Isn’t that just avoiding the problem? Oh, no, we don’t want to ban guns we just want to keep the wrong people from having them, nevermind that “wrong people” can’t be defined unless you have a magic ball?
Or are we just going to pretend that completely sane reasonable people don’t go fucking nuts in traffic?
There’s a reason most countries defaulted to “keep guns out of the hands of most people” as their gun control policy, and it’s not because other solutions are easier.
Matt_W
7664
Most mass shootings are committed by men who have obtained their weapons legally and aren’t on any watchlist or anything. It’s not clear that mental health restrictions would have prevented very many or any mass shootings.
Matt_W
7665
Oh we know how “wrong people” usually gets defined in the United States.
While I’m squarely in the camp of significantly restricting guns in the US, I think this position is silly. There are millions of guns in the US. Gun does not equal highly likely homicide. On tire irons and such, it’s likely they’re not used because better killing tools are available (e.g., those millions of guns) for when killin’ needs doin’. I’m 100% behind the idea that guns lower the barrier to killing and that removing guns would significantly reduce homicides in the US, but I’m not so foolish as to think they’d go away—knives, tire irons, whatever. Some percentage of currently-gun homicides would transfer to more difficult means, if we could remove all guns.
Does anyone think homicides would go away without guns? I assume they would reduce to a rate similar to what you see in countries with strict gun control laws.
So you think my view that fewer guns would lead to fewer killings is silly, but you think that fewer guns would probably lead to fewer killings. That’s…very clear.
I think your two main points are dumb: 1) that most people are homicidal if given sufficient means 2) the only means that would be sufficient would be guns.
I think we can argue about the first point, but I never said the latter. My point — transparent to any charitable reader, I think — is that access to guns was probably the greatest factor in the very different outcomes in the US versus other countries. Unless you think that Americans are naturally more homicidal than are other peoples, I’m guessing you probably agree with that. Especially since you wrote this, which is basically the same damned thing:
I’m not overly worried about false positive, any more than DUI license suspension and restrictiction, almost certainly burden a large number of people who aren’t of significant risk to society. i.e. folks who made a one time mistake.
Nor do I think have to show the person is mentally ill, only that at this time the person possessing a gun would prove to be a significant risk to society.
So as a starting point I’d say the following activities would trigger a gun possession hearing
- attempted suicide
- violating a restraining order
- multiple posts, video, text, or voicemails advocating violence, especially gun violence
- for minors under 21, parents, or teachers
- LEO after some well-established criteria, 2 or 3 calls in a year where the person was acting violent and irrational
Well, you’ve pretty much ruled out any possible reduction in gun violence, in your lifetime. Joe Manchin, said on TV this week. “Of course, I own a gun, I don’t anyone who does own a gun in West Virginia. It is part of our culture” (paraphrased)
Nesrie
7672
So BLM members, Civil Rights members, every member of the Black Panthers. They’ll claim that was violence driven… they always do.
This effort would not work in the way you think it will. It would be used as an means to arrest dissent… and still let a group of angry white men storm the Capitol and walk away free.
Yes. Not because I like it, but because it’s reality. In colonial Virginia, in the 17th century, one of the primary indicators of your status as a full member of the community was firearm ownership. Weapon ownership has been tied to citizenship since before there was a USA. We can’t change that overnight.
As @Nesrie says, this will not end well. Too many of those criteria are too dependent on the opinions of too many people who may or may not have anyone’s best interests in mind, or who may have their own agendas. Any approach that relies on determining “good” from “bad” gun owners is doomed to fail IMO. It is all or nothing, really.
Ok, well I guess I can go back to ignoring this thread and the pointless gun debate, since the anti-gun side is acting like Republicans when it comes to compromise.
Nesrie
7675
You seem to think we’re working with a fair system to begin with. That you honestly believe that as soon as people marched in the streets not every single one of them would be put on some list that can’t have a gun because they lifted a BLM sign. I don’t know why you think that wouldn’t happen. that has nothing to do with irrationality. That’s our actual real life history. That is how the government responded. They actually arrested peaceful protestors and took away guns from the Panthers because they freaked out over seeing black men with guns.
You can’t have these conversations like they are in some sort of bubble. That happened.
You can be honest, just admit that keeping the guns is worth strangers dying. It is what it is. We all do it to some extent, but just going around, oh man, this is so bad, won’t someone fix this problem while making sure not to touch the solutions that have been proven to work everywhere else, ok.
ShivaX
7677
The restraining order has some legal legs, since there is some due process involved.
But otherwise you’re really relying on people not being shit, imo.
It’s generally regarded that the best target demographic is Domestic Violence perps.
They commit like 60% of gun homicides or something iirc.
Every, triggering activity I said is against the law including attempted suicide, and there is due process involved. If the person won’t willing surrender their registered firearm, a judge makes the final determination. There are already states that have these type of hearings.
No, but if you want to change it in 50 years, you start today, no?
Not sure where you get that from. I’m open to all sorts of discussions, but nothing has been proposed that IMO is either workable or has a snowball’s chance in hell of being effective. I can’t speak for others, but I’m not calling for confiscating guns or rounding up gun owners or whatever. I’m actually saying as bad as the status quo is, I think the proposals that I’ve seen to deal with the problem are probably worse.
Personally, I think people who buy guns designed to kill people know the guns are designed to kill people, and they are buying the guns because they are designed to kill people. Maybe they’ll never kill anyone — the vast majority don’t — but what’s in their head is owning a tool made to kill people. You really can’t say that about any other product or buying decision.
Nesrie
7682
I’ve been around a few gun owners, and there are many who simply enjoy shooting and actually care, I mean really care, if someone us uncomfortable around them because they have a gun, as in they care enough to actually ask permission to bring the gun when you go into the woods, or while you’re driving. And no, these are not also liberal people, persay, in fact one of them is obviously not. People who practice gun safety, care about the reaction of others don’t pack giant guns on their backs to shop at wal-mart, they’re not running around trying to conceal carry so they can threaten someone they get in an argument with, and they don’t support people who don’t lock their guns away from easy access to children with loose claims about not being able to stop a robber quick enough if they do.
I’m not exactly anti-gun, but I know what an ill-conceived approach looks like and how it will likely be used. I also believe that basic background checks, across state lines, things like domestic violence concerns and previous violent incidents should be examined. We don’t have great mental health systems in this country, we should simply address that regardless of any gun questions. We also too many guns. There is no reason that someone should just fill their basements with hundreds of guns and certain gun assault, or assault like… it’s just not needed.
I don’t know how many, if any, mass shootings we have to endure until certain groups stop trying to concoct inaction and weak attempts look like… something.
