massachusetts proposed gun control

I'm in the middle on this, or close to. Davey makes sense, and so do the others. The problem I see, if the gun-control is established, there's going to be a section of time when the "law-abiding" citizen is deprived of some of their right to bare arms, and the criminal will still be cocked and ready. How do we disarm the criminals first, and then have enough gun-control to keep them from getting hold of them again. If we just restrict the law-abider, that won't work, imo. I guess I should watch the video, but I am fairly certain it's main focus is not going to be getting the guns always from the bad-guys first! Why can't anyone figure stuff like this out, supposedly all these great minds (or at least they think they are, or someone else thinks they are) and no solution.

Well, what would the "news" have to do if there were not more bad things happening, ick, sick world sometimes.
 

Yes, it is nearly a daily occurrence....

An as-yet unidentified school shooter attacked Reynolds High School in Portland Oregon today, killing at least one student. It was the 74th school shooting since Adam Lanza's infamous assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut — and, as this map shows, they've happened all over the country.
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/10/5797306/map-school-shooting-sandy-hook


74 school shootings since Sandy Hook....I read somewhere, that they are selling bullet proof blankets for children to wear....unbelievable crazy.

Also just a few days ago two white supremacist that were associated with the Bundy Ranch affair shot two policemen while they were eating pizza in Las Vegas, they had told their neighbors they hated the government and President Obama.
 
re:Yes, it is nearly a daily occurrence....


its what we've all become,as long as big outfits with millions to spend to influence state and federal agencies we're kinda doomed.
 
Makes you wonder about the "big outfits" that "used" to influence the government, the mob. Maybe, still alive and well.
 
Yes, that seems logical that it could be here as well, but how do we get the guns back from the bad guys Kim? I just picture (as an extreme) taking all the guns from the good guys, including our police force, etc. Ok, we're set, but wait, all the bad guys are still armed. What happens next? The bad guys figure it's no challenge so they just turn in their arms. I know that sounds ridiculous, but this is what is going through my head about this. It's like trying to fix an infection where gangrene has already set in. The other countries did the right thing early on. What is an answer for us that makes sense?

Denise
 
First the country has to confiscate every firearm out there (especially from the bad guys, no sweat right?), fat chance of that ever happening; I don't think they could do it under marshal law. They merely tried to get certain firearms registered in a couple of states, NY the most recent, got pretty poor compliance as one would expect, at least I would expect.
 
at the time of purchase, defined by the transfer of the firearm form the orginal manufacturer to the gun store, to the orginal buyer all guns are registered. some states are trying to make re-registering the new law, don't confuse the two.

countries that have the strictest gun laws do not have the lowest statistics of gun related deaths (what ever that means) ex. Syria, most African countries--- you have incorrect statistics.


where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to an automobile (that one is a special kind of stupidity)

The federal government does not have the logistic capability to confiscate the guns that are out there.

all schools are "gun free zones" do you see the connection? if you don't -- not much can be said
 
rt3, your are correct on registration of firearms purchased through a dealer, gun shows also in most states, but not private transactions. There are hundreds of thousands of guns that have been handed down or purchased that are unregistered and were never registered other than a possible bill of sale because they predate the paranoia.
 
To expand on my previous post; when I was young a person could go into the local Sears Roebuck, Western Auto, SS Kresge and others, pay cash for a rifle, shotgun or pistol and ammunition and walk out with them and a bill of sale at most for paper.
 
I don't think that even taking guns away from people would help stop this epidemic of senseless killings. It would only make the victims easier to kill. The people that do these things always (amazingly) are able to get any weapons they want. Even when they are illegal weapons, they manage to get them, and you know they just don't go to Walmart and buy them. They are being supplied by someone , somewhere.
The couple who went on the shooting rampage in Las Vegas were unemployed, had been living with the wife's father, and recently moved to Las Vegas. He was a felon, and not legally able to buy a gun, and no one is saying that the wife purchased them, either. They went to the Bundy Ranch, and were told to leave, since he was a felon with a weapon; and a radical, not the kind of person they wanted associated with the situation there.
One picture that is supposed to be Miller shows him in full camo outfit and assault rifle. Most people think the picture is actually not of him, but if it was, he has several thousand dollars worth of gear. How does a broke, out of work, felon manage to do that ? He was complaining that he couldn't even afford to see a dentist for in infected tooth; so how did he buy an expensive rifle ??
Apparently, both of them were shot and killed by law enforcement, and didn't commit suicide, as was supposed at first.

