I would like to have a intelligent discussion about the horrible shooting that occurred today in Boulder, Co. No politics allowed.

[paladin181]

Medical check? Does that mean disabled or sick people can't pass muster?
Credit check? Does that mean discrimination against low socio-economic status?
Mental health? What's the line for healthy? Mild depression? Moderate? Who gets to decide?

A local registry sure is better than a national registry. That's a slippery slope uphill. That's a step and half away from a national registry. Again, would it be public information?

If I bought a gun from you, who's county that register in? At some point there will have to be a cross-reference.

Medical checkup, ok, maybe not.
Absolutely on mental health history, though.
Also yes on a credit history. People who have suddenly recently undertaken severe debt should be considered a risk, contingent on their psychological eval. All these factors play into the yes or no decision. Who decides? Hell if I know. I'm not making policy here. I'm offering ideas that may prove to be completely unfeasible. There's no infrastructure and again, maintaining something at the county or even state level requires legislation and infrastructure to work. I'm not hashing out minutiae, because at this point of spitballing and really wish listing items, I don't need to for this.

If you buy a gun, it registers in the county of the owner. If you sell a gun, it is simply listed as sold in the list (yeah, right, I know that won't happen but in my ideal example, I'm rolling with it). It will take a ton of work to address this. But it could theoretically be done if people cared about someone else's life more than their own convenience.

 

[paladin181]

The data is in complete disagreement to your claim. Over the past 30 years gun ownership has increased, meanwhile in the same time period, violent crimes have decreased. There is no spread of violence. It's going down and gun ownership is going up. Gun ownership and violent crime is actually inversely correlated. Your claim is built on a false premise.

What premise is that? That countries with less access to guns have (in general) fewer intentional deaths (to include suicide and violent attacks)? Because that is the premise I based my claim on.

 

[lilburncock]

So, the answer is it's just going to continue to happen and there's nothing we can do about it that anyone is willing to do (after all Europe and Australia have demonstrated that fewer guns available mean fewer intentional deaths overall).


You actually missed the point horribly on me. First, I know exactly why the constitutional amendment was written the way it was, at least as much as anyone does and have been arguing that side of the issue most of the thread (ie good reasons why restricting types of weapons to the military only is ridiculous). The ability to protect against enemies of the people, no matter their origin. It also states that the militia will be well regulated. We don't have a well regulated militia (Except the National Guard, but as they are ultimately answerable to the federal government, they don't count). I'm perfectly ok revoking the rights of individuals to own weapons in favor of arming militias at the county level, which is exactly what the 2nd Amendment states. Those would be the arms of the people, kept and born by the people.

Failing that, however, we need to find better ways to keep weapons from the hands of the mentally unstable, and the criminally intent. Obviously, if we allow everyone to purchase weapons, we can't accurately stop everyone who would do harm, but there are measures to be taken. Just because a measure won't stop something absolutely doesn't mean it doesn't mitigate it at all. Your assumption that because it wouldn't stop one person (maybe it would have, there are many factors that will go into it) that we shouldn't do anything, because it might inconvenience someone with no ill intent. That is a completely ridiculous premise. "If we slow down the spread of a disease, we can limit the damage" "But one person would still die, better to do nothing." Obviously, hyperbole, but it is essentially what you've suggested.

You haven't debated me on anything in this thread. You've also failed to present anything compelling against anything I've said.

I got your point.
You don't really care what the constitution says.
You know better.
You are not willing to take the prescribed steps to change what is.

 

[Silver_Coconut]

What premise is that? That countries with less access to guns have (in general) fewer intentional deaths (to include suicide and violent attacks)? Because that is the premise I based my claim on.

I follow you. You're saying gun deaths are going up. I said violent crimes are going down. Both are true.

 

[Silver_Coconut]

Medical checkup, ok, maybe not.
Absolutely on mental health history, though.
Also yes on a credit history. People who have suddenly recently undertaken severe debt should be considered a risk, contingent on their psychological eval. All these factors play into the yes or no decision. Who decides? Hell if I know. I'm not making policy here. I'm offering ideas that may prove to be completely unfeasible. There's no infrastructure and again, maintaining something at the county or even state level requires legislation and infrastructure to work. I'm not hashing out minutiae, because at this point of spitballing and really wish listing items, I don't need to for this.

