If only there was something we could do...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowsparkco

If only there was something we could do….

I hate this title. It seems so Libtard, like there’s a simple solution, we snap our fingers and mental illness and firearms disappear.

I’m a left leaning moderate… so what’s the easy solution?

---

The solution is very simple;
Register EVERY gun. Minimum 5 year sentence for having a non registered gun
Min 30 day waiting period with exhausting background checks for every purchase
A tiered licensing system where it requires much more training and proficiency to acquire ANY semi auto, but it's much easier to obtain hunting rifles
Every 2 years one must pass another background check and proficiency test, if you can't pass a proficiency test, no gun for you, simple

Think of all the jobs this would create

The gun "enthusiasts" seem to know the last 5 words of the 2A, but are clueless when it comes to the first 4 words of the 2A

K2skier, your solution is kind of like lock everyone that violates the law up for the rest of their natural life. Society isn't willing to pay the freight for the jails. Same here.

And ATF takes over a year to process NFA transfers and registration at the moment, how many more agents do you think your plan would take? And don't forget on the enforcement side, how many LEO's do you think your plan requires?

In short, nothing society is willing to bear the freight to implement.

How about mandatory 5 years of https://www.caffeine.tv/XGames/video/a05a2d80 pop up ads??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNKen

And ATF takes over a year to process NFA transfers and registration at the moment, how many more agents do you think your plan would take? And don't forget on the enforcement side, how many LEO's do you think your plan requires?

In short, nothing society is willing to bear the freight to implement.

---

the old strangle-the-enforcement-mechanism-to-prove-it-doesn't-work move...solid!

almost as good as the if-background-check-doesn't-clear-in-three-days-then-the-gun-sale's-good-to-go move


gosh...if only there was something we could do...

The old conflating society as a whole with his shooting buddies move too!

Im a gun owner and have long been okay with a registry. The tricky part is that there will still be a black market and a certain percentage of these suicide/murder shooters are first offenders. They use a legal firearm.

the overwhelming number of these people are using legal guns. i think we have to admit that zero is a goal we should always strive for but is unattainable in our violent and gun flooded environment. there is no silver bullet to fix this but if we
make a few changes the levels of violence will come down. maybe agreeing on what is acceptable would be a place to start but any changes we make won’t be measurable for a few years anyway. there’s no reason to refuse to do anything as far as i can tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ex-powderbroker

the overwhelming number of these people are using legal guns. i think we have to admit that zero is a goal we should always strive for but is unattainable in our violent and gun flooded environment. there is no silver bullet to fix this but if we
make a few changes the levels of violence will come down. maybe agreeing on what is acceptable would be a place to start but any changes we make won’t be measurable for a few years anyway. there’s no reason to refuse to do anything as far as i can tell.

---

Zero is most commonly used by people who want to evaluate any proposed change in such a way that they can say “what’s the point? It won’t stop this scenario.”

Everyone else wants to reduce gun violence and understand that it requires a variety of approaches from putting reasonable restrictions and time lines on access, mental health, cultural changes, and will not eliminate all gun violence.

Same as any other law we have on the books.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

the old strangle-the-enforcement-mechanism-to-prove-it-doesn't-work move...solid!

almost as good as the if-background-check-doesn't-clear-in-three-days-then-the-gun-sale's-good-to-go move


gosh...if only there was something we could do...

---

Why the sarcasm? Prison’s aren’t full enough for you?

Maybe it’s easier just to blame the right. But, a registry would be a big compromise and a step in the right direction. Even if enforcement isn’t full blown throw the book, I guarantee a lot of illegal guns would be confiscated. Compromise and progress are full of baby steps.

There’s not an east answer and pretending there is an easy answer is not a great look.

An interesting article that, to me, points out the hopelessness of thinking we can identify mass shooters beforehand and keep firearms out of their hands,
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...campaign=share

Quote:

---

Knowing about the common characteristics of these killers and terrorists does not shed much light on what to do to thwart them. Stricter gun laws, a good idea in general, will not stop the mass murderers already among us who live in a society saturated with easily obtained weapons. Law enforcement can infiltrate and destroy violent militias, terror cells, and other threats, but that will not prevent unstable young men from searching for causes to justify their massacres—if they even bother with such ideas.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowsparkco

Why the sarcasm? Prison’s aren’t full enough for you?

---

nothing to do with prisons...lack of progress by intractable bad faith argumentation intended to obstruct changes to the status quo has me a little salty about this issue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowsparkco

Maybe it’s easier just to blame the right.

