Image ImageImage Image

OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting

Moderators: HomoSapien, Ice Man, Michael Jackson, dougthonus, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10

step
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,533
And1: 521
Joined: Nov 14, 2006

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#241 » by step » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:21 pm

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
1985Bear wrote:Panther: Would you be oK with Illinois laws if they were Federal and all states had to follow them?

As a person who wants AMERICANS TO STOP MURDERING Americans, action has to happen. All we get from the gun side is nothing works so don’t do anything and expect problem to change.

Unless it’s not a problem? Everything is all good on the gun front?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What I usually see or hear first are people calling for bans. That triggers an emotional response from gun owners like you can pry my guns from my cold dead hands and its usually a childish back and forth.

It triggered a response down here in Australia. People were livid about the changes at the time.
However, in retrospect, I think 99% are glad something did happen. And you can't really argue with the results, they speak for themselves.
Almost Retired
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,673
And1: 909
Joined: Oct 07, 2020
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#242 » by Almost Retired » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:21 pm

WookieOnRitalin wrote:
_txchilibowl_ wrote:Because the Constitution is an infallible document...

Maybe we should try evolving as a society? If people weren't so dogmatic about the Constitution, a document written when people were still sporting wooden teeth, then maybe we could solve modern day problems with modern day solutions.


Great idea, how would you like us to evolve as a society considering our current governmental structure?

You may figure out ways to call for a new Constitutional Convention to reorganize our system of governance, but I would probably bet that's not going to happen because there is not enough passion in the American populous to go through such a task simply because, well, America has the greatest producing economy in the world and unless the bottom falls out economically, I do not see a mechanism strong enough to upend our current rule of law.

Unless you have additional ideas that you find compelling?


A new Constitutional Convention would result in somewhere between 2 and 6 Separate Countries. There is no chance in hell that the two sides on almost every issue would ever again compromise as they did in the summer on 1783. But maybe that is the best outcome we could hope for. California, Oregon and Washington would never agree to be governed by the laws of Alabama, and vice versa. Let people and businesses migrate to the area they feel more politically aligned with. It's already happening actually. People continue to flee Blue states for Red states. That point is not debatable. Businesses are doing the same thing. So many companies have moved to Austin that home prices have doubled in 2 years. A Conserv-exit or a Liber-exit would be preferable to where we are heading. The acrimony is too entrenched.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,979
And1: 19,062
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#243 » by dougthonus » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:21 pm

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:Its hard for people to give up their right to own something especially if they don't believe its really going to make a difference. Its like why should a few bad seeds ruin it for millions of other responsible owners. Its not hard to understand. Clearly if you are against guns or you aren't a gun owner it is so simple for you to consider it. And yes there are some gun owners that agree with it but they don't speak for the masses when it comes to banning.

Like I said, I don't care about the constitution but the problem is you are suggesting taking away something from people who have done nothing wrong. Its a real uphill battle, not simple and I'm not giving a cop out answer. Its not that easy.


I understand this and I agree with it.

What I don't understand is why are people against:
Gun registration (aimed at reducing illegal guns)
Waiting periods to purchase guns (aimed at stopping people from purchasing in moments of anger)
Licenses to own (which can be revoked based on triggered conditions like felony conditions, restraining order, mental health issues) and require background checks (aimed at reducing access to guns from individuals that may purposefully use them negatively)
Continuing education on safety (aimed at reducing accidents)
Accountability of gun owner for all incidents with their gun (encourages responsible gun ownership)

These all seem like pretty reasonable steps to me that don't infringe on your enjoyment of gun ownership in terms of hunting, shooting at ranges, sport, or your use of guns as a method of home / personal protection.

These are all things which would help move the needle for safety and over time reduce access to weapons from people you who shouldn't have them. It doesn't meaningfully inhibit any intended purposes or impose greater than current restrictions on types of weapons. It does require you a gun owner to put a bit of effort into the process, but that feels very reasonable.
panthermark
RealGM
Posts: 21,711
And1: 4,009
Joined: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Undisclosed: MJ's shadow could be lurking....
         

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#244 » by panthermark » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:26 pm

1985Bear wrote:Panther: Would you be oK with Illinois laws if they were Federal and all states had to follow them?

As a person who wants AMERICANS TO STOP MURDERING Americans, action has to happen. All we get from the gun side is nothing works so don’t do anything and expect problem to change.

