About This is getting out of hand. Page 5
|April 10th, 2012||#41|
| || |
Responsiblity cannot be legalized or inacted by law. We as Americans should realise this and take more measures to reduce the chances of these homicidal sprees by tending to the problem and not the sypmtoms.
Looking at other nations and learning from what works there and what doesn't can aid, but also we must realise that finding our own true solution will more or less be a long studious process of trail and error.
A better and more important screening method being paramount. At least in my state application of your carry permit must be re done every year, not every 3 years as previous.
Also the carry permit itself has been taken more seriously, shedding clarity on the type of firearms it covers and what it allows. Even the flimsly colorless permit card that looks like it was photoshopped by a drunken baboon at Walgreen's and lamenated, is now has been redesigned and issued as a hard plastic full color permit card with some kind of foil looking chip thing in it which can be legally used as a state photo ID.
Point is I am sure there are ways to protect rights while at the same time find and screen for possible problem cases. Such as those at a mental risk of committing such atrocities or those who are known to straw sell firearms to people who are.
Linking of criminal histories as well as mental histories and having them availible to licensed firearm dealers to use discretion when making a sale would help.
To anyone who compains about their violation of privacy, obviously has something to hide and shouldn't qualify to buy a firearm in the first place.
It's a difficult task , and in my opinion half of it lies with American society as a whole. Not just with policy makers.
It's easy to sit back and say (if you can't play nice then nobody has them). But if we applied this method of thought to every single issue in this country, then I suppose instead of mandating seatbelts it would have been a better alternative to just elminate all automobiles in this country in order to prevent motor vehicle deaths.
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience"- Dwight D. Eisenhower , Jan 17,1961.
Last edited by Yossarian; April 10th, 2012 at 00:50..
|April 10th, 2012||#42|
| || |
The fact is that there is no answer to this problem because as a nation you are not prepared to solve it, instead you hide behind the notion that more guns equals less shootings and if you ignore the problem long enough it will go away.
As far as half the problem lying with American society well I think you will find the whole problem lies with American society as I can't think of anyone else with this issue.
We are more often treacherous through weakness than through calculation. ~Francois De La Rochefoucauld
|April 10th, 2012||#43|
| || |
I love owning firearms, I love having them.
And I am a firm believer, in a mature sense, that we as a country can keep our firearms and enjoy them. For those who ask how do you enjoy such a thing, keep in mind that the vast majority of legal firearms owners use their firearms for sporting or recreation, not for homicidal murdering sprees as is commonly feared by people who look upon a gun owner.
I would be completly comfortable with a dealer or law enforcement agency looking into my mental health past, asking if I was taking any medications and checking my criminal history.
I would be buying a firearm, not toothpaste, firearms are deadly and shouldn't be permitted to land in the hands of citizen's with known problems, either mental or criminal.
I would rather get told "no" at the Gun Smith counter after I am old enough to apply for a hand gun permit (21 in my state) than have the dealer or authorities in charge look over my case, and treat the next guy the same way.
So he can go to an orphanage or crowded public sqaure and cut loose killing multiple victims.
Yes I have heard people already complain about how long it takes for their background check to come along so they can purchase their weapons.
But again, I ask, why do you need access to a weapon so quickly all of a sudden?
If you are late for that weekend at the range with your buddies then obiviously you are not responsible enough to plan ahead and apply before, which brings to mind if you should be allowed to carry in the first place.
This is why I understand fully that Americans will have a hard time reaching any mature and tangible conclusion to this debate.
|April 10th, 2012||#44|
| || |
'americans rate guns higher then lives' there you have it Monty. It must be.
Yossarian your train of thought seems to be; I agree but I still want to have firearms.
The finer detail you are missing is we agree theres nothing wrong with having a rifle or purposeful tool. But walking around all day strapped with a god dam submachinegun is just ridiculous.
|April 10th, 2012||#45|
| || |
As I said we are programmed to beat the crap out of each other not shoot each other.
|April 10th, 2012||#46|
| || |
I admit I do not see the point in holstering a weapon in public. But holstering a weapon in public is not how the massacres that are the topic here were committed,
Average gun owning Joe doesn't wake up and decide to visit the town sqaure and on a whim decide to shoot a U.S. Represenitive because he had his ole .45 in holster that sunny afternoon.
A mentally deranged person got access to a firearm, in particular a automatic handgun, I much rather see this fact and problem attacked other than every other issue under the sun. The contineous side stepping and stabbing at firearms possesion by lawful persons is completly out of context.
I am not a whistle blower on the 2nd Amendment who constantly feels so threatened that I wish to be bristling with armament as I stroll to the grocery store.
But attacking with political disagreances and ignoring the root problem is ridiculous.
Attacking the 2nd Amendment as a whole claiming it to be the source of the problem is like turning the clock back in time to the seat belt debate, recomending that in order to save lives you must buy double policy protection from your insurance company instead of wearing your seat belt.
Meaning more useless legistration.
You can't solve a problem by legistrating more problems to make you forget about the orginal issue.
As for Submachine guns I believe you need a Type 1 FFL at the very least in cordination with NFA regulations to even own one, as for carrying it in pulbic whoever decides to do such a thing I will gladly visit them in while they are serving in jail.
Last edited by Yossarian; April 10th, 2012 at 02:07..
|April 10th, 2012||#47|
| || |
Here is a question for you, how many of these incidents have been committed by your average farm boy (grows up in a rural setting around firearms) and how many are committed by city boys who have grown up getting their view of firearms influenced by TV/Movies?Video games etc?
