Sorry gun advocates, you'll just have to suck it up

[Stoked]

I've reached that point with him, myself. That's why he's on the ignore list.

I'm at that point with three people as well.

 

[Gameface]

Moe, I think you've lightly touched on it, but I think it is important to differentiate the difference between the urban gun culture and the rural gun culture. I personally think it would be tragic to impose restrictions on rural communities based on urban realities. The problems of guns in urban areas do not translate at all to the role firearms play in rural areas.

 

[franklin]

Moe, I think you've lightly touched on it, but I think it is important to differentiate the difference between the urban gun culture and the rural gun culture. I personally think it would be tragic to impose restrictions on rural communities based on urban realities. The problems of guns in urban areas do not translate at all to the role firearms play in rural areas.

This is my biggest beef in my line of work. I'm a regulator. Federal laws and rules apply uniformly no matter what the individual or area situation is. It's tragic, and in many cases causes more damage than what the regulations are attempting to prevent. This is why we have state's rights. Let New York or Illinois deal with there specific gun issues without imposing them on us.

 

[Gameface]

So, step one: Education. Step two: Screening.

Step Three: Cultural shift. Maybe the least realistic, at least from what I see within the pro-gun community.

This is complex and I'm starting to run short on time, but I'm very disappointed in what I see in the pro-gun community these days. First of all, they need to be good winners, but they are far from it. I had a conversation at work with a guy talking about how they were going to take all our guns. My first response was that I felt we had pretty much won that fight and they were further from taking our guns or even significantly restricting them then they ("they") have been in a very long time. There is no political momentum at all for new regulations, restrictions or prohibitions. Lets take the win and make sure we keep it by emphasizing responsibility and rationality amongst the gun owning public.

Funny when even suggesting responsibility and rationality is seen as a threat to guns rights.

But I come from a background where firearm possession requires a significant amount of discipline. That when someone is in possession of a firearm they need to be extremely diligent and be very aware of what their rights, responsibilities and limitations are in regard to the use of that firearm. And that the pro-gun community needs to hold one another to a very high standard and should be the first to point out and condemn violations of this standard.

I can't continue because I have stuff to do, but I'm going to pick up where I left off shortly.

 

[moevillini]

This is my biggest beef in my line of work. I'm a regulator. Federal laws and rules apply uniformly no matter what the individual or area situation is. It's tragic, and in many cases causes more damage than what the regulations are attempting to prevent. This is why we have state's rights. Let New York or Illinois deal with there specific gun issues without imposing them on us.

Part of the trouble is that when local communities enact gun restrictions that are heavily supported within the local community, the NRA has come in and sued to get those restrictions overturned on the basis of violating 2nd amendment "rights"

 

[moevillini]

So, step one: Education. Step two: Screening.

Step Three: Cultural shift. Maybe the least realistic, at least from what I see within the pro-gun community.

This is complex and I'm starting to run short on time, but I'm very disappointed in what I see in the pro-gun community these days....

...Funny when even suggesting responsibility and rationality is seen as a threat to guns rights...

And that is a factor I see complicating the idea of education on gun safety in schools. I may be wrong, but I imagine that anything that would be taught could be viewed as "anti-gun" by the pro-gun lobby.

I would be curious to know what might be the curriculum in teaching gun safety at various ages, and how the curriculum would reconcile various viewpoints on gun rights.

 

[moevillini]

Moe, I think you've lightly touched on it, but I think it is important to differentiate the difference between the urban gun culture and the rural gun culture. I personally think it would be tragic to impose restrictions on rural communities based on urban realities. The problems of guns in urban areas do not translate at all to the role firearms play in rural areas.

Good point, but I think this is more applicable to the idea of WHY someone would own a gun, and less applicable to why one would use it in a homicide.

 

[franklin]

Part of the trouble is that when local communities enact gun restrictions that are heavily supported within the local community, the NRA has come in and sued to get those restrictions overturned on the basis of violating 2nd amendment "rights"

What examples of communities enacting restrictions that have been overturned by the SC other than outright violations of the 2nd amendment? New York has stringent gun ownership requirements that have been upheld by the SC.

I think your point would be better supported with a spillover argument.

 

[Stoked]

And that is a factor I see complicating the idea of education on gun safety in schools. I may be wrong, but I imagine that anything that would be taught could be viewed as "anti-gun" by the pro-gun lobby.

I would be curious to know what might be the curriculum in teaching gun safety at various ages, and how the curriculum would reconcile various viewpoints on gun rights.