Unless it’s not a problem? Everything is all good on the gun front?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I would not. We have fairly strict guns laws that would negatively impact most states.
No automatic weapons are allowed in Illinois. (We are one of the few states that do now allow them)
No silencers are allowed in Illinois. (We are one of the few states that do not allow them)
SBR's (Short barreled rifles) are restricted AND you need a C&R (Curious & Relic) license on top of it. (We are one of the few states that restrict them).

I understand why people you want them, but as I said before, that application of ineffective and Unconstitutional feel good laws seem great, all the way up until you are on the other side of them without committing any crimes. I would not want to subject millions and millions of people that have done nothing wrong to our Unconstitutional (FOID) laws and other restrictive take-aways.

More importantly, the criminals don't care. If you are willing to kill someone, all the laws in the world won't matter. We have those laws now, and Chicago still has shootings left and right.

Now, if you could assure me that gun violence would actually decrease in a significant way, maybe I would consider it on a temporary basis. But I don't see it. How do you get knuckleheads in the hood to stop beefing with each other over dumb crap? How do you get loners to quit taking out their angst on innocent people from rooftops or in classrooms? Those are behavioral issues, how do we fix that?
Jealousy is a sickness.......get well soon....
IliketheBullsNBearstoo
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,496
And1: 1,388
Joined: Sep 27, 2001
Location: Socal
     

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#245 » by IliketheBullsNBearstoo » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:28 pm

dougthonus wrote:
IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:Its hard for people to give up their right to own something especially if they don't believe its really going to make a difference. Its like why should a few bad seeds ruin it for millions of other responsible owners. Its not hard to understand. Clearly if you are against guns or you aren't a gun owner it is so simple for you to consider it. And yes there are some gun owners that agree with it but they don't speak for the masses when it comes to banning.

Like I said, I don't care about the constitution but the problem is you are suggesting taking away something from people who have done nothing wrong. Its a real uphill battle, not simple and I'm not giving a cop out answer. Its not that easy.


I understand this and I agree with it.

What I don't understand is why are people against:
Gun registration (aimed at reducing illegal guns)
Waiting periods to purchase guns (aimed at stopping people from purchasing in moments of anger)
Licenses to own (which can be revoked based on triggered conditions like felony conditions, restraining order, mental health issues) and require background checks (aimed at reducing access to guns from individuals that may purposefully use them negatively)
Continuing education on safety (aimed at reducing accidents)
Accountability of gun owner for all incidents with their gun (encourages responsible gun ownership)

These all seem like pretty reasonable steps to me that don't infringe on your enjoyment of gun ownership in terms of hunting, shooting at ranges, sport, or your use of guns as a method of home / personal protection.

These are all things which would help move the needle for safety and over time reduce access to weapons from people you who shouldn't have them. It doesn't meaningfully inhibit any intended purposes for impose greater than current restrictions on types of weapons.


A lot of this is already in place in some states and it would be nice if it was federal wide. I haven't come across anyone against any of these personally.
Almost Retired
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,673
And1: 909
Joined: Oct 07, 2020
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#246 » by Almost Retired » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:32 pm

Bullflip wrote:
Dresden wrote:
panthermark wrote:Sure, and the 1st amendment should only apply to items either spoken in person, or written in a physical newspaper, or written on parchment with a feather dipped in ink.

amirite?


I think common sense can be used here. New laws need to be written as needed to keep up with changes in society and technology. Many other countries have seen the problem with firearms and taken steps to greatly reduce their availability, and as a consequence, they suffer far fewer cases of gun violence than we do. Why can't we do the same? If it takes a constitutional amendment to do that, fine, let's do that. But then the argument is "well, that isn't politically feasible".

So the real issue is not whether something can be done about this, it's "why do so many people resist changing that part of the constitution when it's so clearly apparent that it needs to be updated?"


This is correct. The Constitution should be treated as document that needs to evolve with the changing times. If we had kept the first iteration of the Constitution, slavery would still be around and women would have no right to vote. Just because it is in the Constitution, does not make it the be-all-end-all. It needs to adapt


Quite right. The drafters of the Constitution wisely provided a procedure for it to be Amended. There are 27 Amendments. It is not impossible to achieve if you feel so strongly about gun control. Jefferson once wrote that the Constitution should be revised periodically.....that "each generation"...should have the "solemn opportunity" to update the Constitution. So Article V sets forth the method for amending the document. Just get 2/3 of the House AND the Senate to Approve an Amendment. Then get it ratified by 3/4 of the State legislatures (38 States to ratify).
_txchilibowl_
Veteran
Posts: 2,527
And1: 2,726
Joined: Aug 17, 2017
     

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#247 » by _txchilibowl_ » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:35 pm

^^^^^ You bridge the income inequality in this country and normalize taking care of mental health. That's how.

