"The Hunt"

[highfigh]

Agreed! The laws on the books are by and large adequate, but not properly enforced.

You can't expect to have a cop waiting everywhere for people to do something stupid- why don't you see people as the problem? It's not a matter of enforcement, it's about people disobeying the laws.

 

[bigkrazy155]

You can't expect to have a cop waiting everywhere for people to do something stupid- why don't you see people as the problem? It's not a matter of enforcement, it's about people disobeying the laws.

Still agreeing.

 

[herbu]

I am with the protesters that say "do something!"

But why does that "something" ALWAYS mean gun control? If you were also willing to support some criminal control actions, we would be more inclined to believe your intention is to address crime, not just take guns.

 

[KEW]

But why does that "something" ALWAYS mean gun control? If you were also willing to support some criminal control actions, we would be more inclined to believe your intention is to address crime, not just take guns.

It is not that it has to be gun control (although it does to fulfill the objective of testing the influence of the NRA).

What criminal controls are you thinking about?
I think I'd be for them!
What makes you think I would not be willing to support criminal controls?

 

[Trell]

But why does that "something" ALWAYS mean gun control? If you were also willing to support some criminal control actions, we would be more inclined to believe your intention is to address crime, not just take guns.

You've made that point earlier, and I thought I made it clear that all (most?) supports both. This is like walking and chewing gum at the same time.

 

[herbu]

It is not that it has to be gun control (although it does to fulfill the objective of testing the influence of the NRA).

What criminal controls are you thinking about?
I think I'd be for them!
What makes you think I would not be willing to support criminal controls?

How about stiff MANDATORY sentences for a felony with a firearm?
If you're a convicted felon caught with a firearm, 20 years.
If you have a firearm in your possession during the commission of a felony, 20 years.
If you have a stolen or illegal firearm, 20 years.
(These are all laws that already exist but are given no teeth.)

The reason I doubt liberals will ever support laws like this, or even enforcement of laws already on the books, is because history tells us the "disenfranchised" will be over-represented in this group going to jail. They always look for a way to blame me for criminal activity of their target voters.

If you don't like my ideas, let's hear yours. I mean ideas to address Gun Violence that don't include additional regulations or penalties for the legal gun owners.

 

[KEW]

How about stiff MANDATORY sentences for a felony with a firearm?
If you're a convicted felon caught with a firearm, 20 years.
If you have a firearm in your possession during the commission of a felony, 20 years.
If you have a stolen or illegal firearm, 20 years.
(These are all laws that already exist but are given no teeth.)

I don't have a problem with any of those laws, but the only one that would (maybe) address mass-shootings is the last one, because that could feasibly happen before the "event".
For mass shootings it is rare that the shooter ever plans to be alive after the event, so he doesn't really give a flip what penalties exist.
But if these laws exist, it is up to the executive branch to enforce them, so what's up with that?

I'm good with enforcement of those laws, but they really don't address the gun related issues that most concern me:
1) Mass shootings - acts of domestic terrorism.
2) Suicides (having dad's gun at the ready makes it a little too easy during someone's lowest moment of life - just having to think about it and plan it for an hour or longer would help - as opposed to grab the gun and shoot the roof of your mouth.
3) Accidental shootings - often young kids who get a hold of a gun left carelessly lying out.

I don't really see laws for 2 or 3 working unless we are going to allow intrusions into the home for inspections. That is why I think a training requirement before buying a gun is useful. I don't care if you are a good shot so much as that people understand their responsibility for what may happen with their gun when they are not watching, so keep them secured. I know people who are more concerned about keeping their liquor locked up than their guns, and they have kids in the age that might not know whether a gun in their hand is a toy!

 

[Trell]

... I know people who are more concerned about keeping their liquor locked up than their guns, and they have kids in the age that might not know whether a gun in their hand is a toy!

Those people should have their guns taken away from them to protect their children, themselves and others.

 

[highfigh]

How about stiff MANDATORY sentences for a felony with a firearm?
If you're a convicted felon caught with a firearm, 20 years.
If you have a firearm in your possession during the commission of a felony, 20 years.
If you have a stolen or illegal firearm, 20 years.
(These are all laws that already exist but are given no teeth.)

The reason I doubt liberals will ever support laws like this, or even enforcement of laws already on the books, is because history tells us the "disenfranchised" will be over-represented in this group going to jail. They always look for a way to blame me for criminal activity of their target voters.

If you don't like my ideas, let's hear yours. I mean ideas to address Gun Violence that don't include additional regulations or penalties for the legal gun owners.

Because stiff sentences for felons is called 'racist', that's why. Don't you know that our prisons are already overcrowded with criminals?

In MKE, people have killed someone within three hours of getting out of prison, several times. THAT'S why gun control won't work.

Liberal judges who want to make criminals feel like citizens are one reason people die. Judge Lynn Adelman is one such judge and he needs to go.

