Can we have a rational discussion about guns and why the typical arguments for gun control and its implementation won't work?

[cpp]

Well, this speaks to larger societal problems, doesn't it? As the saying goes, "guns don't kill people, people kill people". But, if the "wrong" people don't have access to a firearm, they can't kill anybody with one. Of course, with determination and planning, someone can make a bomb, drive through crowd, hijack an aircraft, etc. However, if there were no guns available, how many people will expend the time, effort and planning to commit their crimes with other methods? There are always knives, but they require someone to get "close and personal". A lot fewer people would be willing and/or able to commit their attacks in such a manner.

With such a quantity of weaponry in circulation, any new regulations - or more strict enforcement of current ones - would take generations to have a noticeable effect.

Maybe it's time to address the lack of social mobility.
Poverty, lack of social mobility, government distrust contribute to U.S. gun violence - UPI.com

Not sure mobility has anything to do with it as these poverty stricken areas are overrun with bullies and gangs . What bus these people to malls, let them be mobile where. And govt distrust is just a cop out. It all starts at home, sure a lot of these gangs and really low income housing areas have a large number of drug related crime, but that's not the Govt's fault. As these people somehow have a way to buy drugs. I would say they do venture out and rob others for that money. People want somethings for free, no work which means the parents have NO skill sets, and that goes back to their parents etc.. a continuous circle. All of that just leads to robbery, which at times turns into murder.

Fix the hate, you fix the crime. Just to much hate these days. Like in our local paper this morning. "A man has been arrested in the beating death of his roommate last February at a motel near Daytona Beach ".

 

[highfigh]

Well, this speaks to larger societal problems, doesn't it? As the saying goes, "guns don't kill people, people kill people". But, if the "wrong" people don't have access to a firearm, they can't kill anybody with one. Of course, with determination and planning, someone can make a bomb, drive through crowd, hijack an aircraft, etc. However, if there were no guns available, how many people will expend the time, effort and planning to commit their crimes with other methods? There are always knives, but they require someone to get "close and personal". A lot fewer people would be willing and/or able to commit their attacks in such a manner.

With such a quantity of weaponry in circulation, any new regulations - or more strict enforcement of current ones - would take generations to have a noticeable effect.

Maybe it's time to address the lack of social mobility.
Poverty, lack of social mobility, government distrust contribute to U.S. gun violence - UPI.com

One of the sticking points of gun control is:

How can they find all of the guns and how would they take them from people who aren't supposed to have them?

The link I posted shows that millions of stolen guns are out there and close to 15K are stolen annually. They're virtually invisible to law enforcement at that point, unless confiscated- unless they close off each block of houses and apartments, set up check points and search every nook and cranny and make entry/exit with a gun, to each block, they'll never find all of them. Guns are the preferred weapon because drive-by stabbings don't work and because someone doesn't need to get blood on themselves in the process.

The lack of social mobility can be caused by many factors- as I have mentioned, many cities keep some people in a condition of poverty and make it difficult to move up- that needs to change but people can't agree about that, either. It seems that some politicians come up with policies and programs, implying "Here- we don't think you can do it for yourself, so we'll do it for you" and drag their feet in implementation, which means people are just waiting for something to happen. It sure seems that way, here.

 

[TankTop5]

This starts in the home, period, end of story.
We have dropped teaching basic morality and substituted social justice instead, you can’t have one without the other. Lacking morality social justice will turn violent.

End the war on drugs or at least cut its budget by 50% and spend that money on mental health and recovery programs. This will only work if the money is spent locally, Washington needs to stay out of it!!!

 

[TankTop5]

How can they find all of the guns and how would they take them from people who aren't supposed to have them?

They can’t, we’re well passed that. This is something I’m not for but go search for ammo online, hint there isn’t any. If the government figured out how to stop the flow of ammunition any available ammo’s price would be astronomical, it’s already ridiculous. This isn’t what I want but in my humble opinion this is what will happen soon.

 

[highfigh]

Maybe those who commit mass murder are mentally ill. But, mass murder is small proportion of gun deaths. It just gets more coverage. And, if by definition, mass murderers are mentally ill, doesn't that give them a "get out of jail free" card?

And the fact that mass-murder is a small percentage of gun deaths, politicians think they need to be perceived as 'doing something about it'. They're not, they're pandering to peoples' fears and reactions.