If you give people the option of a happy life most will take it. People in "the hood" generally don't want to live in "the hood". People who are hopeless and miserable generally don't want to be hopeless and miserable. The problem is those solutions would cost all of us money and most are unwilling to contribute.
IliketheBullsNBearstoo
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,496
And1: 1,388
Joined: Sep 27, 2001
Location: Socal
     

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#248 » by IliketheBullsNBearstoo » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:36 pm

step wrote:
IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
1985Bear wrote:Panther: Would you be oK with Illinois laws if they were Federal and all states had to follow them?

As a person who wants AMERICANS TO STOP MURDERING Americans, action has to happen. All we get from the gun side is nothing works so don’t do anything and expect problem to change.

Unless it’s not a problem? Everything is all good on the gun front?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What I usually see or hear first are people calling for bans. That triggers an emotional response from gun owners like you can pry my guns from my cold dead hands and its usually a childish back and forth.

It triggered a response down here in Australia. People were livid about the changes at the time.
However, in retrospect, I think 99% are glad something did happen. And you can't really argue with the results, they speak for themselves.


That is fantastic mate. But this is the US of A over here. We are just a different animal, a different beast. People are different here. We are this melting pot of greatness but also of a lot of hate unfortunately. We've seen it rear its ugly head in the past and most recently in the last couple years. This country was built with violence. I don't believe it would go down the same way here, I really don't. You Aussies are way more laid back :D
Almost Retired
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,673
And1: 909
Joined: Oct 07, 2020
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#249 » by Almost Retired » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:36 pm

From someone who calls himself "Indianbronsnan" via substack:
“In the Land Cruiser Jeep with the MAC-10 by the seats”

But don’t get too smug, L*beral. Because where the conservative impulse might be stupid, the unexamined moderate and left wing position on guns is (Please Use More Appropriate Word). It manages somehow to have even less merit, on technical and moral premises.

For starters;

Almost all US firearms murders happen in a few cities, perpetrated by young black men with lengthy prior criminal histories, using illegally obtained handguns, and next to no one is killed with ‘assault weapons’.

i.e. laws about long guns are irrelevant to homicides in the US, the caricature of an angry white guy with a gun is only that, a caricature, and laws which materially penalize the criminals causing America’s gun problems will be laws which disproportionately incarcerate blacks (specifically young black men), and more laws restricting legal gun ownership, particularly in jurisdictions with both lots of gun laws and lots of young black men, are not going to help at all.

You have a few options:

you can take my word for the facts that I’ve stated above:
buy my top subscription tier and receive reams of data about it, if you want
I will also accept crypto (USDC, BTC, or ETH)
Subscribe
you could do what most Bien-Pensants do; take offense and ignore it
And the popularity of option three is really the core problem because a huge amount of dissembling in the debate on guns in the US, as it rages between sets of more or less educated, well-to-do white people, is that the left conflates two different issues—the schoolyard spree shooter and the street criminal of the city.

This happens because in polite company it feels a whole lot more acceptable to complain about white men with AR-15s than the typical person who murders other people with a gun; a young black kid with a pistol aged about 17, in a city.

Here’s an exercise you could try:

With this FBI UCR data in hand, calculate the percentage of people in the US murdered with a rifle of any kind, and those killed by hands, fists, and feet.

American gun violence becomes acute and high pitched in the summer, going back to a tanpura-style drone in the rest of the year. Predominately black neighborhoods suffer, as almost exclusively black teenagers are initiated into gangs with shootings, settle their trivial beefs over girls, drugs, and ‘respect’, and engage in a cadence of anti-social criminality, using guns they strictly never purchase or own legally, circumventing all kinds of local, State and Federal laws.

Consider this piece by Mother Jones: US Mass Shootings, 1982–2022. They claim there have been…128 mass shootings since 1982, with 1,036 deaths, or something like 0.2% of all homicide deaths in the United States over the past forty years.

But that’s quite strange, because EveryTown says that “there have been 277 mass shootings in the United States, …1565 people shot and killed.” since 2009.

