All-purpose gun legislation thread

[Pyperkub]

Beyond what we do about violent crime in general? Yeah, probably not.
I mean… why exactly should we? This kind of highlights the issue. There’s some general emotional response, largely based upon media induced hysteria, that makes us think this stuff is so uber terrible. But it’s not really that much worse than any other violent crime. Domestic terrorism on its own doesn’t really move the needle in terms of your safety, statistically.

Because, like I said, heart disease and cancer cause way, way, way more deaths.

But again, there are around 5 and a half MILLION car accidents every year. So things like car saftey mechanisms are affecting something which involves a statistically significant portion of the population.

If there were only 500 car accidents a year, then yeah, we probably could get away with eliminating seat belts and airbags… or at least not bother with federal regulation of them.

I think the reason why we should is encapsulated in this once sentence from this article:

The United States is, by a long shot, the global leader in mass shootings, claiming just 5% of the global population but an outsized share – 31% – of the world’s mass shooters since 1966, a new study finds.

It appears to be low-hanging fruit, and an area in which the US is sorely lagging just about every single other country in the world.

[Tman]

285/365 is not more than 1 a day.

My bad. I originally wrote it with the 459 and after removing the suicides (which I didn’t think appropriate, although I do wonder how many wouldn’t be successful without a gun) I didn’t update it.

[Tman]

Guns are one of the last areas of resistance against liberal experiments, which I define to be state or national laws designed to change widespread human vices that are difficult or expensive to enforce but might possibly make a marginal change on aggregate, or at least make people “feel” better or safer, and if they don’t work, the results will be dismissed quietly (or pumped up with new money and laws) without rolling back the original changes.

Anyway, dealmaking is open! What additional gun rights or reduction of ineffective red tape would you like to trade for universal licensing, training, and storage laws? Shall we strengthen the fundamental protections of the Second Amendment in exchange for agreed-upon regulations?

As I always say, the left controls nearly the entire education system in America. Why can’t you use it to improve education about these important topics? Let’s make it a success story like teen driving fatalities and unwanted pregnancies!

I don’t see why it needs to be a trade. I own 2 pistols, 3 shotguns, and 6 rifles. I’m a responsible gun owner and went through gun safety training when I got my first deer hunting license at 12. Interestingly enough, once you > 18 yrs old, the gun safety no longer applies. I think it should be required for any age. When I got my concealed carry permits (OR/UT), they had some good training there as well.

I completely agree - let’s make it a success story!

[Scott123]

Tman did you grow up in a rural or semi-rural environment? My guess is yes, but would be interested to hear if you grew up in a major city. The reason is that in my opinion rural kids grow up in a culture of knowledge about guns and their use. When you are 9 or 10 (or younger) and you see a deer twitching itself dead, it leaves a deep impression as to the power and responsibility of guns. Not to mention that you see your father bleed a gallon of blood out of that deer, cut its guts out onto the ground, carry the thing home, butcher it, cook it, and eat it; it leaves a good impression about the responsibility of eating meat, which frankly I think all kids should go through.

But the point is people migrate to the big City, and bring their guns and even knowledge, but not the real-world experiences with them. Could be dangerous. Thoughts?

[Tman]

I’m gonna say something here which is kind of coldhearted, but I think it needs to be said.
That number is pretty much insignificant.

In a population of 320 million, 500 deaths a year is trivial. It is not a number which merits federal action. The federal government shouldn’t be focused on things which are so isolated, rather than things which affect more significant portions of the population.

If we look at the CDC causes of accidental death, we’re talking 130,557. So you’re talking about 0.4% of accidental deaths, not even total deaths. Both cancer and heart disease each claim around 600k.

So, while tragic, I just don’t think it’s practical to have the federal government of the nation worrying about something that affects 500 people a year.

I agree to a point, but interestingly the same number that just died in Orlando. And it happens every year. We can manufacture sorrow for an event like Orlando but we let the same number of children die each year without a word.

