Register Guns

chisueSeptember 19, 2013

Germany requires the registration of guns. There is a proposal that the entire European Union do the same.

Switzerland is recalling guns kept in homes by its' militia. Their arms will be stored in armories. This was prompted by rising numbers of domestic violence incidents involving guns and the discovery that 90% of suicides were gun deaths.

Good for Starbuck's. They were pressured to dis-invite guns when gun nuts wanted to host events in their shops. They can't avoid hosting a replay of the event where a gunman entered a coffee shop and killed a number of *armed* police officers.

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

Wait for it......................3..............2............1........

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 12:21PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lily316(z5PA)

Two Michigan men with concealed permits to carry had a major shootout in an road rage incident and shot and killed each other. Fun times. It's like the wild west here in America.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 4:25PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

How come so many defend the conceal and carry laws as the "good guys" carrying in case the " bad guys" show up?

What is to say that the guys carrying concealed weapons aren't bad guys?

Do you folk have uniforms down there ?

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 4:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
duluthinbloomz4

We're stuck with it and many of us do not defend it. I'd all around prefer not to see these self-styled patriots (no matter how well intentioned) exercising their "Constitutional Rights" either openly or under concealment as I went about my daily routines. At least with the usually obvious open carry, one can choose to be where they are not.

There are different laws on open carry. Laws also change frequently.

Permissive open carry states: Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia and Wyoming

Licensed open carry states: Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Utah, North Dakota, Tennessee, Mississippi, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island

Anomalous open carry states: Alabama, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin

Non-permissive open carry states: Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, New York, South Carolina and Texas.

As for the rest of the states and any open vs. concealed carry business, one of the forum's gun experts will have to chime in.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 5:28PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jerzeegirl(9)

I'd all around prefer not to see these self-styled patriots (no matter how well intentioned) exercising their "Constitutional Rights"

Yes, and I would also like to stress that I have the constitutional right to stay alive and be protected from lunatics carrying guns. And I think my constitutional right trumps theirs.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 8:17PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Someone posted before, I think, the comments by Justice Ginsberg about the second amendment being for militias and how it has become something it wasn't meant to be (ah, per the Founding Fathers).

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 8:49PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

and wouldn't you assume someone of her stature would have bothered to understand the true meaning of the 2nd amendment when all she needed to do was read the founders letters to one another as well as the federalist papers which clearly lay out what their intent was regading that amendment. She is not a very impressive justice, not by any means,. But then, you could also do some research and get the reasoning for yourself, if you really want to know. But then, most of the anti types just want to hear themselves bark.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 9:48PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

You calling me an "anti type"?

I have said I don't want to take away the right to bear arms.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 10:42PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

That's a fair question, Fanci, IMO. What say you?

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 10:45PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
duluthinbloomz4

And I suppose the pro gun people don't want to hear themselves bark.
I'd tend to believe Justice Ginsburg has a much better understanding of the 2nd. Amendment than anyone you might encounter.

From an interview on Public Radio International:

In the wake of the fierce, nationwide debate over gun rights and gun control, Justice Ginsburg explained the historical basis for her view on the Second Amendment.

"The Second Amendment has a preamble about the need for a militia ... Historically, the new government had no money to pay for an army, so they relied on the state militias," she said. "The states required men to have certain weapons and they specified in the law what weapons these people had to keep in their home so that when they were called to do service as militiamen, they would have them. That was the entire purpose of the Second Amendment."

Ginsburg said the disappearance of that purpose eliminates the function of the Second Amendment.

"It's function is to enable the young nation to have people who will fight for it to have weapons that those soldiers will own," she said. "I view the Second Amendment as rooted in the time totally allied to the need to support a militia. So ... the Second Amendment is outdated in the sense that its function has become obsolete."

Sounds rational to me. Of course, it would not sound reasonable or rational to FF if there's the slightest chance that buried in that reasoning is the mistaken idea that Ginsburg, or I, or most forum participants want your guns taken away.

    Bookmark   September 19, 2013 at 10:53PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

All rights have limits...........or at least they should.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 7:49AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

And the majority of firearm owners do abide by the laws set... it's the minority that always ruins it for the law abiding majority...