Last edited by MontyB; April 10th, 2012 at 02:11..
|April 10th, 2012||#48|
| || |
That is the exact type of thinking I am looking for, I have asked these questions before.
Who did they grow up around?
What did these individuals surround themselves with?
What did they feel? (people need to stop throwing disregard to their emoitions, if they are deranged this could be an important part of the puzzle in preventing this in the future.
Were they loners?
And what did the lack in nuturing them as human beings?
I ask these questions as not as a "blame society" standpoint. As I don't ask the questions for a place to put the blame, just a place to put change in how we distrubute and obatain fire arms. In an effort to prevent them from obtaining while preserving that right.
If I knew it would be so criminal mention preservation of the Constition in the process I guess I would have just stayed quiet.
For we already know the easy asnwer to this question.
Keep firearms out of the hands of mentally incapable owners or criminally dangorous persons willing to carry out these attacks.
The hard part is getting there.
For those who say screw the 2nd, repealing a Amendment from the Constitution is a BIG deal to a lot of Americans, a really big deal so no it's not that simple.
Also in a country where cigarettes and tobaco use kills someone about every 8 seconds firearms deaths total don't really even reach half of the annual tobaco related deaths. Also over many periods of time firearms related deaths were eclisped by drunk driving fatalities as well.
If we treated every Amendment like this then what reason to have a Constitution in the first place? I am not picky choosy with the 2nd, just the concept for any Amendment brings this to mind.
I know the problem here which is the topic of this thread, just looking for a way that does not punish the entire country in an effort to brainstorm a safer society.
Hence why I shared this with the world on this forum. To see what works and what doesn't the world over , to maybe find some clues to an American problem and maybe a way to an American answer.
Last edited by Yossarian; April 10th, 2012 at 02:24..
|April 10th, 2012||#49|
| || |
Another point is the difference of views in that Americans have a 'right' to nearly any kind of firearm- meaning a right to use deadly force at their discretion.
I think that is far too much trust to be given to your average citizen.
|April 10th, 2012||#50|
| || |
It isn't just murders that have dropped in Kennesaw it's other crimes, rapes, home invasions, vehicle theft. Kennesaw crime rates are less than half of US averages. Crime rates declined from 2003 through 2008.
The overall crime rate has decreased by more than 50% since the law was put into affect according to statistics from 2005.
Kennesaw must have something going for it as more and more people are moving there and feel safer doing so.
As I said before, criminals are not stupid, they are not going to invade a home, steal a car, assault someone, mug someone or attempt rape if they know their victims are armed.
DC was the murder capital of the US because there was a ban on handguns which has since been repealed.
Murder and violent crime rates were supposed to soar after the Supreme Court struck down gun control laws in Chicago and Washington, D.C.
Politicians predicted disaster. “More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence,” Washington’s Mayor Adrian Fenty warned the day the court made its decision.
Chicago’s Mayor Daley predicted that we would “go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle it in the streets…”
The New York Times even editorialized this month about the Supreme Court’s “unwise” decision that there is a right for people “to keep guns in the home.”
But Armageddon never happened. Newly released data for Chicago shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn’t rise after the bans were eliminated — they plummeted. They have fallen much more than the national crime rate.
Not surprisingly, the national media have been completely silent about this news.
One can only imagine the coverage if crime rates had risen. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year – back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago’s murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982.
Meanwhile, the other four most populous cities saw a total drop at the same time of only 6 percent.
Similarly, in the year after the 2008 “Heller” decision, the murder rate fell two-and-a-half times faster in Washington than in the rest of the country.
It also fell more than three as fast as in other cities that are close to Washington’s size. And murders in Washington have continued to fall.
If you compare the first six months of this year to the first six months of 2008 , the same time immediately preceding the Supreme Court’s late June “Heller” decision, murders have now fallen by thirty-four percent.
Gun crimes also fell more than non-gun crimes.
Robberies with guns fell by 25%, while robberies without guns have fallen by eight percent. Assaults with guns fell by 37%, while assaults without guns fell by 12%.
Just as with right-to-carry laws, when law-abiding citizens have guns some criminals stop carrying theirs.
Myth: Concealed carry laws increase crime
Fact: Thirty-nine states, comprising the majority of the American population, are”right-to-carry” states. Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell (or did not rise) after the right-to-carry law became active (as of July, 2006). Nine states restrict the right to carry and two deny it outright.
Fact: Crime rates involving gun owners with carry permits have consistently been about 0.02% of all carry permit holders since Florida’s right-to-carry law started in 1988.
Fact: After passing their concealed carry law, Florida’s homicide rate fell from 36% above the national average to 4% below, and remains below the national average (as of the last reporting period, 2005).
Fact: In Texas, murder rates fell 50% faster than the national average in the year after their concealed carry law passed. Rape rates fell 93% faster in the first year after enactment, and 500% faster in the second. Assaults fell 250% faster in the second year.
Fact: More to the point, crime is significantly higher in states without right-to-carry laws
Fact: States that disallow concealed carry have violent crime rates 11% higher than national averages.
Fact: Deaths and injuries from mass public shootings fall dramatically after right-to-carry concealed handgun laws are enacted. Between 1977 and 1995, the average death rate from mass shootings plummeted by up to 91% after such laws went into effect, and injuries dropped by over 80%.
Adversus solem ne loquitor
Last edited by BritinAfrica; April 10th, 2012 at 06:55..
|Shiites, Sunnis should work hand in hand|
|Favorite hand to hand combat scene(s)|
|Who are the best hand to hand combat warriors in the world?|