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

D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Samurai
I think it was the beginning of the end when America allowed the assault weapon on the market. I tried a middle ground of incentivizing state's to start producing less of them or ban them outright. But I know to see real change on that would take years. And even then it might not do any real good. I thought gun ownership was the simple two-barrel shotgun (for hunting) and the six-barrel hand gun for self-defense. I'm willing to be wrong though.
 
D

Danzilla31

Audioholic Spartan
Okay so I watched the video of the guy who got shot 60 times.

Here let's watch it together


Let's recap shall we? What did we learn?

Let's go over some rules that will keep you alive no matter what color your skin is.

#1 don't get involved in a high speed chase with cops. Pull over and comply
#2 don't shoot at cops while they are following you
#3 don't get out of the car with a ski mask on and then run with your hands down and then turn and face the cops suddenly.
#4 get out with your hands up and get face down on the ground immediately.

Do that and your going to live no matter who you are I 100% guarantee it.

This really is not the right case for some of you who want to sh$t on cops to hang your hat on.

Side note he was wearing a ski mask and it was dark and it happened fast they didn't know what color he was.

You had 9 cops who carry guns with clips that can discharge 15 to 20 rounds in seconds. So yeah it's a lot of bullets.

Cops dump there mag center mass till the target is dead. It's how they're trained they're not going to try to hit your leg and see what you do. That kind of stuff will get you killed in the line of duty

Been nice chatting with you Let's do it again sometime
 
D

Danzilla31

Audioholic Spartan
We are now averaging 12 mass shootings a week. Illinois made news, but a mass shooting at the stone arch bridge in Minneapolis only rates a blip on the local news. Our 16 year old grandson is living with us currently in the suburbs, because he is too scared to live in Minneapolis.

What happened over the weekend just shows the idiocy of allowing people to own guns. Being in possession of an AR 15 needs to carry a life sentence.

It really is time for another constitutional conference. I will state on record that I no longer support the US constitution, and now regard it as totally out of date.

It is time to start again. As part of the new conference, states can have the right to join the new union, or become independent counties, if they don't want to be sensible.

I am firmly of the opinion that only constitutional change will bring positive change. Instead of the right to bear arms, we need zero right to bear arms.

I am tired the refrain of more arrest of criminals and more mental health. Neither of those will stop the carnage.
I'll agree with everything your saying when we have politicians and local DA's and judges that actually ENFORCE THE LAW.

Until people can step up and I don't know actually govern? Instead of enabling people to engage in destructive behavior so they can pander for there votes?

Then nah keep the constitution and I'll keep my guns. People want to throw out the constitution defund cops. I don't think so.

You really want it to be where the only people that have access to guns are criminals or the government?

You really want to break up the union and disarm the populace with China and Russia being as aggressive as they are right now?

Let's say Trump wins in 2024. Which is a real possibility. Do you really want in that government the only people that can have guns is the government?

With all due respect no way to hell with that
 
D

Danzilla31

Audioholic Spartan
What are all those people doing in jail if we aren't tough on crime?
Because they just let them right back out. So we're not really tough on crime. That driver that ran over all those people a couple months ago? He was bonded out for peanuts after he attempted to kill his girlfriend by running over her with his car. So we're big on sending them to jail. But not big on making them face consequences. So no we are not tough on crime at all.

And that's why we are at where we are at right now
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Samurai
America First internationally I'd agree, but the idea we should producing more assault weapons because the gun industry is influential seems loco.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Ninja
We are now averaging 12 mass shootings a week. Illinois made news, but a mass shooting at the stone arch bridge in Minneapolis only rates a blip on the local news. Our 16 year old grandson is living with us currently in the suburbs, because he is too scared to live in Minneapolis.

What happened over the weekend just shows the idiocy of allowing people to own guns. Being in possession of an AR 15 needs to carry a life sentence.

It really is time for another constitutional conference. I will state on record that I no longer support the US constitution, and now regard it as totally out of date.

It is time to start again. As part of the new conference, states can have the right to join the new union, or become independent counties, if they don't want to be sensible.

I am firmly of the opinion that only constitutional change will bring positive change. Instead of the right to bear arms, we need zero right to bear arms.