The most common guns used are handguns. They're easy to conceal, easy to use and they aren't always expensive. At this time, ammunition is scarce and the price has more than tripled for many calibers, but if someone steals it, even that's not a problem. Hot guns are often sold by word of mouth and when someone tells another person "I need some bullets", they're not hard to find. Stolen guns are also trafficked throughout the country and into/out of Mexico, as well. The gangs and cartels are some of the major users and traffickers- it's a big business. Banning "assault weapons" is a feeble attempt to solve the problem- it has been said that a problem can only be solved after identifying it and they haven't done that.

 

[highfigh]

They can’t, we’re well passed that. This is something I’m not for but go search for ammo online, hint there isn’t any. If the government figured out how to stop the flow of ammunition any available ammo’s price would be astronomical, it’s already ridiculous. This isn’t what I want but in my humble opinion this is what will happen soon.

Part of the ammo shortage is due to the increase in first-time gun sales- when someone starts, they'll need bullets and if they buy one or two boxes, that's 50-100, if they bought a handgun (unless they only buy hollow point, which often come 25 to a box). I saw that 70 million guns were sold between late-2019 and late-2020, so that's 50-100 million rounds. Then, Remington was split up and sold which, along with other factors, stopped their production of ammunition. I have seen comments that law enforcement and the military have increased their purchases, but no solid details. I also saw videos from CCI and Remington that said they were at full production but there's a lot of ammunition out there- it's just hard to find for people who need it for ongoing training, first time gun owners and people who want to hoard it. What used to cost ten bucks is now close to fifty- that's a good way to get people to stop buying it if they don't have decent income or aren't willing to take food out of mouths.

 

[highfigh]

Not sure mobility has anything to do with it as these poverty stricken areas are overrun with bullies and gangs . What bus these people to malls, let them be mobile where. And govt distrust is just a cop out. It all starts at home, sure a lot of these gangs and really low income housing areas have a large number of drug related crime, but that's not the Govt's fault. As these people somehow have a way to buy drugs. I would say they do venture out and rob others for that money. People want somethings for free, no work which means the parents have NO skill sets, and that goes back to their parents etc.. a continuous circle. All of that just leads to robbery, which at times turns into murder.

Fix the hate, you fix the crime. Just to much hate these days. Like in our local paper this morning. "A man has been arrested in the beating death of his roommate last February at a motel near Daytona Beach ".

Businesses are having a very hard time filling positions, now that they're able to reopen- a lot of people aren't returning to work by choice, same as after the crash in 2008. Why work when money will come in, anyway? They can find gigs and part-time work that adds up but with the inflation that nobody seems to want to talk about, there's gonna be a very rude awakening for a lot of people. Have you seen the price of lumber? An 8' stud is close to $9- I paid $78 + tax for a sheet of 1/2" MDO plywood, which used to cost a little over $50/sheet.

 

[Mikado463]

They can’t, we’re well passed that. This is something I’m not for but go search for ammo online, hint there isn’t any. If the government figured out how to stop the flow of ammunition any available ammo’s price would be astronomical, it’s already ridiculous. This isn’t what I want but in my humble opinion this is what will happen soon.

Sad but potentially true and as the a-holes in Gov't push their agenda for EV's one can deduct the same for gasoline ..........

 

[highfigh]

If the government figured out how to stop the flow of ammunition....

If they decide to do that, they're gonna have to answer to all of the PO'd former workers, whose jobs were shyte-canned, AGAIN, by the government. Whole industries have suffered because of the way they handled COVID. So many people could have continued to work, in order to keep other industries going- lumber prices are through the roof (no pun intended), partially because the chemical industry couldn't produce enough glue for plywood/OSB, etc. Lumber could still be harvested, trucking and rail freight could continue, construction workers often wear masks already, so there's no reason for many to stop building. Now, try to get a builder- they're booked out two years in some places.

Government can be so short-sighted and it costs EVERYONE. The existing homes that were affordable will be completely out of the question for the people who are trying to get out of cramped apartments and into better areas- great for homeowners who want a bidding war, but now, out of state buyers are coming in and they're going to grow the slums, which cities can't afford to have. Absentee property owners don't always care about the conditions of cheap(er) properties, they just want their money.

 

[Trell]

^Without the government there would be no vaccine developed this so extremely fast, and distribution of injection of said vaccines needs government as well.

 

[lovinthehd]

Well there are certain right wingnut politicians trying to pass legislation that would allow cars to be used as weapons against protesters....so you can leave your guns at home and just drive to spread and express your "free dumb".