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 8:40AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

Minority offenders have 'ruined' (made inconvenient) a lot of things. There are all sorts of rules in daily life that exist today because somebody cheated when the rules weren't there. This is about life and death due to casual gun ownership by every normal (and impulsive) person in America.

Register guns. How hard is that?

Stop with the militia argument. We have an army, navy, air force, marines...etc.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 3:40PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

register criminals, how about that. Im not one, neither are my guns, so forget about them.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 5:02PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Pidge

Thanks, ff, for another inane comment.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 5:04PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

"Register guns. How hard is that?"

Sometimes useful in solving crimes. Does nothing to prevent them, though.

There are 2 ways to prevent gun crime:

a. NO GUNS anywhere. That will never happen;

b. No inappropriate gun use. That's the tough one, but that's the right answer.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 7:14PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

no problem pidge. Its no more stupid or asinine than me registering my guns. Where do you people come up with this stuff? Why not work on ideas to do something serious about gun crime and stop wasting energy on these ineffective proposals.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 7:21PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

FF, what's wrong with registering your guns? You register your car. Are you are afraid of something?

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 8:19PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Esh, why do you think guns should be registered?

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 8:48PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
frank_il

"Esh, why do you think guns should be registered?"

I don't know about Esh, but I would not mind registering my guns. It would limit the amount of illegal gun sales. You would have to prove that you were selling your guns to someone who could legally own a gun.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 8:57PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

1. A police team going into a domestic situation could find out if there were weapons registered to that address.
2. If someone were amassing a large supply of weapons (beyond what is reasonable such as they now own 12 AR-15s and 25 Glock handguns ....). If each weapon had to be registered then that would show up.
3. If someone were later declared to have mental issues then one could determine that they already own weapons (assuming later that there is some controls put in place for folks with mental issues owning guns).
4. Perhaps the person buying it has a criminal record (this could be caught on a background check).
5. Similar to #3, a person is convicted of a felony (not related to the gun) and registration records would show that he/she has a gun (in case that is a problem).

So, those are some of the reasons. Why elvis, do you think they should NOT be registered?

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 8:59PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

"So, those are some of the reasons. Why elvis, do you think they should NOT be registered?"

I am all for background checks. Registration, not so much. I don't trust the record keepers. I'm not going to debate this; you asked, Esh, and I answered.

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 9:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
frank_il

" I'm not going to debate this; you asked, Esh, and I answered. "

You answered, but you did not explain. (Not very well at least)

    Bookmark   September 20, 2013 at 9:47PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
heri_cles

Gun registration is disfavored by gun owners because they believe that the database will be abused. Registration is even feared by the paranoid among them, which are many.

On the flip side, registration can be a useful tool in temporarily suspending gun ownership for individuals who are convicted of violent crime or who have been caught physically harassing or stalking someone, or engaging in any form of domestic violence.
Perhaps a one year suspension for a first offense and then a 5 year suspension for the second offense.
It seems to me quite obvious that we have to know who has weapons as a first step toward stopping the most violent and unstable among them from committing the next gun massacre.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:03AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Pidge

Two massacres in one week is enough to let us know that registering guns would be a very good idea. And it's an idea whose time has certainly come.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:15AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

The line at the courthouse will be miles long. Thugs and other criminals will be there to register their guns. (so we know who has guns)

Please avoid the congestion by taking alternate routes to work.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:16AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Perhaps we could relieve the congestion by having registration on multiple days using the alphabet.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:37AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

LOL

I think the congestion may be relieved by gunshots.

Or did you miss the thugs and criminals?

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:44AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
demifloyd(8)

Posted by fancifowl 5Pa (My Page) on
Fri, Sep 20, 13 at 17:02

register criminals, how about that. Im not one, neither are my guns, so forget about them.

*

Yea.

Paint then with non toxic spray so we'll know them when we see them.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 9:53AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

The bottom line is that all the laws, all the regulations in the world won't make a difference if everyone does not follow them. And criminals are criminals because they don't abide by the law.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 10:01AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jillinnj

I'm not going to debate this; you asked, Esh, and I answered.

A sure sign that they have nothing to back up their statement. Kind of like when your parent said "...because I said so", something I have never said to my children (after hearing it so often from my parents). You either have valid reasons or you don't.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 10:42AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Joe Manchin for President!