I am tired the refrain of more arrest of criminals and more mental health. Neither of those will stop the carnage.
I gave you a 'disagree' but not entirely, it's the 'no gun ownership period' that I disagree with.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
It can be quite baffling to us that someone can act so impulsively and disproportionately, but it's quite explainable in many circumstances.
Opinion: The surprising solution to gun violence - CNN

Sure, the political BS needs to stop. How about not reading the 2nd amendment through a kaleidoscope and observe it with the original intent in mind. If you want to exercise your right to keep and bear arms, become a member of a "well-ordered militia", i.e. join the National Guard. Any permissions granted beyond that should be considered a privilege, not a right.


You're throwing out a strawman - the link I posted (I even pasted the relevant snippet) refers to violent crime, not suicide.
That's not a solution, it's an opinion piece with no validation. I do agree that not all homicides are committed by inherently bad people, but one question that was never dealt with in your link is: "Where did they get the guns and were they possessed legally"? If illegally possessed, that makes them slightly 'bad' because they know it's illegal, yet they had the gun(s) anyway.

The kaleidoscope is part of the gung ho NRA member deal and you're right- it needs to stop. Kenosha, WI is debating the possibility of allowing people to carry at some government facilities- not all, but generally places other than Police stations and jails, but this link isn't the most recent, so it's not complete. I watched a news report with comments from a couple of residents on opposite sides of the argument and the pro-carry guy read his "When the average response time is 4-5 minutes, I don't want to wait for the police to show up" comment but I suspect that some who think this way might stay in a bad situation for too long and allow it to go too far just because they have a gun, even though they're carrying legally.

Nobody is willing to walk away- it's like the concept of 'saving face', where walking away from a confrontation is seen as a sign of weakness.

Not a strawman- many aren't willing to take their own lives but decide that they'll go out in a 'suicide by cop' scenario. Many are domestic violence situations and often involve the person with the gun deciding that "If I can't have him/her, nobody else can" and those are the most dangerous because they escalate faster than most people can react- sometimes, they call the PD just to ambush the officers and that has happened several times in the last few weeks.

You don't get it- the National Guard is part of the government and they could be one of the arms that might be used to squash the general public- they can only be used in specific situations that are well-defined. When the Second Amendment was written and ratified, it was during a time when the colonies were still under the thumb of the Crown and battles involved guns, knives & swords, arrows and cannon. Fighting off a government-led attack on The People could be carried out more easily than it can be now, assuming the government uses everything at its disposal but one of the main points was: if The People are disarmed, we're completely helpless against the government- voting wouldn't even be allowed if they ever declare Martial Law. The other reason for allowing people to have guns was to fight off attacks, whether by Native People, privateers/pirates or others who decide they want someone elses' things and try to take them by force. For most people, the chances of the US government shutting down our lives is very remote and for others, it's coming very soon. I don't understand the latter but I can see how a government might use our current problems to institute harsh restrictions on us because they haven't solved the underlying problems.

IMO, one of the biggest problems at this time is that the wrong people have guns and they don't possess them legally. The application is too easy to cheat, the Police aren't filing reports that could prevent gun buying (the a$$hole in Highland Park, IL is a great example of that) and if no reports are filed, the NICS search will show nothing that would disqualify someone buying what they feel they need. The Red Flag Laws help, but only when people do their job and file the reports needed after someone starts to go off the rails.

 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
In Norway and Denmark we've had mass shootings (along with elevated risk levels) the last few days so in Sweden we get news that otherwise would not cross the border.

It is however instructive to show differences in police culture: A report came to the police in a fairly small town in Norway that a man had a long rifle/firearm and was walking around. The Norwegian police, that is usually unarmed, arrived and for some reason shot a warning shot as they could not clearly see what the man was carrying. ONE warning shot. The "perp" was scared, of course, and dropped his umbrella. A total of one bullet fired by the police. What would have happened in USA in a similar situation?
I haven't heard of the police shooting someone with an umbrella, but they do train for situations where someone has a knife. The practice of shooting as soon as someone with a knife starts moving toward them comes from many officers being stabbed or cut before they could un-holster their firearm- they shoot when the distance is 25' or less and the person is moving toward them. A motivated person with a knife can close that distance very quickly. However, if they shoot at great distance and there's nobody at risk, they need to be charged. There was no reason for them to shoot that many times- it's ridiculously excessive and they completely ignored the safety of everyone behind him.

However, I doubt this could happen in your country. Unfortunately, it happened four blocks from my house and one wrong turn could have put him in my neighborhood-


From the link- "So why was a signature bond granted that allowed Seaberry out in the first place? It happened because prosecutors couldn't get a crucial witness to testify, delaying the trial. According to Judge Watts, that violated Wisconsin's speedy trial statute.".