If you buy a gun, it registers in the county of the owner. If you sell a gun, it is simply listed as sold in the list (yeah, right, I know that won't happen but in my ideal example, I'm rolling with it). It will take a ton of work to address this. But it could theoretically be done if people cared about someone else's life more than their own convenience.

I'm with you on the mental health check. But at what point is it disqualifying? Include everything from mild depression to severe schizophrenia? That's an enormous continuum.

 

[paladin181]

I follow you. You're saying gun deaths are going up. I said violent crimes are going down. Both are true.

I wasn't saying gun deaths were going up until someone else insisted they weren't. My original premise is that we have more intentional deaths per capita than virtually any other country with comparable metrics in contributing factors, except access to weapons.

 

[pepsicock]

An AR is not an assault rifle. I’m not in favor of banning rifles. Nobody knows why this guy did it.

He was

This is an interesting read...

The US comes in at 5.35 intentional homicides per 100,000 people. Japan is the lowest at 0.2 intentional homicides per 100,000 people and El Salvador is the highest at 82.84 intentional homicides per 100,000 people. The average is 7.03 for the data set.

Murder Rate by Country 2024

worldpopulationreview.com

another data set:

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The numbers do not bear out what most of us think they would...

You stole my handle 😂

 

[paladin181]

I'm with you on the mental health check. But at what point is it disqualifying? Include everything from mild depression to severe schizophrenia? That's an enormous continuum.

Again, not my point to hash out all the minutiae because that would never be my decision. At a certain point a governing body would ideally be implementing those measures and appointing someone to make those decisions. But if you demand an answer, I honestly can't give one, as I am not a mental health professional able to tell you what contributing factors make a person tend to violence, and what level is acceptable to society (or law makers) as risk to grant or deny an application.

 

[843tjsdad78]

You can confiscate every gun from every citizen in this Country but that will not stop people from wanting to kill or harm each other. There is only 1 thing all of these acts have in common. Hate. Pure and simple. If there is hatred in someone then they will find every thing they can get their hands on to cause harm. Matthew 22:37-40. There is only one person alive that can solve this and that is having Messiah Yeshua in your heart. Then and only then can you truly love one another.

Guns laws wouldn't be to end all deaths, or hate, but it limits the amount that can happen at once. When 9/11 happened no one said you can't stop hate right? Yet airports tighten security, limited the amount of fluids you can board a plane with (don't think fluids were the main cause of 9/11) and enforced other steps to prevent another 9/11 tragedy. When kids started eating tide pods, actions where taken to prevent them from easy access right. Only after mass shootings is the response there is nothing that could have been done to prevent this. I don't get that line of thinking.

 

[Silver_Coconut]

I wasn't saying gun deaths were going up until someone else insisted they weren't. My original premise is that we have more intentional deaths per capita than virtually any other country with comparable metrics in contributing factors, except access to weapons.

Gotcha. Looking at the statistics, we're right in the middle of the pack for intentional deaths. We do rank below most European countries, but not by much. For example, the difference in homicides between US and Sweden is approximately 3 deaths per 100,000. And compared to Switzerland, only about 4 deaths per 100,000.
And if you look at suicide rate, we are lower than France, Finland, New Zealand, and WAY lower than Japan and South Korea. Don't know how that factors, but thought it very interesting.

 

[843tjsdad78]

The simplest of terms on guns still applies. Take away the assault rifles and only the bad guys have assault rifles. I'm afraid you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Last summer when a protestor looked in the camera and said, "We're coming to the suburbs next" says everything you need to know about why people want these weapons. Assault weapons (AR15 type) are better for long range targets. A wacko walking in a grocery store could have used a 9mm just as effectively.

I don't own an AR15 but I wish I did now. Besides, this current administration is coming for your ammo by taxing the ever living hell out of it.

Seriously asking, how has this admin raised the taxes on guns without any legislation?

 

[pepsicock]

The shooter was arrested in 2017 . He had no business buying this gun to start with his record .

The Boulder shooting suspect 'blacked out' and violently assaulted a classmate in 2017, police report says

Police records show Ahmad Alissa punched a classmate multiple times during a high-school math class in 2017, later claiming the victim bullied him.

www.yahoo.com

 

[843tjsdad78]

Guns should be treated like cars, must be registered, own a license which has to be renewed and they insured. Hell the state of SC required me to carry additional home owners insurance depending on the breed of dog I own.

Also we have to be honest. The 2nd amendment doesn't cover all Americans. We have seen some ppl shot and killed due to an officer thinking they have a gun. The loudest voices when this happens should be the 2 amendment groups, but they tend to be silent.