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 11:48AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Anybody that thinks data from background checks won't be saved yet is afraid of how data from gun registration could be used ... isn't thinking it all the way through.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 1:56PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

Criminals will not register guns so how will that help poloice when entering any of their areas.
Many people have large gun collections which easily could reach 12-30 AR type weapons. I had 35 single action revolvers, 40some ruger rifles, 12 sako rifles, 8 Weatherby rifles, several shotguns of different makes/models, abput 25-30 semi auto pistols, a bunch of old military mausers of different models and origins. Its not unusual to have large numbers of guns.
if you are a felon, or become a felon law enforcement is gonna check to see if you have guns anyhow.

I wont register any guns because its an infrinfment on my rights.
because its nobody elses business.
because the info WILL be used in ways to harm me by the govt and others who get access to that binfo.
it would entail more fees and taxes on a guaranteed right.
It will do nothing to abet crime.
So, lets move on to some reakl deterrants to criminal behavior and stop blaming the good guys for actions of bad guys.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 2:20PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

No, Elivs there are not only two ways to REDUCE gun deaths.

Obviously, gun control works in OTHER nations. The puzzle is why Americans think it couldn't/wouldn't/shouldn't work here.

This is not ONLY about 'criminals' and guns. There are no 'criminals' involved in a large number of gun deaths and gunshot wounds.

Many shootings involve an angry person acting impulsively -- someone with a beef that *used* to be settled without the use of a handy *weapon* made to kill.

Many are suicides -- where some people *used* to be saved because the depressed person couldn't succeed so certainly on an impulse.

Some are accidents where no one would be dead or wounded had the lethal weapon not been present to be misused.

I don't see how this is any different from laws requiring you to have a license to drive and laws requiring you to register a vehicle. A vehicle can be dangerous in society, but only the gun is manufactured to be dangerous. There should be MORE stringent laws to own something manufactured to harm.

Does anyone know the healthcare costs to treat gunshot casualties in America? The MD/spokeswoman at Washington Hospital was inviting the media see ALL of the results of gun violence in her hospital -- not just this Navy Yard massacre, but the people in her ER night after night.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 2:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Why is registering guns an infringement on your rights but registering your car is not?

So, lets move on to some reakl deterrants to criminal behavior and stop blaming the good guys for actions of bad guys.

Do tell, what are your ideas?

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 2:37PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

I don't know how they do it in Colorado but there is some way to register your gun - if you want to.

And if it gets stolen and found somewhere else, they know who to give it back to.

There was an article in the local paper about some guy who recovered his guns, stolen during a break in at his house some 10 years ago.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 2:40PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

when did automobile ownership become a right? Why do some try to compare cars to guns in any way shape or form? There just is no comparison in any way.

I have expessed ideas in the past.
Ya wanna reduce crimes in the cities, start profiling and taking guns off the streets. Naw, libs aren't interested in stopping the violence, they want to do harm to easy tagets like lawful people who try to obey laws. Bunch of dog catchers is what anti gun types are. Only check the contained dogs, heck with the ones actually marauding the neighborhood.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 3:20PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Ya wanna reduce crimes in the cities, start profiling and taking guns off the streets.

Profile who, what? If we profile people, do we arrest them? On what charge? How do we "take guns off the streets"?

I'm interested in a dialogue.

Still not getting the distinction you see between guns and cars. They are both things that you own. You have a right to vote but you have to register for that. Is that the same as a gun?

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 3:40PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

fowl -- Did you notice that CRIMES are only a portion of gun deaths and shootings? These are lethal weapons. If you want to carry one around in society, prove you know how to use it safely, and register it.

It's the gun lobby that constantly brings up the deaths involving cars, knives, etc. -- none of which are manufactured for the purpose of being lethal weapons. I agree that there is no comparison, yet we do require people to prove they can handle a car and to register any they own. A car *can* be dangerous. A gun is intended to be dangerous.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 3:45PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tapla (mid-MI z5b-6a)

To anyone who cares to be objective, the fact that the intent is to remove ALL guns from the populace is very obvious. The Schumers, Feinsteins, Bloombergs, and their ilk will never be happy unless every gun is out of the hands of every law abiding citizen. If you don't agree - that's tough - overwhelming evidence points to that's the way it is. If degunning citizens could be implemented in such a way that the criminals are disarmed first, it wouldn't be quite as bad as the blindly emotional and irrationally reflexive act of grabbing guns from the many millions of law abiding folks who have owned them for years and years w/o incident.