We're possibly too f*cked already with private gun policies in this country, most people simply have no real justification for owning/"needing" one in the first place (other than they want to and can afford to buy one). Worrying about removing extant guns is one thing, but intelligent sales restrictions, training, use and storage of weapons is another. Have to start somewhere, tho, rather than throw up your hands with and spout "2nd amendment" or "people kill people, not guns". Definitely some people should have guns removed from their possession, tho it will be the old "yeah you can pry them out of my cold dead hands". I guess it's just the continuation of the bloodlust like the genocide and prejudices and dumbass religion that the europeans spread thru the world.....time to read Germs Guns and Steel again perhaps.

Aren't you glad I saved it up for one post?

 

[TankTop5]

We're possibly too f*cked already with private gun policies in this country, most people simply have no real justification for owning/"needing" one in the first place.....

I’m sorry but there are nearly 400,000,000 guns in America, if guns were the issue t Number of gun deaths would be astronomically higher. As it is we’re about 6 for every hundred thousand but suicide accounts for 2/3 of gun deaths and 99% of remaining deaths is murder by criminal with a stolen gun. Of those it’s mostly gang violence and or drug related and innocent deaths again are almost a statistical anomaly. The number of law abiding citizens who kill in self defense is immeasurable statistically.

The problem gun owner have with stricter gun laws is we aren’t the problem even though we currently possess almost half of all firearms worldwide. We possess almost 400x as many firearms as the US military and military and law enforcement combined have less than 20,000,000 guns. If law abiding citizens with lawfully owned firearms were the problem it would make the Nazis look like mother Theresa but we aren’t.

You will need to find another boogeyman.

Anyway I’d like to keep my .50 cal belt fed machine gun and I’m still looking for a surplus Howitzer if I can get a good deal (yes you can own a Howitzer). A family member owns the mini gun from Predator and Terminator 2 and rents it out to Hollywood. It hangs from the ceiling with the belt of ammo draped over a China cabinet, why, because this is America and supposedly we’re free like it or not!

 

[lovinthehd]

I’m sorry but there are nearly 400,000,000 guns in America, if guns were the issue t Number of gun deaths would be astronomically higher. As it is we’re about 6 for every hundred thousand but suicide accounts for 2/3 of gun deaths and 99% of remaining deaths is murder by criminal with a stolen gun. Of those it’s mostly gang violence and or drug related and innocent deaths again are almost a statistical anomaly. The number of law abiding citizens who kill in self defense is immeasurable statistically.

The problem gun owner have with stricter gun laws is we aren’t the problem even though we currently possess almost half of all firearms worldwide. We possess almost 400x as many firearms as the US military and military and law enforcement combined have less than 20,000,000 guns. If law abiding citizens with lawfully owned firearms were the problem it would make the Nazis look like mother Theresa but we aren’t.

You will need to find another boogeyman.

Anyway I’d like to keep my .50 cal belt fed machine gun and I’m still looking for a surplus Howitzer if I can get a good deal (yes you can own a Howitzer). A family member owns the mini gun from Predator and Terminator 2 and rents it out to Hollywood. It hangs from the ceiling with the belt of ammo draped over a China cabinet, why, because this is America and supposedly we’re free like it or not!

Yeah I'm sure you need those guns. I am not looking for a boogeyman, just pointing out there are far too many guns without a particular use. Many of them do cause problems, but saying it's probably too late to do anything because it's already a mess to an extent, gotta start sometime/somewhere.

 

[TankTop5]

Yeah I'm sure you need those guns. I am not looking for a boogeyman, just pointing out there are far too many guns without a particular use. Many of them do cause problems

But who are you or anyone else to decide what I, a free citizen of the United States can or cannot own, what arrogance! What particular use do they need? How many houses or cars should I own, how much stereo equipment? Frankly it’s none of your business! How about we simply hold people accountable for the misuse of their property, you know, personal responsibility. If someone kills someone with one of my firearms that they stole because I didn’t properly secure it I’m responsible. Same with your car, someone breaks into your garage, steals your car and kills a pedestrian while fleeing the police you’re responsible. Everyone can have whatever they want as long as they are responsible for it. If your dog bites someone you’re responsible same as if your teenager drives the car through someone’s fence. Everyone is responsible and you hold them accountable, it’s actually pretty simple.