It’s similar to auto-accidents. Back in the 70’s & 80’s, 50,000 people died each year from automobile accidents. Through improvements, we’ve whittled that death toll down to 40,000 with a 2x population increase.

If we want to just admit it’s insignificant, then Orlando and Sandy Hook are equally insignificant. Or are they? Hmmm.

[Tman]

Tman did you grow up in a rural or semi-rural environment? My guess is yes, but would be interested to hear if you grew up in a major city. The reason is that in my opinion rural kids grow up in a culture of knowledge about guns and their use. When you are 9 or 10 (or younger) and you see a deer twitching itself dead, it leaves a deep impression as to the power and responsibility of guns. Not to mention that you see your father bleed a gallon of blood out of that deer, cut its guts out onto the ground, carry the thing home, butcher it, cook it, and eat it; it leaves a good impression about the responsibility of eating meat, which frankly I think all kids should go through.

But the point is people migrate to the big City, and bring their guns and even knowledge, but not the real-world experiences with them. Could be dangerous. Thoughts?

Not really (Salt Lake City, Helena Montana, Kansas City). Interestingly enough however, is we shot 22’s in grade school in the basement as part of a class. They were single-shot, but still it reinforced the respect for guns.

I got my first 22 at 7 yrs old and I’ve made sure all 3 of my sons got theirs as well at 7. Having guns around & learning the power & respect of them is invaluable. I want to avoid the case of them going to another house & the kid over there non nonchalantly bringing out a gun without parents around, my kids will know to get an adult or leave. That is drilled into them since before they are 7. And even though they technically “own” the 22, it’s kept in a gun safe and the ammo is kept in another locked drawer in a completely separate part of the house.

When we go & shoot, it’s a full on production of safety glasses, hearing protection, and safety on the range. I think if every kid had that interaction, they’d have a lot more respect and we’d have fewer issues with guns today. Hence my push for more education / safety.

[legowarrior]

My bad. I originally wrote it with the 459 and after removing the suicides (which I didn’t think appropriate, although I do wonder how many wouldn’t be successful without a gun) I didn’t update it.

Actual the issue of suicides is a big deal. The vast majority of suicide attempts that are unsuccessful are never repeated again. Those are an extreme cry for help.
Sadly, with guns in the equation, the success of a suicide attempt goes up, so the question is, without guns, how many suicide attempts would have ended with ‘failure’ and the person surviving?

Anyway, I believe we already covered this subject in the this very thread.

[Scott123]

Not really (Salt Lake City, Helena Montana, Kansas City). Interestingly enough however, is we shot 22’s in grade school in the basement as part of a class. They were single-shot, but still it reinforced the respect for guns.

I got my first 22 at 7 yrs old and I’ve made sure all 3 of my sons got theirs as well at 7. Having guns around & learning the power & respect of them is invaluable. I want to avoid the case of them going to another house & the kid over there non nonchalantly bringing out a gun without parents around, my kids will know to get an adult or leave. That is drilled into them since before they are 7. And even though they technically “own” the 22, it’s kept in a gun safe and the ammo is kept in another locked drawer in a completely separate part of the house.

When we go & shoot, it’s a full on production of safety glasses, hearing protection, and safety on the range. I think if every kid had that interaction, they’d have a lot more respect and we’d have fewer issues with guns today. Hence my push for more education / safety.

Huh, thanks. I also received my 22 pretty young, though not that young, I’d guess at 10 or 11 (air guns before). Small town Alberta meant relatively high exposure and knowledge. Main thing that stuck with me was my dad telling me on Christmas morning, that whether it’s loaded or unloaded doesn’t matter; pointing it at anyone, any time, even for a second, even by accident (e.g taking it out of its case), meant losing it forever.

I plan to give my girls some experience, haven’t figured out how to do that yet being a non-owner in a big city. Cheers.

[Tman]

Many shooting ranges allow you to shoot 22 LR rifles and allow you to rent guns so you don’t have to buy them. They also have classes. I’d check into your local ranges and see what they offer. I think you might be surprised at what’s available.