Obviously, gun grabbers feel guns aren't necessary and prefer to rely on luck or agents of the state for their protection if ever they find themselves in a tight spot, but their fear of guns in the hands of the law abiding runs to paranoia. Never having been the victim of a violent crime, they prefer to rely on the idea their good fortune will hold and they'll never really NEED a gun. There is a large measure cognitive dissonance between feeling that "I" don't need a gun because "I" will likely never become the victim of a violent crime (so by projection guns are unnecessary in the hands of my neighbors as well), and fearing guns because they might compromise your life or safety. If you don't need/want a gun because you're happy with the odds on never being affected by violence, then how can you fear guns in the hands of your neighbors. Logically, one would think that (the collective) 'you' know better what's good for your neighbors than your neighbors do - and that is simply the way the pompous nanny left thinks.

Our government is already widely utilizing information illegally obtained for a wide variety of reasons. Only a fool would believe that gun registration is all very reasonable and only 'for your own good', and the information will never be used for more nefarious purposes - like confiscation. If you don't believe confiscation is also a very distinct possibility, that's tough, too. History more than supports the disarming (and slaughter) of millions, confiscation on the heels of registration ..... so why would anyone who wants to retain their right to defend themselves be in favor of registration - they'd have to be a fool.

Al

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:05PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

To anyone who cares to be objective, the fact that the intent is to remove ALL guns from the populace is very obvious.

Your very first sentence is flawed.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:09PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HandyMac

The intent of the Second Amendment was to prevent one of the situations that caused the Revolutionary War---oppression by a government on its subjects. That oppression was possible because only the government had sufficient weaponry and the ciuvilian population was restricted from owning similar weapons.

A short look into the history of how leaders subjugated countries shows those leaders started by disarming the public.

So, my owning a weapon is possible because the men who formed our type of government wanted a much less possibility of that happening here.

I served in the Army to further defend that right, among other rights.

Up until several years ago, I only owned one hqandgun, a .22 single action revolver I inherited from my father.

I became active in civic affairs in my city. Among other areeas, I am on a civilian advisory board for our local police division. The PD overall is trying to improve their job performance and use involved citizenry as part of that process.

The current division commander recommended I get a concealed carry permit for several reasons. One, police cannot prevent crimes nearly as well as we citizens want. Two, if I(or another citizen) is in immediate danger of being a victim of a crime, the police are normally not going to be able to prevent that---but, if I am armed with similar weapons as the criminal, I have a better than normal chance of preventing that crime. There are numerous examples of foiled roberies/burglaries/car jackings/assaults/murders/etc. that did not happen because a law abiding citizen had a weapon.

The crime rate in my city has been dropping, due to a good many reasons.

Concealed carry by the general public is a small part of that process.

I also belong to a city wide Neighborhood Crime PreventionPatrol. We are taught by and assist the police by patrolling and reporting suspicious or unusual events. When I am operating as a NCPP patrolperson, I CANNOT carry any kind of weapon. To include pepper spray.

So, I see and operate both armed and unarmed.

Registering a gun does nothing to prevent crime. There are already sufficient laws in place to keep criminals from legally getting a gun. The real problem is that criminals are criminals because they do NOT follow laws.

That means no matter how many laws there are to restrict owning/carrying a weapon, criminals will still have all they want---and only law abiding citizens will be prevented/restricted from the same thing.

I totally agree there are a lot of law abiding citizens who should not have a gun. The same thing occurs for those same law abiding citizens when it comes to other legal activities---like driving, or drinking, or taking certain prescription medicines and driving, or driving when too sleepy, or too mad, or a host of other activities. They should not be allowed to drive when impaired.

But all those things carrying/driving/etc. are legal.

And the difference is driving is a priviledge, while owning/carrying a weapon is a Constitutionally guaranteed right.

One other thing. Look at the horrific violence perpatrated by mass shooters and the cities with the most strict weapons laws(Chicago/etc.) All those atrocities happen in the most weapon restrictive places----because the criminals know no one will have a weapon that could endanger the criminal.

Wild West? No. I seriously do not believe the Wild West was nearly as violent as what we are experiencing now.