 

[Silver_Coconut]

Guns should be treated like cars, must be registered, own a license which has to be renewed and they insured. Hell the state of SC required me to carry additional home owners insurance depending on the breed of dog I own.

Also we have to be honest. The 2nd amendment doesn't cover all Americans. We have seen some ppl shot and killed due to an officer thinking they have a gun. The loudest voices when this happens should be the 2 amendment groups, but they tend to be silent.

You do not need to register a car that doesn't leave your property. You only need license and insurance to drive in public.

 

[843tjsdad78]

You do not need to register a car that doesn't leave your property. You only need license and insurance to drive in public.

Ok still treat guns the same. Only register it if it leaves your home. And at some point that car that doesn't leave the yard was still registered, how else did you get it there?

 

[Silver_Coconut]

Ok still treat guns the same. Only register it if it leaves your home. And at some point that car that doesn't leave the yard was still registered, how else did you get it there?

Yard? How about ranch trucks? There’s a million ways to legally get an unregistered vehicle to your property.

 

[843tjsdad78]

Yard? How about ranch trucks? There’s a million ways to legally get an unregistered vehicle to your property.

Name 6.
Build it, ship it, tow it is all I could come up with.

 

[CarlUSC]

10-4. I'll drop it right here. I hope you have a good evening. I'm about to swear off this thread as well.

Amen Brother and take care

 

[Silver_Coconut]

Name 6.
Build it, ship it, tow it is all I could come up with.

Not so hard is it?

 

[843tjsdad78]

Not so hard is it?

You tell me, I gave you 3 of the six and haven't heard the other 3. Lol

 

[CarlUSC]

And once again, there's the disconnect.

Both rifles can be chambered to shoot the same caliber.

Both rifles can have 30 round magazines.

Both rifles have the same rate of fire.

But, lets outlaw one of them, because it's scarier looking to some people than the other. That's just outright silly.

More people are beaten to death with fists or blunt objects than shot with ANY kind of rifle, AR or not.. But lets outlaw the AR.

More people are shot with pistols in a Chicago Summer than with rifles of all kinds yearly, but politicians don't want to discuss that. But lets ban the AR.

I just don't get it. Supposedly rational people lining up to give up not only their rights, but the rights of many millions of responsible gun owners who possess many millions of guns....because one "looks scary".

You gotta be kidding me.

You win. Let's outlaw all assault weapons. Here is the one thing that you and just about everyone else who participated in this debate (including myself) convinced me of. THIS IS NOT THE FORUM FOR A DEBATE ON GUNS.
It is also not the site I want to open up and hear about abortion rights, fake news, politics in general, rigged elections, and whatever else the cable "news" networks are throwing at us. What does that leave us?
Maybe we can get back to Gamecock Athletics. Good Night

 

[CarlUSC]

so, maybe they should outlaw smoking in public places like restaurants or something... perhaps limit the people who can and cannot buy cigarettes with an age limit...? In a crazy world they might even check them out by like getting them to prove their age with IDs?? I don’t know just tossing out some potential restrictions we could impose to reduce the dangers... Kinda spit balling here! I know it sounds crazy and like a terrible invasion of privacy and one could even say an infringement on our rights... but it just might work! 😉

Don't stop there. Let's make people remove their belts and shoes at a checkpoint before boarding an airplane. Maybe every now and then let's pat one down just for the heck of it. I agree, we have to start somewhere. When I was in high school, we watched an hour-long film of car accident recreations. There were about six episodes. Each would start with actors who looked like the victims in a car exactly like the ones that wrecked. We would see what led up to the accident - drinking, lack of sleep, driving late on an unfamiliar road, speeding, etc. Then comes the accident and then we all got to see the results up close and in great detail. It had an effect.

 

[ghostofpepsicock]

Not really. Access is access. Obviously, weapons being available means everyone has the ability to get them. You're avoiding the truth to fit a narrative. Again. I'm not against anything, and I believe in our right to possess any weapons we want. But we have to acknowledge that having weapons accessible means the wrong people will be able to get them, and we need to find the best ways to prevent that because we have the best access to weapons in the world. We can't stop all criminals from getting point and click weapons of death, but we need to find better solutions for it. Mandatory safety training, longer waiting periods, stiffer penalties for gun related charges, and more thorough background checks conducted for EVERY transfer of a weapon are the minimum that need to be enacted in order for us to keep the freedom to have the weapons we want, because everyone believes they're not part of the problem. Everyone believes that their weapons won't ever fall into the wrong hands. However, not all illegal weapons are stolen from legal users. We also need to crack down on black market weapons trafficked from other countries and resold on the streets, and we need to find a reliable way to plug some of those leaks. But access is the key, and no amount of fear mongering about "taking our guns" or "infringing our rights" will change that.