~130 mass shootings over forty years, or over 270 in the last thirteen. This is quite the discrepancy. In a country of 340 million people, we have maybe three “mass shootings” a year or more than twenty? What’s going on? The answer of course, is EveryTown included America’s long running low-intensity warfare between usually black, sometimes Latino, gang members killing each other (and bystanders), and Mother Jones didn’t. When you look at America’s violent crime rates with an honest racial lens, you get a different picture of the country’s safety.

You may expect a link to Stormfront, but you’ll have to settle for The Economist:

Guess how we do in PISA Math, Science, and Reading scores vs Europe & Asia..
White America sits comfortably below the OECD average; Latvia is more violent.

And it’s not a poverty thing, either. When mainstream media does try to talk about poor White Americans (who outnumber the poor of any other racial group combined, by the way, and whose poor occupy the poorest counties in America, by the way), they are begrudgingly forced to admit that in “Appalachia: The big white ghetto”, “the overall crime rate throughout Appalachia is about two thirds the national average, and the rate of violent crime is half the national average.”

White America is absolutely awash in guns, and has been since the country’s founding. Its Revolution was fought with the hunting arms of its rebels, its bloody Civil War and World Wars and later conflicts were fought, and still are fought overwhelmingly, by White American Men from the poor places in America where guns are part of manhood, brawling is common, but crime is rare.

There’s really no reason anymore to suspect that more gun laws are going to make a difference in America’s genuinely bad inner-cities because there’s just no way to enforce them without offending the sensibilities of most progressives.
It’s been tried, you know — it was called Stop and Frisk. It worked. It was tossed.

And it’s not as though progressive demands stop at making American cities more dangerous indirectly via failures to adopt good policies which may be insensitive. Thanks to everyone’s favorite Esperanto speaker, George Soros, America’s cities are filled with DAs, prosecutors, and police chiefs who think criminals are good and cops are bad, and that arresting criminals for murder is racist, etc. Perhaps the worst case is one Larry Krasner, the DA of Philadelphia, whose campaign was bankrolled by Soros to pursue criminal justice reform.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,979
And1: 19,062
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#250 » by dougthonus » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:37 pm

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:A lot of this is already in place in some states and it would be nice if it was federal wide. I haven't come across anyone against any of these personally.


I don't really talk gun policy with people much (guns aren't a hot button issue to me one way or the other, I don't own one, but I've been to the range and shot them a few times and don't have a strong investment pro/anti gun as a general rule), but I also have not met anyone who was passionately against those things.

That said, the gun lobby and politicians that are generally picking up the "pro gun" group in their areas all seem to vote pretty passionately against those things. I presume, like most political things in our nation, that people stopped trying to do the "right" thing and turn things into very polarizing issues instead of trying to find moderate, reasonable solutions.
_txchilibowl_
Veteran
Posts: 2,527
And1: 2,726
Joined: Aug 17, 2017
     

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#251 » by _txchilibowl_ » Wed Jul 6, 2022 9:39 pm

Almost Retired wrote:
Bullflip wrote:
Dresden wrote:
I think common sense can be used here. New laws need to be written as needed to keep up with changes in society and technology. Many other countries have seen the problem with firearms and taken steps to greatly reduce their availability, and as a consequence, they suffer far fewer cases of gun violence than we do. Why can't we do the same? If it takes a constitutional amendment to do that, fine, let's do that. But then the argument is "well, that isn't politically feasible".

So the real issue is not whether something can be done about this, it's "why do so many people resist changing that part of the constitution when it's so clearly apparent that it needs to be updated?"


This is correct. The Constitution should be treated as document that needs to evolve with the changing times. If we had kept the first iteration of the Constitution, slavery would still be around and women would have no right to vote. Just because it is in the Constitution, does not make it the be-all-end-all. It needs to adapt


Quite right. The drafters of the Constitution wisely provided a procedure for it to be Amended. There are 27 Amendments. It is not impossible to achieve if you feel so strongly about gun control. Jefferson once wrote that the Constitution should be revised periodically.....that "each generation"...should have the "solemn opportunity" to update the Constitution. So Article V sets forth the method for amending the document. Just get 2/3 of the House AND the Senate to Approve an Amendment. Then get it ratified by 3/4 of the State legislatures (38 States to ratify).



Then the Amendment process needs to be amended. Our current government actively works against each other instead of working with each other. You aren't getting 2/3's of them to agree on what time of day it is.