[Pod]

In all 112 pages of this thread, has anyone been persuaded enough by the arguments on either side to change their stance? I.e. pro-gun vs anti-gun?

[Alstein]

Over the years, I’ve gradually been persuaded from being against gun control to being for it. Mostly from the past 3-4 years and the rise of fundamentalism, both Christian and Muslim.

[Timex]

I’ve become slightly more anti-gun, from being mostly pro-gun. I think my views are still on the pro-gun side, but I recognize the inherent weaknesses in some of the pro-gun arguments, and realize that a lot of it comes down to some weird fetishism.

[Dan_Theman]

I wouldn’t say that I’ve been persuaded, but I’ve certainly become better educated about both sides of the argument and appreciate the time I’ve spent here.

[sharaleo]

I wouldn’t say that I’ve been persuaded, but I’ve certainly become better educated about both sides of the argument and appreciate the time I’ve spent here.

Yep, this for sure.

[Tman]

Well it’s disenchanted me because you all have some very plausible arguments and I’ve tested them out on several of my gun toting die hard republican friends and they just are unwilling to budge. There is absolutely zero movement. I keep trying to find that one chink in the armor.

The problem of course is compounded by two things IMO:

1. The increase in talking / discussion after an incident like Orlando really doesn’t help because no laws were broken. Every law we have on the books was followed. You’d be hard pressed to come up with a new law that would have prevented it. Same thing with Sandy Hook.

2. “Assualt” guns are just semi-automatic and people prescribe way too much on this which is basically a cosmetic overlay.

This is an old video, but it completely explains why any mention of “assault” type bans are met with denial by the gun owners. This is a tree people need to quit mentioning.

[Alstein]

Just listened to something on the radio as I got milk and taco Tuesday for lunch. As long as Democrats are perceived as supporting something, Republicans will never support it, and vice versa.

[Timex]

1. The increase in talking / discussion after an incident like Orlando really doesn’t help because no laws were broken. Every law we have on the books was followed. You’d be hard pressed to come up with a new law that would have prevented it. Same thing with Sandy Hook.

This is kind of the issue, from the perspective of the folks who want more regulation of firearms. The fact that the current set of laws is seemingly insufficient to deal with the issue.

[Tman]

The problem is that nothing except for an outright ban would have prevented Orlando. And if you’re trying to move the needle, talking bans is going to dig in the opposition because they believe, give an inch and you’ll go for the ban.

Any ban needs to be taken off the table.

The time to talk gun reform is when there isn’t a shooting - which is getting harder & harder because as I stated, when a (high profile) shooting takes place, more often than not, nothing of real consequence wouldn’t have affected it.

That’s why I brought up the accidental children deaths. It’s something constant. It happens all the time - and I would think “save the children” is something everyone can agree to, and we might be able to move the needle.

[AntediluvianArk]

For an upcoming fundraiser, the West Tennessee lawmaker [Andy Holt] is planning to give away two AR-15 rifles, the same kind of weapon used in Sunday’s shooting.

-Todd

[TimJames]

I think focusing on tools will seem archaic as the Internet continues to spread information about alternative means, such as bombs, that are even more difficult to control. We’re not even close to Oklahoma City or 9/11, after all. Increasing the difficulty with arbitrary hoops will lower demand for the marginal cases, but radicalism and social isolation in the global Internet era will continue to increase demand further.

Anecdotally, it seems like most of the stories we hear these days involve a lot of planning that blows away any statutory cooling-off period. Even if you accept the idea that gun control works, the methods that are supposed to help against street crime and crimes of passion don’t seem to be as effective against mass shootings where everything is done methodically by the book.

The flip-side is true too: concealed carry would have been a big help to those guys hiding in a bathroom stall (it’s genuinely painful and sad to hear desperate and ineffective attempts to hide from active shooters) but what does it do against suicide bombers?

It’s hard to envision while we’re in the midst of all these shootings, but like most political issues, I’m more concerned about the state of things a couple decades from now.