Another mass shooting.....

[Brian37]

I grew up in the 1970s-80s Ireland. Guess we all must have imagined that mayhem too. 

And it wasn't just the IRA, there was the PIRA, RIRA, INLA, UDA, UVF and hell just chuck the whole alphabet at it, why not.

But no, apparently, atlas says the white people never engage in terrorism against white people, right?

What an abject load of nonsense. Here you and I sit with that crazy time in our living memory, but somehow, atlas knows better.

I was quite sarcastic about that.

All humans are the same creature in terms of material. Males and females, we feel, we think, we breath. So racism is quite a very evil route to take; and I believe it's the sin that got Satan out of paradise.

Humans are equal. white and black are just skin tones. Take it off, and you'll have blood and bones.

Warning, THE FOLLOWING IS METAPHOR ONLY.......


Imagine me, pulling off a white glove finger by finger, and SLAPPING YOU AND CATHOLIC LADY  across the face and saying "Of course you know this means war." (END METAPHOR)

You and your Christian counterparts like CL DONT GET IT........

She like you believe in the holy battle between God vs Satan..... I don't think either of you are evil. I simply think neither of you consider "That was then and this is now".

Maybe you and she should consider that there is no God or Allah or Satan, and that the reason humans do good things, is because humans evolved with empathy. And the reason that humans do bad things is because humans evolved to be cruel too.

But, I DO AGREE WITH YOU that we are equal, and skin tones do not define us. 

I simply pull my hair out when otherwise decent humans like you and CL cling to old mythology. 

Side note here. Cant find the "Old man waving his fist" emotocon. Wanted to insert that here.

[pocaracas]

You understand that, before guns arrive at the "used market" they must be new, right?
It seems far from possible to enforce any kind of control on the used goods market, so the best bet would be a generational struggle to close the tap upstream.

Not in the US.  We have so many guns that production of new guns i already..largely, an export market.  They made a mint of the AR15 of late, due to the brilliance of the three gun marketing campaign.   Remember that most of these guns will -never- be used in a crime, areas with the most guns statistically see lower rates of gun crime -and- gun death, and guns hold their value at floor for decades.  There's no reason to suspect, in this situation, that making more guns or fewer guns will qualitatively increase or decrease crime.   There are already enough guns in circulation to perpetuate gun crime indefinitely.   

Sad

Well... yes they will become less lethal, as they age, rust and break.

I agree with you that such practices should also be employed. Also.

They're durable as shit.........most of my guns are older than me....one of them was made before the civil war.....

Are they durable without some help?
If you didn't maintain them, would you feel comfortable shooting one?

Your efforts are going for the largely uncontrollable P2P second hand market.

A market that needs to be closed.  There should always be a licensed dealer and a background check involved.  

If there is a licensed dealer, then there's the possibility to add a registration to the old unregistered gun. I think this would make sense, even if it increases the price a bit.

Any crime committed with that gun would ultimately be traced back to it's registered owner, and no one wants to be guilty of a crime committed by their old guns, do they?
Start now! Implement this, if it's not already in place. Confiscate and destroy any unregistered weapon.

Americans have an aversion to government agents confiscating their things.  You're familiar with our government, right?  It's not an entirely unwarranted fear, lol.

I know.... but look at how well it worked in Australia a few years ago.

While, at the same time, constraining the ease of access to new guns.

Gun confiscations aren't a reality in a pre gun-ban US.  Thems the breaks.  State level registritation and registration requirements are already a thing.  Buybacks and pos control are much more feasible, and produce the same effect.  Trouble is..we couldn't afford to buy them all...so I say we start with the ones we keep confiscating from criminals..the ones we keep finding at crime scenes.  9mm's manufactured before '06.  Then we can move on to the next category.  Revolvers.......,
then the next....rifles, -amusingly, the only category in which "possession" is the major initiating offense, iow..felons who buy deer rifles.
then the next, shotguns,
then the next, "unknown types"
then the next, derringers (tiny pistols)
then the next, machine guns and assault rifles.

Notice...above, that homemade guns (unknown types) are better represented in trace data than the assualt rifles......I;m not saying we shouldn't do anything about assault rifles (the real ones and the ones that people think are assualt rifles)...I just find it amusing that a Home Depot Special get's higher placement in the trace.

I agree with a phasing out scheme like that, that relies on how often a particular type of weapon is found at crime scenes.

But, remember that, if nowadays most crimes are made with weapons that are 11 years old, then in 11 years from now you'll find that crimes are carried out with guns that are now new.... guns that are now being sold.

[The Grand Nudger]

Guns that are registered and stamped with rifling patterns filed that come with biometric controls.  There are already fundamental differences between old guns and new guns..and more useful differences can be mandated as a standard of manufacturing, same as the legislation we have regarding automotive manufacturing (and gun manufacturing). The majority of those guns will not be used in a crime either, unless we really ramp up the criming in a big way while reducing manufacturing.