The missing witness may have been threatened, which is called 'intimidating a witness' and it's another crime for which someone can be charged. It's relatively common and it's one reason murderers are released without trial. IMO, nobody who has been accused of violent crimes should be released so easily; fair trial requirement, or not. Public safety is at stake. If you read the article in the link, you'll see that the guy who killed the honor student is 17- that means he allegedly killed the first person when he was 16. I'm pretty sure you don't have 16 year olds who would do this in Sweden.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
We are now averaging 12 mass shootings a week. Illinois made news, but a mass shooting at the stone arch bridge in Minneapolis only rates a blip on the local news. Our 16 year old grandson is living with us currently in the suburbs, because he is too scared to live in Minneapolis.

What happened over the weekend just shows the idiocy of allowing people to own guns. Being in possession of an AR 15 needs to carry a life sentence.

It really is time for another constitutional conference. I will state on record that I no longer support the US constitution, and now regard it as totally out of date.

It is time to start again. As part of the new conference, states can have the right to join the new union, or become independent counties, if they don't want to be sensible.

I am tired the refrain of more arrest of criminals and more mental health. Neither of those will stop the carnage.
So, you live in the suburbs because of White Flight? How would you defend yourself if you lived in Minneapolis? As I wrote, people can't bring themselves to walk away from a fight. It would be best to avoid getting into a fight in the first place.

I don't see a need for some guns, but you're ignoring the fact that handguns are used far more often because they're easier to conceal.

ALL of the Constitution is out of date?

If we start over now, with the current mob in Congress, we'll all be screwed.

How would improving mental health NOT improve this problem? Nobody who's mentally healthy would go on a shooting rampage.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
The police officers are supposed to be trained to handle such situations, for God’s sake!

Contrast this with the police response when an assailant is armed and is mass murdering children in Uvalde.
So you think they're taught how to take a bullet?
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
That's not a solution, it's an opinion piece with no validation. I do agree that not all homicides are committed by inherently bad people, but one question that was never dealt with in your link is: "Where did they get the guns and were they possessed legally"? If illegally possessed, that makes them slightly 'bad' because they know it's illegal, yet they had the gun(s) anyway.
It's a suggested solution based on real studies and cases, which provide some validation. You don't think intervening in young peoples' lives to keep them on a straighter path is of no use?
The kaleidoscope is part of the gung ho NRA member deal and you're right- it needs to stop. Kenosha, WI is debating the possibility of allowing people to carry at some government facilities- not all, but generally places other than Police stations and jails, but this link isn't the most recent, so it's not complete. I watched a news report with comments from a couple of residents on opposite sides of the argument and the pro-carry guy read his "When the average response time is 4-5 minutes, I don't want to wait for the police to show up" comment but I suspect that some who think this way might stay in a bad situation for too long and allow it to go too far just because they have a gun, even though they're carrying legally.

Nobody is willing to walk away- it's like the concept of 'saving face', where walking away from a confrontation is seen as a sign of weakness.
Reading through a kaleidoscope includes SCOTUS, the NRA, and many State legislatures. They twist the words of the second amendment to suit their own purposes.
Not a strawman- many aren't willing to take their own lives but decide that they'll go out in a 'suicide by cop' scenario. Many are domestic violence situations and often involve the person with the gun deciding that "If I can't have him/her, nobody else can" and those are the most dangerous because they escalate faster than most people can react- sometimes, they call the PD just to ambush the officers and that has happened several times in the last few weeks.
Yes, strawman. In fact, you threw a red herring into the strawman's arms. You did not address my point, which is that mental health problems do not account for a significant proportion of gun crime. You can mention all the anecdotal/hypothetical situations you want. While 'suicide by cop' may be a thing, it wouldn't be suicide in the legal or statistical sense. A 'normal' suicide, where someone shoots himself in his basement is not a violent crime, as it is not a criminal offence to take your own life.
You don't get it- the National Guard is part of the government and they could be one of the arms that might be used to squash the general public- they can only be used in specific situations that are well-defined. When the Second Amendment was written and ratified, it was during a time when the colonies were still under the thumb of the Crown and battles involved guns, knives & swords, arrows and cannon. Fighting off a government-led attack on The People could be carried out more easily than it can be now, assuming the government uses everything at its disposal but one of the main points was: if The People are disarmed, we're completely helpless against the government- voting wouldn't even be allowed if they ever declare Martial Law. The other reason for allowing people to have guns was to fight off attacks, whether by Native People, privateers/pirates or others who decide they want someone elses' things and try to take them by force. For most people, the chances of the US government shutting down our lives is very remote and for others, it's coming very soon. I don't understand the latter but I can see how a government might use our current problems to institute harsh restrictions on us because they haven't solved the underlying problems.
I certainly do get it.
Militia (United States) - Wikipedia
The militia of the United States, as defined by the U.S. Congress, has changed over time.[1] During colonial America, all able-bodied men of a certain age range were members of the militia, depending on each colony's rule.[2] Individual towns formed local independent militias for their own defense.[3] The year before the US Constitution was ratified, The Federalist Papers detailed the founders' paramount vision of the militia in 1787.[4][5] The new Constitution empowered Congress to "organize, arm, and discipline" this national military force, leaving significant control in the hands of each state government.[6][7]