I don't really see anything wrong with requiring potential gun buyers to show some indication that they're not currently mentally ill. Sure, people change and they can go off the rails, but on average, I think it would weed out some bad people.

THe current application asks one question about mental health, but doesn't include anything about getting additional info from a doctor, as shown in the quote from the Wisconsin driver's license application page-

"Answer the medical questions. For some medical conditions, you will be asked to have your doctor provide medical information."- if someone wants a gun, I want them to be sane and I definitely want them to be able to hit what they're aiming at, not just spray lead in all directions.

 

[highfigh]

Those people should have their guns taken away from them to protect their children, themselves and others.

OK, how would you do that and abide by the Constitution? Can't just barge into their house and look around, or take what they have- the 4th and 6th Amendments prohibit that. I'm sure you wouldn't want the Police breaking down your door without a damn good reason (or a search warrant), just because they heard something bad about you.

If we didn't have these Amendments, the Police could lock down a city and search every building on every block without allowing anyone to leave the buildings, then move to the next block and make sure nobody leaves the other blocks or enters the ones they're searching. There aren't enough officers in the country to do that and it would require using the military, which is also forbidden.

Sure would result in removing a helluva lot of guns from the hands of criminals, though. If they can get warrants for this kind of search, they could do it but the manpower needed would be prohibitive. However, the people in the inner city here are pissed and I think it won't be long before they start offering info about who has illegal guns, or possess them illegally.

 

[highfigh]

I don't have a problem with any of those laws, but the only one that would (maybe) address mass-shootings is the last one, because that could feasibly happen before the "event".
For mass shootings it is rare that the shooter ever plans to be alive after the event, so he doesn't really give a flip what penalties exist.
But if these laws exist, it is up to the executive branch to enforce them, so what's up with that?

I'm good with enforcement of those laws, but they really don't address the gun related issues that most concern me:
1) Mass shootings - acts of domestic terrorism.
2) Suicides (having dad's gun at the ready makes it a little too easy during someone's lowest moment of life - just having to think about it and plan it for an hour or longer would help - as opposed to grab the gun and shoot the roof of your mouth.
3) Accidental shootings - often young kids who get a hold of a gun left carelessly lying out.

I don't really see laws for 2 or 3 working unless we are going to allow intrusions into the home for inspections. That is why I think a training requirement before buying a gun is useful. I don't care if you are a good shot so much as that people understand their responsibility for what may happen with their gun when they are not watching, so keep them secured. I know people who are more concerned about keeping their liquor locked up than their guns, and they have kids in the age that might not know whether a gun in their hand is a toy!

It's the Judicial Branch that enforces laws, not the Executive.

People often plan suicide for a long time. They do it alone because they may not want to inconvenience others, but holy crap! They don't imagine what happens when they're found, by whom or the effects it will have on others. I worked with someone who killed himself in the back room of his uncles' business (where we had worked)- he shot himself, just as his mother had (sister of the uncle). They also may hint at what they're going to do and in some cases, they fire a test shot, to prevent flinching- I knew someone who did that. It's less frequent that they kill themselves in front of others, but I knew someone who waited until his girlfriend arrived at the business before doing it. I thought he was a nice guy and can't imagine what his GF went through in dealing with it.

I agree that people who are careless with weapon storage should lose them, but how do you find out until it's too late or they report that their weapons were stolen?

 

[highfigh]

At least this isn't more common-

https://news.yahoo.com/latest-says-carried-attack-kabul-103959798.html

 

[snakeeyes]

The kid is who is willing to do this is a kid who has been in trouble before. Maybe some serious mental health strategy for our kids would help too.

 

[markw]

How about stiff MANDATORY sentences for a felony with a firearm?
If you're a convicted felon caught with a firearm, 20 years.
If you have a firearm in your possession during the commission of a felony, 20 years.
If you have a stolen or illegal firearm, 20 years.
(These are all laws that already exist but are given no teeth.)

I'll go along with that with one addition: If one intentionally kills with a gun, and there is more than evidence of this, then apply the death sentence ...quickly.

 

[KEW]

It's the Judicial Branch that enforces laws, not the Executive.

The executive branch executes the law and the judicial branch address concerns that require interpretation of the law.

The legislative branch writes the laws.
The executive branch administers the laws.
The judicial branch interprets the laws.

The three branches of government each have different authority, to maintain a separation of powers.

 

[highfigh]

The executive branch executes the law and the judicial branch address concerns that require interpretation of the law.

Thanks- I didn't remember it correctly.

 

[herbu]

I don't really see anything wrong with requiring potential gun buyers to show some indication that they're not currently mentally ill.

Really? So an assumption of guilt, and you have to prove you're innocent? You have to prove a negative? And who decides whether you can buy a gun or not? Your MD? A psychiatrist? Clergy? Neighbor? Family?

Tell me how you would actually execute this requirement. Then look at the causes of death in this country, and tell me why put the effort in gun control and ignore causes that are orders of magnitude greater than mass shootings. I mean, if the goal is really to save lives...