Most reasonable pro gun people should want a respect for firearms taught. I know I do and it's fairly obvious the GF is the same way.

Teach respect for guns along with capability in handling a weapon does not infringe on gun rights. Obviously there will be those opposed to such a class for moral or religious reasons and it should have a way for parents to opt their children out of such a course.

 

[Gameface]

Good point, but I think this is more applicable to the idea of WHY someone would own a gun, and less applicable to why one would use it in a homicide.

True, but important in understanding why the gun is there in the first place which could lead to ways of identifying how the gun could continue to serve its intended purpose while being less likely to be used illegally or for other unintended purposes.

I realize I haven't actually addressed your post yet.

 

[moevillini]

True, but important in understanding why the gun is there in the first place which could lead to ways of identifying how the gun could continue to serve its intended purpose while being less likely to be used illegally or for other unintended purposes.

I hadn't thought of it that way; it's a good point.

I realize I haven't actually addressed your post yet.

I like the apparent optimism in this comment! Wouldn't it be great if we could resolve this issue right here and now!
But seriously, thanks for giving this some serious consideration.

 

[moevillini]

What examples of communities enacting restrictions that have been overturned by the SC other than outright violations of the 2nd amendment? New York has stringent gun ownership requirements that have been upheld by the SC.

I think your point would be better supported with a spillover argument.

I'm not sure if this meets your requirements, and I'm also not sure what you mean by a "spillover" argument, but here goes:
https://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-01-07/news/chi-citys-gun-ordinance-ruled-unconstitutional-by-federal-judge-20140106_1_gun-ordinance-gun-rights-advocates-gun-ranges

A federal judge on Monday stripped away a key element of Chicago's gun ordinance, ruling that it is unconstitutional to prohibit licensed gun stores from operating in the city.
The ruling also would make it legal for individuals to transfer ownership of a firearm as a gift or through a private sale as long as the recipient was at least 18 and had a firearm owner's identification card....

...Chicago, the last city to allow residents to have handguns in their homes, once had one of the strongest handgun crackdowns in the country, making it a primary target of the National Rifle Association.

Overturning the ban on retail gun stores and private gun sales was the last major hurdle gun rights groups faced in their hard-fought battle to dismantle Chicago's tough firearm prohibitions.

...But gun shops won't likely be showing up in Chicago any time soon, since Chang delayed his ruling from taking effect to allow the city time to appeal.

Roderick Drew, a spokesman for the city's Law Department, said in a written statement Monday that Mayor Rahm Emanuel “strongly disagrees” with the judge's decision and has instructed city attorneys “to consider all options to better regulate the sale of firearms within the city's borders.”

“Every year Chicago police recover more illegal guns than officers in any city in the country, a factor of lax federal laws as well as lax laws in Illinois and surrounding states related to straw purchasing and the transfer of guns,” the city's statement said. “We need stronger gun safety laws, not increased access to firearms within the city.”

Since the U.S. Supreme Court forced the city to rewrite its firearms ordinance in June 2010, the city has faced a series of legal blows from the lower courts.

Gun rights advocates said they feared the city would stall the process, using zoning and other regulatory measures to make it difficult for businesses and individuals who want to open a store. After the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Chicago's ban on gun ranges in 2012, the city rewrote the law but added restrictions that made it difficult to find a location in the city to open a range, gun advocates said. That case still has not been resolved.

Todd Vandermyde, Illinois lobbyist for the NRA, said Chang rejected all of the city's arguments in his 35-page decision....


...Mark Walsh, campaign director for the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, said the financially powerful NRA has systematically fought to water down gun laws in Illinois and across the country.

“That's the NRA's game plan. They keep filing suits and filing suits to chip away laws and get to their ultimate goal of a complete armed citizenry,” he said.

Though the 7th Circuit Court has ruled favorably for the NRA in recent cases in Chicago and Illinois, Walsh said other federal appellate courts have not followed suit.

“All too often the narrative is that the NRA is this monolithic machine that is winning everywhere, but that really isn't the case,” he said. “There has been the fear mongering by the NRA and gun manufacturers, but it does not necessarily translate.

“What we have seen is people, not just in Illinois but across the country, are successfully passing laws aimed to keep gun violence down.”

Chang found that the city's “blanket ban” on sales and transfers of firearms violated the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

He acknowledged that Chicago has a serious problem with gun violence but said the city had not demonstrated how allowing the sale of firearms would pose a “genuine and serious risk” to public safety....