Today, as defined by the Militia Act of 1903, the term "militia" is used to describe two classes within the United States:[8]


  • Organized militia – consisting of State Defense Forces, the National Guard and Naval Militia.[9][10]
  • Unorganized militia – comprising the reserve militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age, not a member of the State Defense Forces, National Guard, or Naval Militia.[11]
Congress has organized the National Guard under its power to "raise and support armies" and not its power to "Provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the Militia".[12] This, Congress chose to do in the interests of organizing reserve military units which were not limited in deployment by the strictures of its power over the constitutional militia, which can be called forth only "to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions."

This is the Canadian version: Canadian Militia - Wikipedia

A bunch of yokels who don't like the gub'mint getting together in cosplay costumes is not a militia in a real sense. The key clause from the second amendment is "well-regulated". Private armies are not well-regulated.

IMO, one of the biggest problems at this time is that the wrong people have guns and they don't possess them legally. The application is too easy to cheat, the Police aren't filing reports that could prevent gun buying (the a$$hole in Highland Park, IL is a great example of that) and if no reports are filed, the NICS search will show nothing that would disqualify someone buying what they feel they need. The Red Flag Laws help, but only when people do their job and file the reports needed after someone starts to go off the rails.

People who shouldn't have firearms are able to access them in the US so easily because the country is utterly littered with them. A determined person can get one - or more - if he wants to, legally or otherwise.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
It's a suggested solution based on real studies and cases, which provide some validation. You don't think intervening in young peoples' lives to keep them on a straighter path is of no use?

Reading through a kaleidoscope includes SCOTUS, the NRA, and many State legislatures. They twist the words of the second amendment to suit their own purposes.


Yes, strawman. In fact, you threw a red herring into the strawman's arms. You did not address my point, which is that mental health problems do not account for a significant proportion of gun crime. You can mention all the anecdotal/hypothetical situations you want. While 'suicide by cop' may be a thing, it wouldn't be suicide in the legal or statistical sense. A 'normal' suicide, where someone shoots himself in his basement is not a violent crime, as it is not a criminal offence to take your own life.


I certainly do get it.
Militia (United States) - Wikipedia
The militia of the United States, as defined by the U.S. Congress, has changed over time.[1] During colonial America, all able-bodied men of a certain age range were members of the militia, depending on each colony's rule.[2] Individual towns formed local independent militias for their own defense.[3] The year before the US Constitution was ratified, The Federalist Papers detailed the founders' paramount vision of the militia in 1787.[4][5] The new Constitution empowered Congress to "organize, arm, and discipline" this national military force, leaving significant control in the hands of each state government.[6][7]

Today, as defined by the Militia Act of 1903, the term "militia" is used to describe two classes within the United States:[8]


  • Organized militia – consisting of State Defense Forces, the National Guard and Naval Militia.[9][10]
  • Unorganized militia – comprising the reserve militia: every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age, not a member of the State Defense Forces, National Guard, or Naval Militia.[11]
Congress has organized the National Guard under its power to "raise and support armies" and not its power to "Provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the Militia".[12] This, Congress chose to do in the interests of organizing reserve military units which were not limited in deployment by the strictures of its power over the constitutional militia, which can be called forth only "to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions."

This is the Canadian version: Canadian Militia - Wikipedia

A bunch of yokels who don't like the gub'mint getting together in cosplay costumes is not a militia in a real sense. The key clause from the second amendment is "well-regulated". Private armies are not well-regulated.


