(May 25, 2022 at 5:17 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(May 25, 2022 at 4:50 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: I suspect that trying to make schools a harder target might be the tactic that does the least good in the long run. Even if we actually find a way that works, they might find another soft target. What would likely do better would be trying to keep potential shooters from following through on their plans. Things like increasing access to mental health services (for those shooters who are aware that something's wrong with them and need help before they do the unthinkable), a more thorough vetting of who's allowed to own guns (including mandatory psych exams for anyone who wants a license to carry firearms), Red flag laws (which, aside from confiscating them from felons, are the only circumstances where I would support the sort of gun confiscation you fear), and maybe some other provisions that I'll explain later because I just got a message there's a tornado warning in my area.

I agree with a fair bit - but psych evals for ownership are crap. It is far more likely that someone who is legial for gun ownership would be denied than a whackadoodle sneaking through. Doctors with an axe to grind - ex spouses looking for revenge - ect...

(May 26, 2022 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 25, 2022 at 5:17 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: I agree with a fair bit - but psych evals for ownership are crap. It is far more likely that someone who is legial for gun ownership would be denied than a whackadoodle sneaking through. Doctors with an axe to grind - ex spouses looking for revenge - ect...

Your objections to it notwithstanding, I still think psych evaluations would help (not solve the problem, but help). But I'm willing to forego that if gun owners would agree to make owning a firearm no more difficult than owning and operating a car.

-Title and tag at each point of sale.

-Required training.

-Written/practical tests.

-Minimum health requirements (vision, hearing, etc).

-Liability insurance (people who own more than one firearm would be eligible for a multi-gun discount).

-Renewals and inspections at regular intervals.

Boru

Addendum: A point system for violations, leading to suspension or revocation of gun ownership.

(May 26, 2022 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 25, 2022 at 5:17 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: I agree with a fair bit - but psych evals for ownership are crap. It is far more likely that someone who is legial for gun ownership would be denied than a whackadoodle sneaking through. Doctors with an axe to grind - ex spouses looking for revenge - ect...

Your objections to it notwithstanding, I still think psych evaluations would help (not solve the problem, but help). But I'm willing to forego that if gun owners would agree to make owning a firearm no more difficult than owning and operating a car.

-Title and tag at each point of sale.

-Required training.

-Written/practical tests.

-Minimum health requirements (vision, hearing, etc).

-Liability insurance (people who own more than one firearm would be eligible for a multi-gun discount).

-Renewals and inspections at regular intervals.

Boru

Addendum: A point system for violations, leading to suspension or revocation of gun ownership.

(May 25, 2022 at 5:24 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:

(May 25, 2022 at 5:06 pm)Helios Wrote:
This symbol has zero impact on a shooter they would shoot a place up even if it wasn't there. They are trying to go out in a blaze.

Yes, the fact that many of these mass shooters off themselves kinda burns a huge gaping hole in that idea. Best case scenario, the threat of someone armed shooting them makes them try to outsmart security and try to get at least one shot in before anyone’s the wiser. And once the shooting starts, it can be very hard to get the sort of handle on the situation that allows for taking out the shooter.

And, for the record, Biker, I have NEVER been one to believe slapping a “gun free zone” sticker actually works. It’s just an extremely lazy form of security theater.

(Still posting from my iPad while in the basement waiting for the tornado warning to subside, which it should in a few minutes.)

(May 26, 2022 at 11:48 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(May 25, 2022 at 5:24 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Yes, the fact that many of these mass shooters off themselves kinda burns a huge gaping hole in that idea. Best case scenario, the threat of someone armed shooting them makes them try to outsmart security and try to get at least one shot in before anyone’s the wiser. And once the shooting starts, it can be very hard to get the sort of handle on the situation that allows for taking out the shooter.

And, for the record, Biker, I have NEVER been one to believe slapping a “gun free zone” sticker actually works. It’s just an extremely lazy form of security theater.

(Still posting from my iPad while in the basement waiting for the tornado warning to subside, which it should in a few minutes.)

Again, people speed so lets not have speed limits. People murder other people, so lets not have laws against murder. 

I see the "no gun" sticker on many doors, such as hospitals, nursing homes, government buildings. Now of course someone can ignore those regulations, but that sticker isn't for the crazies, it is basically saying, "For the responsible gun owners, please don't make our jobs more difficult by bringing in your firearm, please help us out". Most people understand this. Especially bars. Sane people know that mixing firearms and booze is not a good idea. So when they see that sign, again, responsible firearm owners understand.

(May 26, 2022 at 9:29 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It would price most people ( but not most mass shooters)out of ownership…..in much the same way that many people ( who would never pull a teenage dui)are priced out of a car.  

Another way to put that, is that it places the onus on poor people to do the governments job by leveraging a little class war.  I can see how people (and the industry) would object, and on compelling grounds.  I know that most farms that have working rifles would be unprofitable if they had to carry liability, too.

Broken record, but…I think we might really want to at least -try- to enforce our gun laws before we decide to go nuclear…. If only so that we have a better picture of exactly where to drop the bomb for greatest effect.