How about instead, to amend the Constitution it takes 2/3 of the public to approve it? Considering how these government officials work for us and all that....
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 35,661
And1: 10,107
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#252 » by League Circles » Wed Jul 6, 2022 10:22 pm

I'm not sure I've ever in my life heard of a serious attempt by any member of congress to even discuss serious changes to the constitution. They're all a bunch of morons IMO, so deeply afraid of upsetting their base and giving the appearance of a willingness to compromise.

I'm a rule of law person before any particular policy or party. I want many policies to change, some of them at the constitutional level. But until/unless they do, IMO we need to follow the constitution. To me, it IS the country. Without it, we're all just having a non stop argument indefinitely with the most fragile and tenuous standards. It's far from a perfect document but it's pretty amazingly wise. One thing I'd like to see is to reduce the senate vote tally from 60 to 55, and make the filibuster only a real one where you have to keep talking continuously or whatever the details are/were.
https://august-shop.com/ - sneakers and streetwear
Stratmaster
RealGM
Posts: 22,328
And1: 8,978
Joined: Oct 02, 2010
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#253 » by Stratmaster » Wed Jul 6, 2022 10:48 pm

League Circles wrote:
Stratmaster wrote:You ban high capacity, rapid firing guns and magazines.

The problem is that defining these is not at all clear cut. But we can try. What capacity and rate of fire do you propose banning?
You're asking for my opinion. I will give it to you. But as I said in my list post there are all kinds of people smarter than me on this subject.

But I will give you my opinion and ask that you not do what you did with the semantics game.

If it were up to me, no gun sold to civilians would shoot more than 6 bullets without reloading. Reloading would require a fingerprint reactivation process that requires 30 seconds of delay.

But if you read my post, limiting these types of weapons was just one of the things I mentioned, and not even the most important.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
Michael Jackson
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 29,794
And1: 11,819
Joined: Jun 15, 2001

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#254 » by Michael Jackson » Wed Jul 6, 2022 10:52 pm

As Chuck D taught me in the first election I was able to vote in

Neither party is mine not the
Jackass or the elephant

It is not strange at all that every issue is politicized because both parties (or all including the off shoots) are about getting power and not really about helping people. Both sides soothsay what they need to, if they believe it or not, to reach a base. I guess though that does represent america where celebrities are more important than most anything. The divide is too great and it is crazy and it is always the wrong points. Misdirection…

The gun issue has no discourse, just like any of the things we have had. The vaccine issue had no discourse it was all I’m right your wrong.

I would love love love to see way less guns being easily accessible. I would greatly prefer that a guy like Crimio couldn’t so easily get ahold of his weapons, because he only had one thing in mind. Now do I think the great majority of “ar-15” (loose term] owners fall in the category of a mass shooter? Nope not even close. Do I think for the people with a mental profile like a Crimio or Wouk be bold enough to go and try to kill a group of people with a knife. No. Will there still be someone who does? Absolutely and there are plenty effective ways for sociopaths to kill large groups… yet this is the most accessible. Something has to be done about that specifically and it shouldn’t be that hard to figure it out. As mentioned…

Gun ownership at the very least should be accounted for like a drivers license. Pass a test get reevaluated etc…. Having to get a psychological test to get a semi auto doesn’t bother me as a law. It doesn’t seem crazy to me. Politics inflame people but ignore sides… does hat seem like a bad thing. Mas’s shootings are just unfathomable. They need to be addressed. Suicides, jealous spouse, etc… yeah need to be addressed for sure but mass shootings ughhh. Yup people can use cars still… much harder mind you but it surel can be done no doubt. I’m making for it to be harder. Are there enough guns out there that anyone determined enough can still get them…. Yup! And not that hard likely, but it will make it harder, which will limit some peoples access (especially in the demographic of these shooters are in) that let’s say it cuts down by 10% or maybe 50%. Regardless what the number is it will cut it down some and I don’t think a stringent screening process will absolutely make anyone give up their freedoms.
Dresden
RealGM
Posts: 14,401
And1: 6,725
Joined: Nov 02, 2017
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#255 » by Dresden » Wed Jul 6, 2022 10:52 pm

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
step wrote:
IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
What I usually see or hear first are people calling for bans. That triggers an emotional response from gun owners like you can pry my guns from my cold dead hands and its usually a childish back and forth.

It triggered a response down here in Australia. People were livid about the changes at the time.
However, in retrospect, I think 99% are glad something did happen. And you can't really argue with the results, they speak for themselves.