People who shouldn't have firearms are able to access them in the US so easily because the country is utterly littered with them. A determined person can get one - or more - if he wants to, legally or otherwise.
I absolutely think intervention is needed, but who's going to step in and make it happen? The city, state and Federal governments are doing a shytty job on many fronts, so I would like to know what you suggest. IMO, many kids who might be on a path to destruction should be removed from whatever 'family' situation they're in. The 'parent(s)' don't raise them in a way that could prevent them joining gangs, engaging in crime and becoming lifelong criminals, so they really need to be removed. Why do we have 10-12 year olds stealing cars and fleeing from the police? Why do we have kids of the same age shooting people, robbing, burgling and dealing/running drugs? You'll probably say it's because of poverty, which it is, but the real problem is that the parents weren't raised to be functional members of society, either.

Right- they quote the Amendment, then come up with some twisted way to use it in their own form. However, it IS a right but the methods of preventing the wrong people obtaining guns are, IMO, almost useless. Your comment about local yokels is accurate- it's too bad they can buy camo. God, I hate that crap- camo pants & shirts, camp waders and hip boots for fishing, camp cookware, camo EVERYTHING, because they think it's cool. I helped someone with a roofing job and he said he would replace my gloves. Yup- camo. He's one of the guys I have posted about, with the idiot cousins- he wears a big 2nd Amendment belt buckle, yet he thinks the police should be able to talk their way into someone's house after finding pot in a car during a traffic stop. He seems to think that owning guns and hunting makes him a man. Too much of that BS, IMO.

I agree with your last paragraph 100%. It's too easy to steal guns, it's too easy for people to lie on the application and as the killings in Chicago proved, the Police aren't filing the reports needed after someone threatens suicide or threatens to shoot people. There's also an illegal gun trade in this country that the Feds are unable to stop. The Obama admin Fast And Furious program is still biting us in the ass, too. I have to say that in some places, people do need a way to protect themselves from predatory jags who, in far too many cases, are people they know as 'friends' or acquaintances. People are careless, irresponsible and stupid- welcome to the Good Ol' US of A. Make your own acronym. Do you really think I like having two murders two and four blocks from my house in the last thirty days? Think about the people who live in the area of MKE or any other city where shootings occur frequently- their options are limited- many can't afford to stay OR leave. Chicago gun laws are very strict and they're not stopping the violence. Crimo's dad sponsored the dirtbag's application. Good job, there.

Last weekend in Chicago- 71 shot, 8 dead. If you know anything about Chicago, the Highland Park shootings should be included since it's really a suburb, even though it's in a different county. That would put the total at 15 dead, more than 100 shot.

I'm sick of the killing, but I'm also sick of the lack of solutions by government and the pandering that's done, based on emotional responses. Of course emotions will be an unavoidable part of this discussion but just saying 'guns are the problem' when people are the problem isn't going to solve it. If ~400 million guns were the problem, we would see far more killing. If the stat of ~45K firearm deaths is accurate and if each person was killed with one gun, that means 99.9875% of the 400 million guns weren't involved. OTOH, I have seen articles showing that most (by a wide margin) of gun deaths involved stolen guns. Weeding through the BS on both sides takes a lot of time and I'm not going to post a link because it's all so slanted.

Suicide by cop is planned- the results are the same, but the ones who go out this way can't bring themselves to pull the trigger. You're making a distinction without a real difference. Recently, a guy who was despondent after his mother died robbed a store, stole a car, went on a chase and pulled a gun on the cops, aiming it at them after they used the PIT maneuver.

Would you say he was suffering from mental illness?

 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I absolutely think intervention is needed, but who's going to step in and make it happen? The city, state and Federal governments are doing a shytty job on many fronts, so I would like to know what you suggest. IMO, many kids who might be on a path to destruction should be removed from whatever 'family' situation they're in. The 'parent(s)' don't raise them in a way that could prevent them joining gangs, engaging in crime and becoming lifelong criminals, so they really need to be removed. Why do we have 10-12 year olds stealing cars and fleeing from the police? Why do we have kids of the same age shooting people, robbing, burgling and dealing/running drugs? You'll probably say it's because of poverty, which it is, but the real problem is that the parents weren't raised to be functional members of society, either.
You don't need my suggestions. There were several in the article (that you dismissed) that I linked previously.
Opinion: The surprising solution to gun violence - CNN
If the efforts highlighted in the article were expanded, it might make a substantial difference. With your reference to parenting in mind, it would appear from the available information that Crimo's father exercised a bewildering lack of good judgement.