Most of the places that these shooting have taken place are in schools; which are all gun-free areas. The attacks that have been stopped, have been where some person had a gun, and was able to stop the shooter before he could kill people.
None of these attacks have ever happened at a shooting range (just as a point of reference here); or even anywhere that there was likely to be armed resistance.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/official-police-not-wife-killed-jerad-miller
 
marinaio said:
First the country has to confiscate every firearm out there (especially from the bad guys, no sweat right?), fat chance of that ever happening; I don't think they could do it under marshal law. They merely tried to get certain firearms registered in a couple of states, NY the most recent, got pretty poor compliance as one would expect, at least I would expect.
Click to expand...

It's never too late but the problem can't be solved state by state. There needs to be a nationwide effort with all the states working together. This is hurdle #1.

You don't need to confiscate every gun, just establish a national register of firearms. Hurdle #2.

Some weapons should/would be declared illegal (for example, are US citizens allowed to own anti aircraft missile launchers now? I would hope not.) Then an amnesty period could be declared to allow people to hand in any illegal weapons for destruction by the authorities. After that, anyone found with illegal or unregistered weapons would be subject to confiscation and court action, probably a fine. Hurdles #3 and #4.

To reduce the number of guns in a country that is now awash with them you might consider a gun buyback scheme where guns are voluntarily handed in and the owner is compensated for the value of the weapons up to a reasonable limit. Hurdle #5


None or even all of the above is a complete solution but it could be a way to start changing what has become a serious social problem.

FTR, I don't expect any of the above measures to receive popular support. It would take some very brave state governors and an extremely brave president to even establish the first step. I wonder whose child will have to die in a school shooting before public opinion shifts towards some sensible limits to the right to bear arms.
 
Dame Warri, We have tried a couple of things on the list. The buy back with amnesty. Of course too little too late. I sometimes think it will take people targeting the upper classes, the politicians, movie celebrities, big business. Then maybe it will be important enough for this country to come together, and get control of all the issues.:cry:
 
You've never done all across the country at once. State by state is pointless. That will never work.

One advantage we had was that most firearms in this country are imported. The ones we don't want around can be made prohibited imports and then customs can deal with them at point of entry. The USA manufactures firearms for the whole world. This industry would need to be curtailed somewhat. Hurdle #6.
 
Good points, Warrigal. It will take a combination of these to work...I fear nothing will get done until the parents and relatives of the innocent children and people killed rise up and demand change. As Kim pointed out, developed countries that have strong gun control do not have this problem, what a shame for our country.
 
Confiscate the guns and the idiots on drugs will start using bombs.

The mental health issue and especially the use of drugs in children and teens would be the place for new laws. We should make those drugs illegal. How about a buy back program to get them off the street?


We should also make reporting these shootings in the news illegal. The sensationalism in the news media just leads to more shootings.

Citizens of this country have been armed with guns since before we were the United States. Guns owned by citizens are the reason we are not still a British colony
And with all these guns for 400 years we didn't have this problem with all these shootings until just recently, but all some people can think of is blame the guns.
 
Well, rkunsaw, you do seem to have a problem now. A modern problem may need a novel solution.
Keep thinking on it. A solution that will fit in with American values would be the best way to go.
Doing nothing is not a solution and it doesn't seem like a 'can do' attitude that I have been led to believe is the spirit of America.
 
there is no such thing as an illegal gun, they are inanimate objects, good grief. People commit illegal acts. Headline in paper today "Gun gets 5 years for armed robbery". Less than 2% of crimes solved using gun traced thru any type of gun registry. The laws are already there , they are just not being enforced. Even if a gun does get lost by multiple purchases as suggested by one of the above posts, the original purchase is still on record, and very few guns have a high sales turn over.
The only problem is some people's inability to recognize the fact that it is not a perfect world,
There are more people killed in the US with hammers and fists, than rifles and shotguns. (FBI stats).
domestic violence crimes including suicide will continue with or without guns.