We can agree to disagree. Access for law-abiding gun owners is not a problem. Access for people who are going to use the guns illegally is a problem. The question is how do you tell the difference?

 

[bflogger28]

Don't stop there. Let's make people remove their belts and shoes at a checkpoint before boarding an airplane. Maybe every now and then let's pat one down just for the heck of it. I agree, we have to start somewhere. When I was in high school, we watched an hour-long film of car accident recreations. There were about six episodes. Each would start with actors who looked like the victims in a car exactly like the ones that wrecked. We would see what led up to the accident - drinking, lack of sleep, driving late on an unfamiliar road, speeding, etc. Then comes the accident and then we all got to see the results up close and in great detail. It had an effect.

yall need to watch this, Reminds of today!! Our New Government is like THE OCCUPATION, well except they have a wall and we have open orders now..
Your evey move

 

[Boom4life]

Ok still treat guns the same. Only register it if it leaves your home. And at some point that car that doesn't leave the yard was still registered, how else did you get it there?

Put it on a trailer

 

[WingchunCock]

The shooter was arrested in 2017 . He had no business buying this gun to start with his record .

The Boulder shooting suspect 'blacked out' and violently assaulted a classmate in 2017, police report says

Police records show Ahmad Alissa punched a classmate multiple times during a high-school math class in 2017, later claiming the victim bullied him.

www.yahoo.com

Maybe the FBI has ulterior motives and needs a few events like this to push for more gun control. How is it several of the incidents have flags that should have prevented the individual from getting a gun only to find the FBI dropped the ball.

 

[rodemi]

There is no chance at gun control. It's just political gas for right wingers to use to fuel their political agendas.

Freedom is currently not a popular concept in Washington . Any excuse is used to take away individual Constitutional rights.

 

[bflogger28]

Maybe the FBI has ulterior motives and needs a few events like this to push for more gun control. How is it several of the incidents have flags that should have prevented the individual from getting a gun only to find the FBI dropped the ball.

seems like 90% of the mass shooters were "on teh FBI Radar" So you may very well have a point. We see how corrupt the FBI and IRS got under the Gangster Obama famliy!!

 

[Six Million Dollar Man]

Maybe the FBI has ulterior motives and needs a few events like this to push for more gun control. How is it several of the incidents have flags that should have prevented the individual from getting a gun only to find the FBI dropped the ball.

This isn't your Daddy's FBI. They are full of deep state idiots and are highly incompetent and it transcends administrations.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

Now this is just funny:

Florida Man Sells Homemade '1776 Boom Sticks' At Gun Buyback, City Runs Out Of Cash In 30 Minutes

Anti-gun "buyback" event in Pensacola, Florida does not go according to plan

nationalfile.com

A so-called “gun buyback” event in Pensacola, Florida did not go according to plan over the weekend, as a local gun club showed up to counteroffer the city by paying actual market value for citizens’ firearms. The only weapons the buyback was able to acquire included BB guns and homemade “Boom Stick 1776” pipe guns, which forced the event to run out of cash in under 30 minutes.

 

[Six Million Dollar Man]

Seriously asking, how has this admin raised the taxes on guns without any legislation?

Here is what they were proposing last summer before they took control of all three branches. It's a matter if time.

Fact check: Democrat's bill would increase taxes on firearms and ammunition

The claim: H.R. 5717 would implement a 30% tax on all gun sales and 50% tax on all ammunition sales Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., introduced in

www.jacksonville.com

 

[ghostofpepsicock]

Earlier in this thread...way earlier lol, some people asked why this or that type gun was "needed." I can understand why people have the question, but whoever makes the choice to buy one doesn't owe anyone an explanation.

To me it is like this...it exists, I like it and I want one. I don't have to justify it but for those that are wondering, I can use it for home protection, hunting, target shooting, and varmint control, etc.

A different example along similar lines...I do not understand why someone in SC would buy a Lamborghini. It makes no sense to me in that there are no roads to legally stretch the legs on it. What fun is a Lambo driving our speed limits around here? But, that person doesn't owe me an explanation or justification and it is not my place to tell them they do not need one. It exists, they have the means to buy it and pay for the expenses associated with it. End of story.