Other countries and gun violence? Not applicable, simply because none of those countries have the same history and level of society we do. Look at the riots and terrorism in some of those countries. That sort of thing is only possible because those societies are unarmed.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:22PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Nice summary, handymac. Any thoughts on how to move forward with reducing the amount of guns in the hands of people that should not have them?

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:26PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

Im sure you know what profiling involves! Sure they are arrested if in possession of an illegal firearm, what would be the sense otherwise? Quit beating around the bush and get on with the real game. Prove you(gun grabbers) are interested in doing something other than harassing good honest hard working NRA members and all other gun owners.
macs 1st sentence is spot on, not flawed. If you've paid attention over the past 20 years you would have heard those gun grabbers state they would ban and take ALL firearms. They said it, that's just the fact.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:46PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

I know the definition of profiling, yes, but how would you propose profiling these people with illegal guns? Is it the color of their skin, the car they drive, where they work? I'm asking you to be specific on HOW you would profile people to find illegal guns.

And what is an "illegal" gun anyway?

I am not beating around the bush, I am trying to have a real discussion. I don't want to harass people. My stepfather owed several guns. My neighbor has a gun. I am not anti-gun and I have said that in this very thread.

I didn't say that mac's sentence was flawed. I said al's sentence was flawed: the intent is to remove ALL guns from the populace is very obvious.

From my perspective, and I am supposedly on the "other" side from you, that is not the intent.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 4:57PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jillinnj

Duh!

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 5:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Gun registration should be treated just like auto registration. When the money is directed to the hands of politicians it will find a way to pass. I promise you that!

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 5:43PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

I see we've 'drawn the fire' of the gun crowd, focusing on sham arguments about 'criminals' and nonsense interpretations of the Constitution.

I have never needed a gun in my 72 years. My parents never needed one. IF I needed one I would expect to be tested about my ability to handle one safely and to register it.

Very probably the last member of my family to NEED a gun for protection was my G-grandfather, who was a doctor in a silver mining town in the Old West -- when *everybody* had a gun. He was relieved when law and order supplanted that society and his wife and children could go into town without becoming innocent bystanders shot in some altercation.

I do not want to return to the Wild West today.

Chicago could be as safe as Toronto -- a demographic sister city. Chicago has 500 gun deaths; Toronto, 32. Canada has gun control.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 6:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

I have to agree.

American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?

Last week it was the slaughter of 12 people by Aaron Alexis at Washington DC's navy yard

But what if we no longer thought of this as just a problem for America and, instead, viewed it as an international humanitarian crisis - a quasi civil war, if you like, that calls for outside intervention? As citizens of the world, perhaps we should demand an end to the unimaginable suffering of victims and their families - the maiming and killing of children - just as America does in every new civil conflict around the globe.

The annual toll from firearms in the US is running at 32,000 deaths and climbing, even though the general crime rate is on a downward path (it is 40% lower than in 1980). If this perennial slaughter doesn't qualify for intercession by the UN and all relevant NGOs, it is hard to know what does.

The figures from Congressional Research Service, plus recent statistics from icasualties.org, tell us that from the first casualties in the battle of Lexington to recent operations in Afghanistan, the toll is 1,171,177.

By contrast, the number killed by firearms, including suicides, since 1968, according to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI, is 1,384,171.

Talking to American friends, I always sense a kind of despair that the gun lobby is too powerful to challenge and that nothing will ever change. The same resignation was evident in President Obama's rather lifeless reaction to the Washington shooting last week. There is absolutely nothing he can do, which underscores the fact that America is in a jam and that international pressure may be one way of reducing the slaughter over the next generation. This has reached the point where it has ceased to be a domestic issue. The world cannot stand idly by.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:01PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

Thankfully, the gun lobby is growing and gaining strength. All this anti gun nonsense is driving it. There are more new legal gun owners in the last 4 years than in the previous 20 years. What do ya suppose drives that, at least in part. More non shooters have taken up the sport of shooting because it can be a family oriented sport, it is relaxing, competitive and educational. Very few guns are used in crimes and the overwhelming majority of gun owners are law abiding, good citizens. There is absolutely NO reason to harass them If ya don't like guns, don't want one or are afraid of them, simply don't get one. Put your energy towards getting criminals off the streets, work for more efforts to recognize mental problems. Why pester good people who only desire to enjoy their hobby, sport.