Lets revisit the term innocent. Innocent of what? it is a legal term meaning without liability. How do you know one of the kids that got shot doesn't set cats on fire on Halloween? Should he deserve to die for that? probably not, but then I'm not playing God.


Jackie22 Kims comments on violent crime is erroneous. both of you need to do some research. Even as an example, you cannot define developed countries so please don't use that as a qualifier.
 
Warrigal, your biggest advantage in Australia was a smaller population and only five states for your then Prime Minister to convince a gun law change was necessary. To your advantage was also is your type of government.
 
nwlady said:
Yes, that seems logical that it could be here as well, but how do we get the guns back from the bad guys Kim? I just picture (as an extreme) taking all the guns from the good guys, including our police force, etc. Ok, we're set, but wait, all the bad guys are still armed. What happens next? The bad guys figure it's no challenge so they just turn in their arms. I know that sounds ridiculous, but this is what is going through my head about this. It's like trying to fix an infection where gangrene has already set in. The other countries did the right thing early on. What is an answer for us that makes sense?

Denise
Click to expand...

Probably a phase out period. The first step would be all guns must be registered, no assault weapons or other non-hunting guns sold unless certain circumstances apply. The evolution of phasing out anything that is a detriment to society takes time. You cannot do it overnight. Also, much of the deaths from guns are domestic violence.....people you might classify as a good guy, or accidental shootings (kids taking their parents' guns.)
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Well, rkunsaw, you do seem to have a problem now. A modern problem may need a novel solution.
Keep thinking on it. A solution that will fit in with American values would be the best way to go.
Doing nothing is not a solution and it doesn't seem like a 'can do' attitude that I have been led to believe is the spirit of America.
Click to expand...

Show me your research.
 
I too have looked at the so-called statistics and come away with only the understanding that the stats are generally tailored to the intent of the researching group; gun ownership is bad to the anti-gunners and beneficial to the pro-gunners. Statistics can be and are manipulated to prove just about whatever the statistician wants to prove, I don't trust them one bit.

I did find the CDC report on causes of death in the US, homicide of all kinds ranked at 0.7% of the total deaths, doesn't seem much of a crisis to me! Clearly we should be putting our money and talent behind medicine but most countries with socialized national health systems, the US now included, have actually diminished any incentive for that effort. I have a nagging suspicion that both the pro- and anti- gun lobbies are very aware that it was an armed citizenry that brought the US into being and has likely played a role in maintaining its freedom, not a comforting thought to an ever-more controlling government.

All "facts" set aside, anyone dreaming of disarming the American citizenry needs to stop smoking whatever it is that is causing the hallucinations.

Cause
Percent of Total
1. Diseases of the heart
28.5
2. Malignant tumors
22.8
3. Cerebrovascular diseases
6.7
4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
5.1
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
4.4
6. Diabetes mellitus
3.0
7. Influenza and pneumonia
2.7
8. Alzheimer's disease
2.4
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis
1.7
10. Septicemia (blood poisoning)
1.4
11. Suicide
1.3
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
1.1
13. Primary hypertension and hypertensive renal disease
0.8
14. Parkinson's disease (tied)
0.7
15. Homicide (tied)
0.7
Source: CDC/NHS, National Vital Statistics System
 
being of the cold war generation, we called the people of the world who wanted to register and confiscate guns communists
my parents called them fascists
I think it was FDR said once, that if they changed the word socialism to something else, the American people would buy it in a minute.
You are more likely to die from a mistake in a hospital visit than from a gun
Statistics are certainly cooked. anyone thinks that other countries do crime statistics the same as the FBI doesn't even know the FBI and the Dept. of Justice don't even coincide. As far the CDC, they have a real vested interest. Any disagreement with the current Administration and their funding is gone. The CDC statistic is even lower if you remove suicides and domestic violence.

Lets use statistics for a moment. Apples and Oranges-- some say you can't compare them, but wait

they are within 2% of being the same size
their carbohydrate content is the same and with 4% of the same wt.
both grow on trees and have seeds.

yep apples are oranges anyway you cut them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top