---

Are you seriously implying the right has no responsibility in this issue? Protecting gun manufacturers; doing nothing about gun regulation; and loosening gun regulation laws have been policy platform items for years.
From what I can tell, the shoe very much fits - pretending that the blame is "partisan" or "divisive" is disingenuous or willfully ignorant. It is dead on and the truth is uncomfortable. But apparently hasn't been uncomfortable enough yet to do anything about the public safety problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowsparkco

But, a registry would be a big compromise and a step in the right direction. Even if enforcement isn’t full blown throw the book, I guarantee a lot of illegal guns would be confiscated. Compromise and progress are full of baby steps.

There’s not an east answer and pretending there is an easy answer is not a great look.

---

There are a lot of easy answers and just taking one or two would go a long way towards improving public safety. Then taking a few more as time passes. Then a few more.

Same parallel as highway safety: a lot of little things add up to millions and millions of highway miles with fewer "accidents"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by k2skier112

The solution is very simple;
Register EVERY gun. Minimum 5 year sentence for having a non registered gun
Min 30 day waiting period with exhausting background checks for every purchase
A tiered licensing system where it requires much more training and proficiency to acquire ANY semi auto, but it's much easier to obtain hunting rifles
Every 2 years one must pass another background check and proficiency test, if you can't pass a proficiency test, no gun for you, simple

Think of all the jobs this would create

The gun "enthusiasts" seem to know the last 5 words of the 2A, but are clueless when it comes to the first 4 words of the 2A

---

no.

No silver bullets but how about plastic bullets? It greatly reduces the lethality of guns beyond like 30 feet.. Makes a gun more like a knife.. But you can still have almost as much fun at the range with them. Keep the guns but they're no longer lethal from a mile away.. or even 100 feet away.. You can still defend yourself from a close up threat with it.

Chris Rock's idea.. Make metal/lead projetitle bullets as hard to buy as Sudafed and as big an offense to possess as fentanyl.

Start with the AR .223s and work through all of it.. Buybacks and exchanges.

Ya there will always be some out there, TONS for years.. but if we never start somewhere we'll never get anywhere

The right is hugely to blame, but moderates can make progress together. I think we owe it to each other to alienate the extremes in each party.

A registry does not have to lead to confiscation of legal firearms. I would be pleasantly surprised if we could accomplish a registry in my lifetime.

I know a lot of you have years of experience with each other and your posts are influenced by these relationships. I try to read each post as just an introduction of an idea and to evaluate the idea on its merits. I do think the criminal justice system is overwhelmed and in need of an overhaul. A huge increase in gun offenses would be an additional burden. I do think it’s worth pursuing and worth the societal costs of enforcement.

I don’t think a registry will end gun violence. I do think it is a step in the right direction.

Being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm or ammunition is a mandatory minimum ten-year sentence in the federal system. Rarely does it get prosecuted as a stand-alone crime. And it is always a throw-away chip or rolled into a concurrent sentence as opposed to a consecutive sentence in the sentencing phase.

The latest greatest gang device is the Glock switch. Again, rarely are individuals prosecuted for violation of the NFA laws as a stand-alone crime, which is again a mandatory 10 year sentence.

Let's start by enforcing the existing laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowsparkco

The right is hugely to blame, but moderates can make progress together. I think we owe it to each other to alienate the extremes in each party.

A registry does not have to lead to confiscation of legal firearms. I would be pleasantly surprised if we could accomplish a registry in my lifetime.

I know a lot of you have years of experience with each other and your posts are influenced by these relationships. I try to read each post as just an introduction of an idea and to evaluate the idea on its merits. I do think the criminal justice system is overwhelmed and in need of an overhaul. A huge increase in gun offenses would be an additional burden. I do think it’s worth pursuing and worth the societal costs of enforcement.

I don’t think a registry will end gun violence. I do think it is a step in the right direction.

---

ON a long enough timeline a registry will absolutely lead to the disappearance of legal firearms ownership. This is why you think its a step in the right direction despite not thinking it will end violence. Be honest here. Or stop being short sighted.

The problem is, like with many issues, people want compromise but cannot admit that those who disagree with them have any reasonable valid basis for their beliefs. its just YOU compromise because my beliefs are right and if you don't agree you're either crazy stupid or evil.

A felony is a pretty low bar for that sentence as a stand alone charge. In most cases that would be a draconian bullshit sentence for just carrying. And I’m pretty much full gun control everywhere but that ain’t the way by growing the prison industrial complex

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

ON a long enough timeline a registry will absolutely lead to the disappearance of legal firearms ownership. This is why you think its a step in the right direction despite not thinking it will end violence. Be honest here. Or stop being short sighted.