That is fantastic mate. But this is the US of A over here. We are just a different animal, a different beast. People are different here. We are this melting pot of greatness but also of a lot of hate unfortunately. We've seen it rear its ugly head in the past and most recently in the last couple years. This country was built with violence. I don't believe it would go down the same way here, I really don't. You Aussies are way more laid back :D


One big difference between the US and Australia is I doubt they have a pro gun lobby as powerful as the NRA. And likely politics does not revolve around money as much there as it does here, so political donations are not as important, which means lobbyists have less power. The NRA funds a huge propaganda machine here that is highly influential.
Stratmaster
RealGM
Posts: 22,328
And1: 8,978
Joined: Oct 02, 2010
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#256 » by Stratmaster » Wed Jul 6, 2022 11:09 pm

panthermark wrote:
Stratmaster wrote:You ban high capacity, rapid firing guns and magazines. You offer a buy back period. After that buy back period yes, you put people in jail for possession. You require all new guns sold to have fingerprint activated safety mechanisms.

You institute universal background checks and expand the background checks. You add significant waiting periods.

You raise the minimum age to purchase to 21 at a federal level.

You outlaw ghost guns with automatic tripling of times served compared to possession of other guns.

You repeal the liability protections provided to gun manufacturers, sellers, and owners.

You require annual licensing of the gun owner, and annual registration of each gun, just like cars.

You provide universal Healthcare, including mental health care. That should have been done decades ago regardless of guns, and better mental health care addresses all kinds of problem areas, not just mass shootings and gun crimes.

This isn't brain surgery. And no. All of those together won't eliminate all shootings. No law eliminates everything it prohibits. Those measures sure as hell would put a major dent in the problem.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

And there it is folks. This is why nothing will ever happen. There will be no compromise, and no one will give an inch, because there is nothing to compromise and the end goal is that **** listed above. About the only thing useful is mental healthcare.

That is the exact reason why I went from someone that was very much against assault weapons, to someone that really dug into the laws and came out on the opposite end.

What is a "high capacity mag"? The original AR's came with 20 round mags. 30 round mags have been the standard for as long as I can remember. 10 rounds is REDUCED capacity. SCOTUS just decided on this BTW.

Rapid fire? What does that mean? Semi-auto? EL OH Freaking EL.

Ghost guns? Creating your own firearms have been the norm since the day this country was founded.

Remove liability protection? Gun grabbers always get this mixed up. Car manufactures are liable if there is something wrong with their cars that causes injury. Ford is not liable if someone uses their car to run down a bunch of people at a Christmas parade.

Finger prints, annual licensing and registration? What part of the 2nd amendment are you not understanding?

Buy-back? How is the government going to buy something back that I'm a) not interested in selling, and b) didn't buy from them in the first place?


FACTS: The majority of gun deaths in the US are SUICIDE, followed by dumbasses shooting each other in the hood with handguns over stupid beefs or drugs or disrespect. What you are proposing won't touch a dent in a majority of gun deaths because the people shooting each other in the hood won't give two craps about insurance and licenses or laws in general.

But damn near EVERYTHING you proposed is Unconstitutional. The 2nd does not give one the right to bear arms...that is a common misconception. It specifically states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by the government.
Do you know what the 14th Amendment is? It basically means you can't make Unconstitutional state laws.

If you don't like that, amend the 2nd and the 14th.

Now, do you know what it takes to push through an amendment?
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/#:~:text=An%20amendment%20may%20be%20proposed,in%20each%20State%20for%20ratification.
An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.

You are not going to get 3/4th of anything to ratify that.
Plus, you should be really think long and hard about opening the door trying to amend amendments....that is the kind of thing that often backfires spectacularly, especially considering that the 14th is pretty important to a lot of (us) folks on this board.

I'm going to say this again.
b]The majority of gun deaths in the US are SUICIDE, followed by dumbasses shooting each other in the hood with handguns over stupid beefs or drugs or disrespect.[/b] Outside of mental healthcare for suicides (and hopefully some mass shooters), nothing you proposed impacts gun deaths.

12 pages on guns....with hardly any discussion on the person that actually pulled the trigger. Typical.
Complete crock of ****. I never said anything about being unwilling to compromise.

And then we go into the bull **** semantics and obfuscation. How many bullets? 30? 20? Yeah. That's the real question here, right?

I secure my computer and phone with fingerprints. But you're unwilling to secure your gun with your fingerprints? I never said anything about those fingerprints being recorded by anyone.