 

[biting curve]

You win. Let's outlaw all assault weapons. Here is the one thing that you and just about everyone else who participated in this debate (including myself) convinced me of. THIS IS NOT THE FORUM FOR A DEBATE ON GUNS.

There you go again.

You want to “outlaw all assault weapons”, and you don’t even know what an assault weapon is.

Your Mini 14 is the exact same as an AR 15, no difference functionally at all. The only difference is the physical appearance. Yet you own one. And you obviously have no idea what you own.

I think debate like this is important, because it shows that many people with extreme ideas have absolutely no clue what they’re talking about.

 

[biting curve]

Failing that, however, we need to find better ways to keep weapons from the hands of the mentally unstable, and the criminally intent. Obviously, if we allow everyone to purchase weapons, we can't accurately stop everyone who would do harm, but there are measures to be taken.

There’s already a FBI background check system in place for guns bought through dealers.

Multiple shooters, including the Orlando, Charleston, Colorado, and Vegas shooters just to name a few bought their guns legally, passing a background check.

Curiously, many of these shooters (and the Boston Bombers) had been/were under investigation by the FBI. They were known individuals.

If it happens once, maybe twice, well you can file that under “things happen”.

When it happens repeatedly, there’s a problem. When it seemingly happens every time a political party desperately needs a distraction to shift a news cycle, there’s a problem.

 

[Gamecock Lifer]

But you've already made up your mind what a gun-owner is, and I dare say you have very little experience with guns and average gun-owners.

I dare say you don’t know shit about me, my experience with guns or my thoughts about gun owners. You are again assuming things, and talking about everything BUT the subject at hand by trying to redirect the discussion to your made up opinions about me.

 

[uscwatson21]

Earlier in this thread...way earlier lol, some people asked why this or that type gun was "needed." I can understand why people have the question, but whoever makes the choice to buy one doesn't owe anyone an explanation.

To me it is like this...it exists, I like it and I want one. I don't have to justify it but for those that are wondering, I can use it for home protection, hunting, target shooting, and varmint control, etc.

A different example along similar lines...I do not understand why someone in SC would buy a Lamborghini. It makes no sense to me in that there are no roads to legally stretch the legs on it. What fun is a Lambo driving our speed limits around here? But, that person doesn't owe me an explanation or justification and it is not my place to tell them they do not need one. It exists, they have the means to buy it and pay for the expenses associated with it. End of story.

The difference is I don’t have to worry about a Lambo killing me while I’m in a grocery store buying some Cheerios.

 

[biting curve]

So, the answer is it's just going to continue to happen and there's nothing we can do about it that anyone is willing to do (after all Europe and Australia have demonstrated that fewer guns available mean fewer intentional deaths overall).

Our society, cultural norms and the way we treat mental illness are also different from other countries, which is why it’s difficult to compare. It’s apples and oranges.

Last time I checked, Japan had a higher suicide rate than we do, because culturally that’s how many there have been brought up to deal with failure (real or perceived).

Muslims in Europe have proved you don’t need a gun to kill people, either Ginsu them to pieces with a knife, blow them up with a bomb, or run them over with a truck.

And what do we do here? DA’s want to release violent criminals as part of a SJW campaign, leftists want to abolish/diminish police and prisons, and some loons want to take away gun rights from law abiding citizens.

It’s almost like reading a comic book instead of reality.

 

[ghostofpepsicock]

The difference is I don’t have to worry about a Lambo killing me while I’m in a grocery store buying some Cheerios.

No but if the owner of the lambo decided to do 180 down I26 he could kill you if you were in front of him...he would have chosen to operate his car in an illegal fashion and you would be a innocent casualty on your way to a nice wkd in Charleston.

 

[843tjsdad78]

Here is what they were proposing last summer before they took control of all three branches. It's a matter if time.

Fact check: Democrat's bill would increase taxes on firearms and ammunition

The claim: H.R. 5717 would implement a 30% tax on all gun sales and 50% tax on all ammunition sales Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., introduced in

www.jacksonville.com

It didn't pass though. And that would be under the last admin if it did.

 

[biting curve]

The difference is I don’t have to worry about a Lambo killing me while I’m in a grocery store buying some Cheerios.

No, that Lambo can just hit you head on when you’re heading home after buying your Cheerios.