 

[highfigh]

Really? So an assumption of guilt, and you have to prove you're innocent? You have to prove a negative? And who decides whether you can buy a gun or not? Your MD? A psychiatrist? Clergy? Neighbor? Family?

Tell me how you would actually execute this requirement. Then look at the causes of death in this country, and tell me why put the effort in gun control and ignore causes that are orders of magnitude greater than mass shootings. I mean, if the goal is really to save lives...

Guilt is one thing, determining mental health is another.

If someone you know comes to your house with a gun, what would you do if you know they have always been careful with it and you don't think they will use it irresponsibly?

Mentally ill people are buying guns and that needs to stop. The slippery slope is in how to determine their wellness and who gets to decide what constitutes 'mentally well vs mentally ill'. A gun is a weapon, the person using it has decided that they'll use it, for whatever reason and using whatever logic they can.

I'm not just referring to AR/AK style weapons- handguns kill far more than long guns. I think habitual criminality is a huge problem and the illegal weapon trade is rampant- the hard part is in how to find and confiscate the illegal weapons. Whatever they're doing now isn't working but the root of the problem is people.

While it's an example that has been beaten to death, Chicago has been a shining example of failed gun policy-

https://www.chicagotribune.com/data/ct-shooting-victims-map-charts-htmlstory.html

How would you stop the killing?

 

[Trell]

Really? So an assumption of guilt, and you have to prove you're innocent? You have to prove a negative? And who decides whether you can buy a gun or not? Your MD? A psychiatrist? Clergy? Neighbor? Family?

Tell me how you would actually execute this requirement. Then look at the causes of death in this country, and tell me why put the effort in gun control and ignore causes that are orders of magnitude greater than mass shootings. I mean, if the goal is really to save lives...

A mental health requirement has nothing to do with assumption of guilt or proving innocence, and such requirements exists for some types of jobs/licenses.

https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455:

"U.S. airline pilots must hold a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman and medical certificate in order to fly.​

....​

How does an AME assess mental health?​

​

The FAA medical application form includes questions pertaining to the mental health of the pilot. An AME may ask questions about psychological conditions as part of his/her assessment Pilots must disclose all existing physical and psychological conditions and medications or face significant fines if they are found to have falsified information. They must report any health professional visits during the previous three years. The AME will use this self-disclosure to ask additional questions about mental health issues. The AME can order additional psychological testing, or defer the application to the FAA Office of Aerospace Medicine if he or she is concerned that further evaluation is necessary.​

​

Additionally, if the FAA receives information from another source that a pilot may have a mental health issue, the FAA's Office of Aerospace Medicine can direct the pilot to provide specific documentation and/or a psychiatric and psychological evaluation from a mental health care professional in order to make a determination about the pilot's suitability for certification.​

​

If a pilot experiences an incident that appears medically related, the FAA will request additional medical information to determine the eligibility of the pilot to hold a medical certificate. If an FAA flight surgeon determines that a pilot with a valid medical certificate no longer meets the medical standards, the flight surgeon will then recommend that FAA counsel revoke or suspend the medical certificate.​

​

Certain medical conditions such as a psychosis, bipolar disorder and severe personality disorder automatically disqualify a pilot from obtaining an FAA medical certificate and prohibit them from flying. However, many pilots have conditions that are treatable. Several U.S. airlines already have reporting and monitoring programs that provide the pilot with a path to report their condition, be treated for it, and return to the cockpit once the FAA has determined – through a rigorous evaluation – it is safe to do so. The FAA addresses the medical certificates of those pilots on a case-by-case basis.​

​

The FAA does not release medical records on living pilots, including the results of any pilot’s medical testing, because medical information is covered by privacy laws. "​

Edit: Fixed copying the wrong section of the linked article.

 

[markw]

A mental health requirement has nothing to do with assumption of guilt or proving innocence, and such requirements exists for some types of jobs/licenses.

https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455:

"U.S. airline pilots must hold a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman and medical certificate in order to fly.​

​

What are the FAA’s medical requirements for airline pilots?​

​

The FAA’s regulations require airline pilots to undergo a medical exam with an FAA-approved physician called an Aviation Medical Examiner (AME) every six or twelve months depending on the pilot's age. Captains are required to have a first class medical certificate and First Officers (co-pilots) may have a first or second class medical certificate. Most, if not all, U.S. airlines require a first class medical certificate for all of their pilots. A first class medical certificate must be renewed every year if the pilot is under the age of 40 and every six months if the pilot is 40 years or older. A second class medical certificate is renewed each year. General aviation pilots apply for third class medical certificates.​

​

In order to apply for an FAA medical certificate, a pilot must complete an official FAA medical application form and have a physical examination with an AME. The FAA’s Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners outlines the application process, examiner responsibilities, examination techniques, aeromedical decision considerations, and resources. There are more than 3,000 AMEs in the United States."​

​

​

And, this applies to assessing mental health exactly how???