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:18PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

You didn't answer my questions.

I know the definition of profiling, yes, but how would you propose profiling these people with illegal guns? Is it the color of their skin, the car they drive, where they work? I'm asking you to be specific on HOW you would profile people to find illegal guns.

And what is an "illegal" gun anyway?

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 7:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
youngquinn_gw

What a sensible idea Mom, as I have said countless times,. More American children are killed by guns than American soldiers.

How would America like the western world to combine and invade America ...in order to prevent the slaughter of American children and other citizens?
More American children have been killed by guns than Syrians killed by the poisons there.
Well maybe the Government isnt doing it...but the Government isnt preventing it either!

    Bookmark   September 21, 2013 at 10:01PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HandyMac

I know several police officers who have never had to use their service weapon in 20 years. Carrying a gun is simply preventive protection. If you need it---and I also know two civilians who are alive today because they had a gun when accosted by criminals who also had guns---there is nothing else that will protect you.

Chisue stated she never needed a gun in her 72 years. Wonderful. I am only 67 and have been in two situations where the fact I had a gun caused some people to suddenly decide I was not a good robbery target. I never had to do more than show the butt of the weapon.

I take strong exception in being accused of 'nonsense interpretations' of our Constitution. Our Constitution is the reason America is what it is---the most free country in the world. I spent over 15 years serving in the military ---as have millions of other Americans------to preserve the rights guaranteed by that Constitution. Which does include the right to disrespect that document. Unfortunately.

There are places in many large cities where it is very dangerous because of gangs and criminals. Those places are much more violent than the Wild West.

Wishing gun violence would stop or go away is simplistic. A pipe dream, unfortunately.

As far as preventing people from having guns when they can legally own/use them just because they are not qualified or could be dangerous----no way. Who makes the decision? Who would trust someone else to make those decisions?

Profiling is a useful tool. If terrorists are predominately young men, what is the point of searching elderly women or babies to prevent terrorism?

Police use race/sex/hair color/height/weight/clothing descriptions when looking for suspects. They do not waste time/resources stopping women when the suspect description is male.

Seems to me if I were a member of a group of people who were being profiled because of crimes committed, it makes sense to do something to stop those of my group causing the problems---instead of complaining about necessary profiling.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 12:26AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?

Sure. But will it change anything?

Human Rights Watch has made several attempts to intervene regarding other human rights violations (committed by USA) with very little success.

Our hypocrisy is sickening.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 7:42AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

I still have this question:

Any thoughts on how to move forward with reducing the amount of guns in the hands of people that should not have them?

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 7:52AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
PRO
Brushworks Spectacular Finishes(5)

Any thoughts on how to move forward with reducing the amount of guns in the hands of people that should not have them?

Background checks only work with honest people.

Any thoughts on how to remove guns from criminals who have guns?

Some folks believe our government needs to search all citizens who have seen a psychiatrist. That may be a good start.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 8:11AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

Not necessarily, Brush... just because someone steps into a particular office once or twice doesn't mean they are a potential bomb ready to explode or a nut case that needs a straight jacket. I think it goes deeper than that... but remember, we also value our doctor-patient confidentiality... so... what to do?

I live in a state that already does background checks. If I were a convicted criminal, I wouldn't be able to hold a valid FOID card, nor would it be legal for me to have any firearm on my person or in my possession.

We have all these laws and regulations... so, technically, we shouldn't have all these problems. But laws only work if we ALL follow them.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 8:31AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

Any thoughts on how to remove guns from criminals who have guns?

I don't have any thoughts. That is what I'm asking too. For those that don't support more laws, they say the laws we have are adequate, and that don't support registration ... what are your ideas for removing guns from the population that "should not have them"?

Randomly search people on the street?
Go after people that see psychiatrists?

Profiling was mentioning, but in what regard? Stop men of color, men with tattoos, men with hoodies, men with ... what? Why just men? Why not women? HOW do you profile people with illegal guns?

And what are illegal guns? How many people are killed with illegal guns versus "legal" guns? Is that really an issue, these "illegal" guns?

