Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
It's also a bad idea and impossible to execute. Satisfied?
Another shooting... California Disability Centre
- Thread starter The Midnight
- Start date
Not helpful but realistic.
I respectfully disagree. I don't think it'd be impossible to execute. I think it'd be very difficult, and take a few years to really have a huge effect. But not impossible to execute.
But remember, this is the nuclear option. Let's say this one is implemented and doesn't work. What's your suggestion?
OK let's talk specifics.
Are we talking about stopping the sale of all future guns? Or are we talking about the confiscation of all guns?
Thank you. Always easier to talk with than at.
Subject: Any weapon with a standard capacity(no custom work) of more than 8 bullets, and any unregistered firearm.
Action: Confiscation.
How do you do it?
Also, while digging around, I did find this:
https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/
Lots of interesting data. The one that stands out is the prohibited/non-prohibited graph. 38% of mass shooting perpetrators should not have been able to have a gun.
https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/
Lots of interesting data. The one that stands out is the prohibited/non-prohibited graph. 38% of mass shooting perpetrators should not have been able to have a gun.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
If you had read my posts you would already know it. National Gun Registry
A national Gun Registry is a great start, but what next? People that keep their guns off the registry? Buy illegally/import?
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
pointless debate .. nothing gonna change yee - har
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
There is no solution for those things. That's one of the reasons that I'm okay with responsible citizens who want to carry concealed weapons. Your solution takes guns out of the hands of good people. Not only would you be in for an unbelievably huge fight if you tried, but I believe we are better off if good people have guns. As a matter of fact, I might buy one for myself.
So because it can't be completely contained, we shouldn't try to curb it with tougher gun laws?
Unlike drugs, gun owners aren't addicted. ... ... or are they?
It's a vicious cycle though. I know you're a 'good person', but nonetheless, if you have 1, then I need to have 1 to protect myself against you 'just in case', and so on and so forth. More guns = more tension.
In theory if the law enforcements are doing their jobs there would be no need for civilians to carry around guns to defend themselves. Creating a much more pleasant environment to live in IMO.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
What you see as curbing I see as primarily insuring that good people won't have guns. I want guns in the hands of the good guys because I know we can't get them out of the hands of the bad guys.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
My motivation to get a gun, if I ever do, will not be because I believe that other good people have guns as you're implying. The environment I live in is pleasant (to use your words). One thing that would make it really unpleasant is a bad guy with a gun.
Not always easy to define 'good' or 'bad' person... a 'good' person can just as easily turn into a 'bad' person over a simple workplace or a domestic dispute. Or in the case of this particular shooting, a change in motivation in a certain religious belief.
We're all a mixture of 'good' and 'bad' in my view... with the balance of good/bad changing constantly.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Have you ever looked at graphs re: how much BIGGER of a gun violence problem the US have vs. any other developed nation?
Kinda like saying "well Uganda has an HIV problem but you can't tell me that people in the US don't die from it!
And that argument is so disingenuous. Germany has over 80 million. Japan has over 120 million. It would be WAYYYY easier to carry out a mass murder in Japan. Mind-numbingly easy. I pass by thousands of people every day on my commute to work. Social media presence just as strong here. TV media might be even atronger. Why the lack of violence? Scientifically speaking, how does the rise in population from 120 million to 300 million all the sudden enable gun violence? There's simply no logical reasoning to that statement.
And no one would enter your home to confiscate them, as gun-collecting is still a thing (even in nations where their use is 'banned'-- like the UK). But, of course, if walking around with one on the street, that's when you'd get charged.
Sorry for the slow reply. Got off work and I'm on my cell.
I'd do it this way:
outlawing the manufacturing and selling of said items and confiscate in full their inventory.
outlaw the import of said items and confiscate any that come in.
Secure the borders.
That seals off any supply and its down to what already exists. This gets even more difficult.
Outlaw the possession of said items and have a punishment sever enough to be taken serious.
Offer a generous buy back program to encourage self turn in.
Confiscate and destroy any guns used in a crime and increase the penalty for using one.
Require gun ranges and groups to turn in possessors of said items.
Establish a list of those known to possesses said items. (NRA lists, already registered, gun sale lists...)
Now the most dangerous part starts.
Confiscate from those people first. Most likely the most dangerous. Do so in a manner that gives them a carrot for compliance when you are at their door. Or a stick heavy enough to discourage resistance as you take it.
Then a national door to door search and seizure would be needed. Probably by DHS, ATF, FBI..., you don't want local cops doing it as it will be ineffective and increases the chance of revolt.
I'd also confiscate all guns owned by cops, security agencies and any non federal program.
Now this would lead to mass problems. Job loss from closed businesses, warrant and search violations, probably martial law during the process. Id also have to weed out military members that oppose said actions and have them busy over seas.
If I did it that would be the start of how I'd do it.
Disclaimer: I'm against this and this is only a rough draft.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Exactly, and therein lies the fallacy. The more you let good people have firearms, the more you'll have bad people start carrying them. That's what people are missing. Unfortunately, the thought of every good gun possessor out there can stop every bad one is simply unrealistic. America's abysmal gun violence stats reflect this.
Fortunately, there's worldwide and time-persistent evidence that leaving guns in the hands of the police, and restricting their use largely to hunting means a humongous drop in gun violence.
People will see WELLLL GANG VIOLENCE THOUGH-- but people also fail to realize that gangs commit violence vs. each other, by and large. General public emerges more safe as a consequence.
D