As to durability..depends on the coating and manufacturer. As to Australia..keep in mind, I'm not interested in becoming Australia, I'm interested in reducing gun crime and gun death. I'm a shooter, remember? If we can achieve that without a gun ban, tha';s preferrable to a gun ban from my POV. I think we can. The ATF thinks we can...if we'd fund and enforce the law, close the P2P loophole, and focus on the actual weapons used in crimes. Hell, even if we're going to eventually have a gun ban...I still think it;s a good idea to do this until then. Keep in mind....our laws make a blanket gun ban a hell of alot harder than it was for Australia....but our wealth makes the buyback portion easier to swallow.

It's worth a shot, we might find that we don;t have much of a gun problem if we make an earnest attempt to resolve the problem for what it is, if we use good metrics and solutions that at least have a chance at doing what we say we want to do. If we have an efficient and politically unobjectionable plan. There's a palpable and fundamental cost, in the US, to a gun ban. Not just in personal liberty or gun ownership and the money it would take to pull it off....but as I mentioned earlier, in the things we use surcharges and taxes to support. Again, IMO, failure to do so will inevitably -lead- to a gun ban.....so, times a wastin.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I usually ignore or make fun of his stupid bullshit, because he does this strawman shit literally every chance he gets, no joke (the dude seriously has a boner for me or something). It's no surprise that he'd use the murder of children as another opportunity. Perhaps you're right that I should have just ignored, but there's something about doing this when people die that really set me off.

He's a troll. Why feed the retard.

Let's not compare him to the mentally challenged. At least they have some decency.

[henryp]

Sorry. But like death in general, this happens too often now for me to allow it any emotional weight. Wake me up when people stop stupidly comparing guns to cars. Thank you.

What do you think about comparing Guns to alcohol rather than cars?  How much assault/rape/murder/child abuse/ruined lives/suicides/vehicular deaths can be laid at the feet of someone drinking too much?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The word I'm seeing is that he had issues with his former in-laws, none of whom were actually at the church that morning. That puts us into the "frustration kills" zone.

[Clueless Morgan]

Reminds me of this Sam Bee clip from last week:

[Brian37]

Guns that are registered and stamped with rifling patterns filed that come with biometric controls.  There are already fundamental differences between old guns and new guns..and more useful differences can be mandated as a standard of manufacturing, same as the legislation we have regarding automotive manufacturing (and gun manufacturing).  The majority of those guns will not be used in a crime either, unless we really ramp up the criming in a big way while reducing manufacturing.

As to durability..depends on the coating and manufacturer.  As to Australia..keep in mind, I'm not interested in becoming Australia, I'm interested in reducing gun crime and gun death.  I'm a shooter, remember?  If we can achieve that without a gun ban, tha';s preferrable to a gun ban from my POV.  I think we can.  The ATF thinks we can...if  we'd fund and enforce the law, close the P2P loophole, and focus on the actual weapons used in crimes.  Hell, even if we're going to eventually have a gun ban...I still think it;s a good idea to do this until then.  Keep in mind....our laws make a blanket gun ban a hell of alot harder than it was for Australia....but our wealth makes the buyback portion easier to swallow.

It's worth a shot, we might find that we don;t have much of a gun problem if we make an earnest attempt to resolve the problem for what it is, if we use good metrics and solutions that at least have a chance at doing what we say we want to do.  If we have an efficient and politically unobjectionable plan.  There's a palpable and fundamental cost, in the US, to a gun ban.  Not just in personal liberty or gun ownership and the money it would take to pull it off....but as I mentioned earlier, in the things we use surcharges and taxes to support.  Again, IMO, failure to do so will inevitably -lead- to a gun ban.....so, times a wastin.

Smart guns are a fantastic idea, problem is the factories and NRA fight that trend no matter what. It is pointless and still does not change that we make to many and they are way too easy to obtain. And just like the "bump stock" even with smart guns someone will figure out how to modify them. Our problem for decades has been our society's obsession with firearms regardless. Firearms are worshiped like gods.

[The Grand Nudger]

The Factories™ don't fight the trend..they'd love it if they could sell you a smartgun.  The ones that don't hold the patents to the tech fight it, because they would be destroyed.  To them I say -tough titties-.  We don't let people who can't manufacture a car that doesn't spontaneously burst into flame sell their shitty jalopies either. If we decide to mandate smart guns as part of the compromise between having guns and the need to establish a baseline expectation of safety in our society..then smartguns it will be...and somebody will make a -killing- off of all the new guns people would buy. Perhaps we could use a portion of the proceeds..as we do for conservation, to fund the effort to reduce the amount of dumb guns. Or..if it were a conversion, we could subsidize some portion of the cost of conversion when possible. Bring in two old guns, get a voucher for one conversion for a third.

But sure, no matter what we do or what laws we pass some criminal asshole will find a way to circumvent the whole thing and do some fun crime or another with it.   That's the portion of crime that you can't prevent without significant loss to fundamental liberty.

[henryp]

"This is unacceptable, we need to do something" will be the refrain after any mass murder. If you give all the background checks, and all the modification requirements, and whatever else you want, there will still be a mass murder, and the response will never be "This is acceptable, nothing we can do."

The NRA is smart enough to recognize this. It's not a battle over gun rights, it's a war. If it were an issue of background checks, and that was going to end the debate, I'd bet the NRA would happily concede the point. But that's not how it will work. Because every event will result in another call to do something forever until guns are illegal.