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 8:42AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jodik_gw

I think, Esh, that a major part of the problem is how skewed the facts and information have become. For a population of our size, with the overall problems that currently exist, the number of incidents are not as off the charts as some would have us believe.

How is introducing more legislation going to help? I'd like to hear specifics. How are more laws going to prevent violence and incidents?

Laws are only as good as the people who follow them... and there's a criminal element that could care less about laws.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 9:50AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HandyMac

jodik 5 wrote:

"Laws are only as good as the people who follow them... and there's a criminal element that could care less about laws."

That is my point. Wringing our collective hands over gun violence and passing more laws has done what demonstrable good in the fight against ILLEGAL gun violence?

I cannot prevent criminals from getting/using a gun. The police---who carry guns because the criminals have them---cannot prevent most crimes simply because they cannot be everywhere. That means in order to have personal protection, I have to provide that protection for myself.

Now, why do I not just not go to where the criminals are using guns? Good idea, so I do not frequent those areas.

But, what happens when the criminals come to where I am? Does telling them they are not in their own area work? Does reasoning with them when they break into MY house or try to car jack MY car do any good?

Oh, one little bit of history about politics in Illinois. Look at the provided link. And show me another State with a similar record(other than Louisiana).

Here is a link that might be useful: Governors in prison

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 11:47AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

The whole country ... knows the problem is there wasn't enough good guys with guns," LaPierre said during an appearance on NBC's "Meet The Press." "When the good guys with guns got there, it stopped.

LaPierre accused "the elite media and the politicians" of drumming up outrage by tying the latest shooting spree to a push by some in Congress for tighter gun control laws. Instead, he argued, firearms had nothing to do with what happened.

Wayne LaPierre on the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard.

Please someone, save us from this idiot.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 4:19PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52_gw

"Two drivers are dead after a "road rage" incident in the Ionia, Mich., area escalated into a shootout, WZZM-TV in Grand Rapids is reporting.

Witnesses told the station that one driver was following the other too closely Wednesday evening shortly before 7 p.m. when the first driver pulled into a car wash and the second followed him.

The driver of the second car then fired shots, and the first driver returned fire, leaving both of them dead, witnesses told the TV station.

Both men had licenses to carry concealed weapons, according to authorities.

In Michigan, anyone 21 or older can be issued such a permit if they take a gun-safety class and meet a list of requirements, according to the Huffington Post. end quote

Thats pretty much it - I need concealed carry because the other guy has concealed carry and is gonna try and shoot me if I don't drive the way he likes.

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 4:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

For lack of better terms, the "pro gun" folks say that the ideas of the "anti gun" folks are wrong: no new laws, no increase in background checks, no gun registration. None of that will help, they say.

But I have yet to hear any concrete ideas from the "pro gun" people on how to deal with senseless guns deaths other than "more goodpeople need to have guns" and "go after mentally ill people."

Are there any other ideas from the "pro gun" side?

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 4:54PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
fancifowl(5Pa)

uh huh, LaPierrre is an idiot. He has taken the NRA to 5 million members from 2 million, he has prevented major losses to citizens rights, he has been a major force in this country to preserve traditional fire arms rights. On the other hand, we do have idiots who keep draaging the same lame misinformation around to the internet and news media. They make up facts, lie and frighten people into believing that guns in the hands of good citizens are evil. Now lets get it straight. Lapierre is the best thing that happened to gun rights proponents and is only evil to those who would destroy our rights. well esh, you just aren't interested. it seems. here are lots of proposals put out by NRA and others. You seem to want more, somehow? I don't get your game?

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 7:23PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

well esh, you just aren't interested. it seems. here are lots of proposals put out by NRA and others. You seem to want more, somehow?

No game at all. Where are the proposals?

    Bookmark   September 22, 2013 at 7:28PM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
And now Gov. Walker - is it "pile on the President" week?
Gov. Scott Walker: ‘I don't know’ whether Obama...
momj47
What goes around ...
.....comes around "It wasn't supposed to be like...
ohiomom
Living in terror in the Middle East - ISIL kidnapping Christians
ISIS Continues Its Assault on Christianity With Latest...
momj47
Boris Nemtsov Assasinated
Shot a few days before he was to lead a peace March!...
labrea_gw
Indecent Exposure
Rep. David Moore on Tuesday introduced House Bill 365...
labrea_gw
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™