The problem is, like with many issues, people want compromise but cannot admit that those who disagree with them have any reasonable valid basis for their beliefs. its just YOU compromise because my beliefs are right and if you don't agree you're either crazy stupid or evil.

---

A registry could have an effect on some instances of mass shootings like Columbine for instance.

What’s the obvious cause and effect of a registry and confiscation of legal firearms? I know the NRA has been making this argument for decades, but I’ve never heard any evidence I found convincing. If a strong gun lobby has fought off a registry this long why couldn’t they fight off confiscation?

You’re clearly on one side of this argument. We would be making the appeal to others like myself who legally own guns and would happily register them. I’ve heard dozens of conservatives agree that a registry is prudent and that the NRA has scared gun owners with the promise of future confiscation.

To be respected for making a valid argument for your beliefs you have to actually make a valid argument. They would know where to come get them is not a valid argument. If “they” had the power to confiscate they could simply go door-to-door. Why does a registry lead to confiscation? If you believe so strongly that’s the case, lay it out. I’m sure you could go onto the NRA’s website and parse some text.

Sadly it’s the slippery slope. Or the camel nose under the tent.

I’m all for registration. And even ballistic samples. But biannual testing? Wtf.

Harsh penalties for illegal guns would certainly help city violence. Chicago had a gun ban for decades and shootings were insane, encouraging normal folk to get guns. Even though they were illegal too.

Maybe amend 2A to allow all existing gun types, create a registry, and no further bans?

After port Arthur Australia lost all rights. That was quick.

So many people have dozens. It’s like a ski addiction. But skis don’t kill people. People kill people. Britain was contemplating a pointy knife ban not that long ago. Might as well ban pillows in case the Spanish Inquisition starts up again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNKen

Being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm or ammunition is a mandatory minimum ten-year sentence in the federal system. Rarely does it get prosecuted as a stand-alone crime. And it is always a throw-away chip or rolled into a concurrent sentence as opposed to a consecutive sentence in the sentencing phase.

The latest greatest gang device is the Glock switch. Again, rarely are individuals prosecuted for violation of the NFA laws as a stand-alone crime, which is again a mandatory 10 year sentence.

Let's start by enforcing the existing laws.

---

We've already established that most of these horrific events are carried out by "legal gun owners". There's too much wiggle room on the law that allows anyone without a felony to pretty instantly purchase ability to carry out said mayhem within an hour or two.. quicker at a gun show.

Just about anybody can also find a handgun just going car to car in any major city jiggling door handles and checking unlocked cars. You'll have one in an hour tops doing that around here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

The problem is, like with many issues, people want compromise but cannot admit that those who disagree with them have any reasonable valid basis for their beliefs. its just YOU compromise because my beliefs are right and if you don't agree you're either crazy stupid or evil.

---

What is your proposed compromise position? So far you’ve just been No.

Hands down the biggest problem with this is topic is people going straight to SumJongguys or Leroy’s end of the argument.


There are so many easy things ranging from enforce the existing laws and tweaking them to our current reality to universal background checks before you ever get to the extremes.

As noted up thread, there is not a perfect solution to this issue which is something lots of us learned early in life. Everything related to this is about harm reduction.

Specifically, this thread was started about reducing the harm from guns to children.

In schools.

Now guns are one of the most dangerous things facing children in day to day life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

no.

---

Yes

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amdt2.2 Historical Background on Second Amendment
https://constitution.congress.gov/br...ALDE_00013262/

Gun "enthusiast's" can't comprehend the 2nd and 3rd word of the Amendment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ex-powderbroker

the overwhelming number of these people are using legal guns.

---

Generally speaking and with a hat tip to certain states, our current laws are so lax that virtually anyone can get an arsenal of extremely capable weapons and be 'legal. That's by the advocates design; you basically have to be a massive fuck up to fall into the 'illegal gun' territory. Tantamount to: I'm a shitty criminal so terrible that I've already been caught and convicted of a felony. Amazingly, despite the completely legal avenue being available, there's still some cheapskates/dimwits whose level of complacency is so high that they'll still try get over by illicit means and grumble if, on the rare occasion, they get called on it.

Enforcing "laws on the books" is a dead end because the barrier to acquire weapons is virtually non-existent. The unlawfulness determination happens after the fact, at best.

Give some teeth to the acquisition process.

Bring accountability to weapons in your charge.

^at this point, there is no structure or rigor that enables enforcing the laws on the books. Again, by design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by k2skier112

Gun "enthusiast's" can't comprehend the 2nd and 3rd word of the Amendment

---

To be fair, Scalia opened the door for nitwits to imagine they "know" what the framers were thinking but didn't write with Heller.