Do you really think I like having two murders two and four blocks from my house in the last thirty days? Think about the people who live in the area of MKE or any other city where shootings occur frequently- their options are limited- many can't afford to stay OR leave. Chicago gun laws are very strict and they're not stopping the violence. Crimo's dad sponsored the dirtbag's application. Good job, there.
I can't relate to the situation in your area, but I can tell you how gun crime has struck close to home. I grew up in Newfoundland, which has a homicide rate of 0.8/100,000 - that's pretty low. But, nine years ago, a cousin of mine and her boyfriend were murdered by an ex who simply couldn't let go. He shot them both in the head with a pistol, drove to a graveyard, then shot himself.

Suicide by cop is planned- the results are the same, but the ones who go out this way can't bring themselves to pull the trigger. You're making a distinction without a real difference. Recently, a guy who was despondent after his mother died robbed a store, stole a car, went on a chase and pulled a gun on the cops, aiming it at them after they used the PIT maneuver.

Would you say he was suffering from mental illness?

I can't say with certainty, because I'm not qualified. But, on the surface, one might surmise that if this is how he dealt with grief, he was suffering from a mental illness. Of course, the higher the number of firearms that are in circulation, the greater the chances of somebody who shouldn't have one actually getting his hands on one.

Bottom line is - answering gun crime by putting more guns into circulation is not the answer.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
You don't need my suggestions. There were several in the article (that you dismissed) that I linked previously.
Opinion: The surprising solution to gun violence - CNN
If the efforts highlighted in the article were expanded, it might make a substantial difference. With your reference to parenting in mind, it would appear from the available information that Crimo's father exercised a bewildering lack of good judgement.



I can't relate to the situation in your area, but I can tell you how gun crime has struck close to home. I grew up in Newfoundland, which has a homicide rate of 0.8/100,000 - that's pretty low. But, nine years ago, a cousin of mine and her boyfriend were murdered by an ex who simply couldn't let go. He shot them both in the head with a pistol, drove to a graveyard, then shot himself.


I can't say with certainty, because I'm not qualified. But, on the surface, one might surmise that if this is how he dealt with grief, he was suffering from a mental illness. Of course, the higher the number of firearms that are in circulation, the greater the chances of somebody who shouldn't have one actually getting his hands on one.

Bottom line is - answering gun crime by putting more guns into circulation is not the answer.
Sorry to read about your cousin. The ex-boyfriend/husband/wife/girlfriend situation is incredibly common around here and I suspect, around the country. I think that mental illness is at the bottom of a lot of crime but it's not classified as that for reasons that need to be explored.

I have a cousin whose first husband served in Vietnam and he came back with some serious problems, but he was OK in a lot of situations. I had met him and while he wasn't the kind of person I would look for in a friend, he treated my cousin and their kids well enough. Until he decided to go out the hard way.

In another case, I worked for a boat dealer and a guy came in to buy a boat. The financing didn't go through but he seemed to be OK with the disappointment. Years later, I saw that he had taken his girlfriend hostage and after finally letting her go, he was shot by the police when he stepped outside and aimed his gun at them.

I have known far too many who took their own lives with guns to be OK with what's happening, or with the lack of direction in government.

You're right- more guns isn't the answer but people don't like to be told that they can't have things. This attitude goes too far back in their lives to expect a quick resolution or for them to change their mindset.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Slumlord
Well, more info about the 3 year old who found a gun and killed himself- the mom had been arrested, but now, her boyfriend has been charged with negligent homicide- he was recently released from prison for the same charge, from an armed robbery he committed when he was 15 years old. He had a duffel bag with three guns in it at her house and the guns weren't secured.

What a freaking surprise- another felon with guns.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Ninja
Well, more info about the 3 year old who found a gun and killed himself- the mom had been arrested, but now, her boyfriend has been charged with negligent homicide- he was recently released from prison for the same charge, from an armed robbery he committed when he was 15 years old. He had a duffel bag with three guns in it at her house and the guns weren't secured.

What a freaking surprise- another felon with guns.
oh yeah, we're tough on crime alright........ BS !!
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Ninja
oh yeah, we're tough on crime alright........ BS !!
The Sackler family has earned many billions on the dreadful opioid calamity they helped create and maintain. So very many people died and otherwise have lives in ruin.

But are they in prison? Not at all and never will.

Same for white collar crimes.

But I guess it’s not that you had mind on not being though on crime?
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Samurai
Gun control: People that want to harm someone, or criminals don't care about laws of any kind.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top