THE Gun Thread

[onlinebiker]

It continues to fascinate me that a country that - so far this year - has averaged 1.4 mass shootings per day doesn’t see a problem.

Boru

Arrogant little guy - ain' t ya?



People SEE the problem..
They disagree on your "solutions".

[Brian37]

Nah that's bullshit, everyone should own guns.

Why would I want the ability to easily kill someone?
as I said in a different thread,  here in the UK it is difficult (not impossible) to get hold of a firearm, compare the number of gun deaths per head of population between the UK and USA, see which system is safer

The sad thing is that the "less regulation" "don't take firearms away from responsible people like me", should want firearms to be hard to get. That is the best way to "just keep them out of the wrong hands".

[onlinebiker]

Why would I want the ability to easily kill someone?
as I said in a different thread,  here in the UK it is difficult (not impossible) to get hold of a firearm, compare the number of gun deaths per head of population between the UK and USA, see which system is safer

The sad thing is that the "less regulation" "don't take firearms away from responsible people like me", should want firearms to be hard to get. That is the best way to "just keep them out of the wrong hands".

Firearms should not be hard to get.

Irresponsible, unbalanced and plain bad people should not be able to get guns.


Big difference.

[Mister Agenda]

Be interesting to see how you keep irresponsible, unbalanced, and plain bad people from getting guns without making guns harder to get.

[onlinebiker]

Be interesting to see how you keep irresponsible, unbalanced, and plain bad people from getting guns without making guns harder to get.

I have outlined a workable plan here on the forum several times.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It continues to fascinate me that a country that - so far this year - has averaged 1.4 mass shootings per day doesn’t see a problem.

Boru

Arrogant little guy - ain' t ya?



People SEE the problem..
They disagree on your "solutions".

Arrogant? Guilty as charged, but I reject the characterization of ‘little’ (at 6’4” and 210 lbs, I don’t have to flaunt it).

If people SAW the problem, they’d offer up something beyond the status quo.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The sad thing is that the "less regulation" "don't take firearms away from responsible people like me", should want firearms to be hard to get. That is the best way to "just keep them out of the wrong hands".

Firearms should not be hard to get.

Irresponsible, unbalanced and plain bad people should not be able to get guns.


Big difference.

You don’t want unbalanced people to have access to gun? Great! We’re in agreement. And yet you rejected my earlier suggestion about psychological testing for anyone who wants to own firearms.

How do you propose to determine who is unbalanced without psychological testing?

Boru

[arewethereyet]

There's another issue with psychological testing...people at one point in their lives may be just fine and then a mental illness or injury or whatever changes that psychological profile.

Are there responsible gun owners, yes. Can some of those responsible gun owners become irresponsible, unbalanced gun owners? Also yes.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Since you acknowledge that no testing will be able to identify all dumbasses, what objection -- if any -- do you have for mandating smart guns going forward?

Several reasons.

1. I can' t see forcing people to rely on vaporware.
    " smart guns" that can discriminate a legitimate 
    firearm user do not exist - on a high enough.                    reliability. When you see police and military being issued such weapons then it will be a different story.

You wouldn't want to issue smart weapons to your soldiers anyway, because it would prevent a disarmed soldier from picking up a casualty's weapon and continue fighting. I can see your point about police.

2. Anything built in can be built out. Criminals and people with bad intent are always going to be able to do a work- around. As usual the gun legislation only affects the law abiding citizen - who is not the problem in the first place.

So making it more difficult for a stolen gun to be used illicitly should not be attempted because it may be hacked? Isn' this a perfect-the-enemy-of-the-better argument?

3. There are already more guns than people - in the USA. Anyone who wants a gun for ill intent will have no problem buying a "dumb gun". All you are doing is adding an unnecessary expense to new guns. 

True. I think with grandfather clauses we could take dumb guns off the streets in three generations or so. There is no immediate fix.

4. Many mass shooters bought firearms legally - shortly prior to the shooting. How would " smart gun" technology stop ANYONE from using a gun illegally if it is purchased for that purpose???

While mass shootings are obviously disturbing, the issue I'm thinking of is the fact that many "mundane" -- for lack of a better word -- violent crimes are committed with stolen weapons, and those murders far outnumber deaths in mass shootings.

[The Grand Nudger]

There are two basic ways to reduce gun crime in the us. We can make guns more expensive, or people less poor. Any other thing is polishing brass on the titanic.