 

[lovinthehd]

But who are you or anyone else to decide what I, a free citizen of the United States can or cannot own, what arrogance! What particular use do they need? How many houses or cars should I own, how much stereo equipment? Frankly it’s none of your business! How about we simply hold people accountable for the misuse of their property, you know, personal responsibility. If someone kills someone with one of my firearms that they stole because I didn’t properly secure it I’m responsible. Same with your car, someone breaks into your garage, steals your car and kills a pedestrian while fleeing the police you’re responsible. Everyone can have whatever they want as long as they are responsible for it. If your dog bites someone you’re responsible same as if your teenager drives the car through someone’s fence. Everyone is responsible and you hold them accountable, it’s actually pretty simple.

How about if I want to collect nitro glycerin? Atomic devices? There are limits and we have a gun culture that definitely has problems that manifest themselves in other ways. I don't know what you're envisioning, imagining someone wants to take every gun from every person or something? What's wrong with more controls over distribution, sales, registration, background checks, being able to act on the nutcases/criminals, etc?

 

[TankTop5]

How about if I want to collect nitro glycerin? Atomic devices? There are limits and we have a gun culture that definitely has problems that manifest themselves in other ways. I don't know what you're envisioning, imagining someone wants to take every gun from every person or something? What's wrong with more controls over distribution, sales, registration, background checks, being able to act on the nutcases/criminals, etc?

What’s the point in more controls? It only affects law abiding citizens and has zero effect on criminals, why in the world would you want to screw with the good guys? The 2nd says we can have guns, it doesn’t mention explosives and friggin lasers, I think your imagination is running wild. You have a personal emotional based opinion that doesn’t rely on facts.

The only thing I support is mental health laws, period!

 

[Irvrobinson]

How about if I want to collect nitro glycerin? Atomic devices? There are limits and we have a gun culture that definitely has problems that manifest themselves in other ways. I don't know what you're envisioning, imagining someone wants to take every gun from every person or something? What's wrong with more controls over distribution, sales, registration, background checks, being able to act on the nutcases/criminals, etc?

Personally, I think owning a gun should be regulated at least as much as getting a driver's license, but unfortunately the 2nd amendment does say, "shall not be infringed". "Infringed" looks like a carefully chosen word. Other amendments use terms like "shall not be abridged", which to my eyes seems to allow more latitude. Of course, I also think we should require a government-issued photo ID to vote, so I'm clearly not aligned with liberals or conservatives as groups.

 

[Trell]

What’s the point in more controls? It only affects law abiding citizens and has zero effect on criminals, why in the world would you want to screw with the good guys? The 2nd says we can have guns, it doesn’t mention explosives and friggin lasers, I think your imagination is running wild. You have a personal emotional based opinion that doesn’t rely on facts.

The only thing I support is mental health laws, period!

Earlier you dismissed deaths by guns by saying that 2/3 suicide while the rest is mostly by criminals. If people did not have so easy access to guns many of those deaths would have been prevented, and those deaths would mostly not be detected by a mental health test. Quite a few of those suicide are children/teenagers.

USA also has many injured by a gun, and that includes many children/teenagers, much more than in other democratic countries.

Combine the above with no requirement of weapons training to buy and own guns it's clear what that policy leads to.

I find the attitude callous and self-centred.

 

[highfigh]

^Without the government there would be no vaccine developed this so extremely fast, and distribution of injection of said vaccines needs government as well.

That's true and there's almost no way private enterprise could have done as much in a year, partially because the government has been researching corona viruses and according to the people in medical professions whom I have spoken with about COVID, Fauchi (director of U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) farmed out some of the research to Wuhan, but the virus didn't have the typical safeguards to prevent its spread in the event that it was somehow able to leave the labs. It did, and here we are. That agency is part of the US government, so they share responsibility.

I'm not one of the people who thinks all government is intrusive, unwanted and that we should be able to do whatever we want- that just doesn't work. If someone wants to run amok in their own house and on their own property, they should be able to do that as long as nobody else is harmed. However, I do think that OUR government needs to be better.

 

[Irvrobinson]

That's true and there's almost no way private enterprise could have done as much in a year, partially because the government has been researching corona viruses and according to the people in medical professions whom I have spoken with about COVID, Fauchi (director of U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) farmed out some of the research to Wuhan

This part of your statement is apparently correct:

https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/resources/docs/ISPSW_689_Lin.pdf

but the virus didn't have the typical safeguards to prevent its spread in the event that it was somehow able to leave the labs. It did, and here we are. That agency is part of the US government, so they share responsibility.

This part is an unproven theory, more like a rumor someone started.