Yeah, I think Nesrie is right here; trying to get rid of guns by making them expensive only means that rich killers will be able to slaughter people (and probably have a much better chance of getting away with it, if they aren’t trying to commit suicide one way or another). The economic approach–“tax the vice”–usually ends up being a thinly-veiled euphemism for “poor people are the problem.” Not that I’m saying leogwarrior is making that point, not at all, just that, in general, that’s what it often ends up reducing to.
I don’t know how many people bring guns to their tournaments, but that behavior was odd long before the actual loss and attack.
Other countries have more access to medical care, although mental seems to be a pretty big stigma in several places, and it’s not as if they don’t have angry individuals who lash out. The reason they don’t have more body counts is they don’t have easy access to guns.
And the fact there is so often a reach for mental illness explanations for young white men and almost no attempt for like anyone else suggests even if we threw up thousands of facilities and providers tomorrow the public might not know what to do with them.
I’m still waiting to find out how a person who was in and out of mental facilities was able to purchase a gun or guns. I remember hearing that he got them legally. This should not be possible.
Being in and out of mental faculties doesn’t necessarily mean dangerous. Sadly, we can’t solve this problem by blaming it on ‘crazy’ people. That won’t work, and it will lead to fewer people seeking help, for fear of the stigma.
This linking the two is a VERY BAD idea.
As for guns and poverty, let’s face it, we won’t be changing the second amendment any time soon, so, high taxes and high costs is one way to reduce the gun ownership situation.
As it stands, helicopters, homes and decent education are limited to the wealthy, so why not guns as well. It seems like something that the average GOP voter would go for.
And once you taxes it enough, people will general stop using it. Like cigarettes.
No it’s not. Guns are not that expensive. Even if you put a percentage tax on it, it’s still not going to be unattainable for anyone but the poor. In addition, we have a ton of guns already. They can just sell them to each other for, well, forever.
naturally
No becomes expansive if you start requiring deeds for guns, similar to buying a home. And like a car or home, pay taxes on it. And who sad a percentage. We don’t have a percentage taxes on gas. A few thousand dollars seems about right to me. How much is a life worth these days anyway.
Sure, there will be illegal weapons around for a while, but not forever. They’ll eventually be picked up by the police or break.
And of course harsh prison sentences to those that does register their guns.
The solution won’t be instantaneous, but you have to start some time. Eventually, after the gun culture dies down, we can move to strike the second amendment, and finally make ownership illegal.
Where’s that mute button…
How much do you think a gun costs? Have you ever walked into a store and looked at one?
Gas is not the right comparison. Gas is largely a required resource. Try tobacco products… and how exactly did taxes change the behavior of all the current and existing smokers. You think the middle class and rich stopped smoking because they had to pay 6 dollars instead of 1? That’s right, taxes is not the reason and the habit is increasing not really decreasing last I checked, despite taxes. Alcohol… has there ever been a time when Americans drank more?
Wait, I take it you disagree with my statement, but you feel you lack the moral fortitude to engage with me?
That’s not the point. I have guns. I had to go through a background check. One of the things they check is if you have ever been institutionalized. If so, you don’t get the gun. They take a while to do the background check. They go through an FBI database and use your social security number to check hospital records.
It’s not so much about dangerous. It’s about a serious database check.
It’s quite a range, but a handgun is cheap here in rural PA
Most people here at off the Friday after Thanksgiving because that is the start of deer hunting season, so rifles are popular.
And why can’t a flat taxes be levied? There is no rule that requires taxes to be a percentage. Just because we don’t do it for cigarettes, or alcohol, doesn’t mean that we can’t slap a 1,000 dollar flat tax on the purchase of a gun (to help pay for the registration, administration and tracking of the gun).
We can also require that all guns have bio locks on them, to further increase the cost.
If I am not being clear about this, let me spell it out: you’re approaching this wrong.
The only thing a tax will do is take access to guns away from the poor and maybe the middle class. You don’t see a problem with rich people and only rich people having access to weapons… really?
And even then, we’re only talking about new guns, not the millions that are already out there.
Sure, but let’s say you have depression and suicide thoughts, and you like owning guns. You might avoid seeking treatment in order to keep your guns.
Do you see how that might be a problem? People will avoid getting the help they desperately need because of the stigma associated with it.
I don’t see the problem. What, do you think you are entitled to gun just because? No thank you. Guns are a big responsibility, and should be earned. Cheap guns is what got us into this problem to begin with.
Incorrect.
Have you read any history… do you think if maybe one group has weapons and the other doesn’t there might be, oh i don’t know, an issue.
Incorrect
I don’t think yours includes vaping.
And I fail to see a problem with that.
Look, while I am sensitive to the notion of not criminalizing mental health issues, there’s also the simple fact that there are risk categories that should not be allowed gun ownership. You have certain criminal convictions, including but certainly not limited to donestic abuse? No guns. Ever. You demonstrated certain behaviors that make you more likely to engage in certain behaviors? No guns for you, for a period of time (in years).
And I’d like to get some good data research into what risk factors should preclude gun ownership. Because while banning gun ownership is a non starter, we can certainly make it harder for people who should not have guns to get them.
Strict enforcement.
What, do you think rich people will suddenly get armed and start hunting the most dangerous game?
Let’s face it, the Military, the police, the government are all supporters of the status quo. The rich don’t need weapons to oppress the poor, since they already have the most powerful armed forces available.
And don’t think even you had a few guns it would make a difference. The Whiskey Rebellion was put down, and Washington didn’t even have tanks, let along helicopters and drones.
Nope, if you seriously think that armed insurrection was the only resort, you need to do it like Confederacy did. Co opt a large part of the armed forces to your side.
You’re talking about tomorrow. I’m talking about decades from now when you have a population of armed white rich people vs. everyone else. It is a set-up for disaster and one of those movies where you can’t imagine why anyone would be so stupid to think they can have a power tilt like that and not see it coming.
Other countries have handled their gun issues pretty well, and it doesn’t seem like they went that route at all. I don’t know why would need to reinvent the wheel and make it am amoeba shape just to see how poorly we run against everyone else.