Gun buy back programs have already been used successfully in many areas. You don't want to sell your semi-automatic back? Your choice as long a you are willing to do the time if found with one.

Licensing is unconstitutional? Registering is unconstitutional? How so?

Suicide is the most common gun death. So we shouldn't try to stop any other type? Great reasoning pal. BTW, you see that waiting period I suggested? You don't think that would help wth suicide and other types?

You're right. We won't get anywhere because of unwillingness to compromise, but it's you who seems unwilling to compromise.

And **** what the old white men decided 200 years ago. The US public is overwhelmingly in favor of common sense gun laws. If an amendment clarifying the 2nd amendment absolutely do it.

You're in the minority, not the majority. Please explain that warning you gave. It is a threat? But you're right. The gun lobby money buying our politicians will keep what is right from ever getting done, and our children will keep in dying because of it.

You're worried so much about the constitution. This is no longer a free country. In a free country you can live your life without fear of being gunned down any time you leave your house. When parts of the constitution endangering the citizenry more than they protect them, **** them, they need to be changed.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app
Stratmaster
RealGM
Posts: 22,328
And1: 8,978
Joined: Oct 02, 2010
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#257 » by Stratmaster » Wed Jul 6, 2022 11:15 pm

IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
step wrote:
IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:
What I usually see or hear first are people calling for bans. That triggers an emotional response from gun owners like you can pry my guns from my cold dead hands and its usually a childish back and forth.

It triggered a response down here in Australia. People were livid about the changes at the time.
However, in retrospect, I think 99% are glad something did happen. And you can't really argue with the results, they speak for themselves.


That is fantastic mate. But this is the US of A over here. We are just a different animal, a different beast. People are different here. We are this melting pot of greatness but also of a lot of hate unfortunately. We've seen it rear its ugly head in the past and most recently in the last couple years. This country was built with violence. I don't believe it would go down the same way here, I really don't. You Aussies are way more laid back :D
You haven't met many Aussie's, have you? :)

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 35,661
And1: 10,107
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#258 » by League Circles » Thu Jul 7, 2022 12:40 am

dougthonus wrote:I understand this and I agree with it.

What I don't understand is why are people against:
Gun registration (aimed at reducing illegal guns)
Waiting periods to purchase guns (aimed at stopping people from purchasing in moments of anger)
Licenses to own (which can be revoked based on triggered conditions like felony conditions, restraining order, mental health issues) and require background checks (aimed at reducing access to guns from individuals that may purposefully use them negatively)
Continuing education on safety (aimed at reducing accidents)
Accountability of gun owner for all incidents with their gun (encourages responsible gun ownership)

These all seem like pretty reasonable steps to me that don't infringe on your enjoyment of gun ownership in terms of hunting, shooting at ranges, sport, or your use of guns as a method of home / personal protection.

These are all things which would help move the needle for safety and over time reduce access to weapons from people you who shouldn't have them. It doesn't meaningfully inhibit any intended purposes or impose greater than current restrictions on types of weapons. It does require you a gun owner to put a bit of effort into the process, but that feels very reasonable.

registration is a good idea

waiting periods harm those who need protection most - people who have just learned of a threat to their lives - like their ex husband threatened to kill them and they can't get 24/7 police escort or afford private security

licenses to own is a good idea

expanded, and universal background checks are a good idea

continuing safety education isn't worthwhile to me. It's trivial to be safe with a gun, just as it is with a car, and a big chunk of people will never be responsible with them. But I just don't think gun accidents are a major problem for society. It's probably pretty rare and almost always impacts the gun user themselves or someone electively in their presence while they're being irresponsible with it

I like accountability of gun owners - with the exception of legit theft from reasonable security measures (like someone breaks into your house and takes your safe, uses some sort of industrial lazer saw to open it, and uses your gun to commit a murder)
https://august-shop.com/ - sneakers and streetwear
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 35,661
And1: 10,107
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#259 » by League Circles » Thu Jul 7, 2022 12:49 am

Stratmaster wrote:#2. The AR-15 is indeed an assault rifle, unless of course, you let the gun lobby provide the definition. Here is how it was defined when they were banned before:

 "a military-style weapon capable of firing multiple rounds, either semi-automatic or a fully automatic firearm."

The AR-15 falls into that description. The NRA says if it isn't fully automatic it isn't an assault rifle. So an AR can only kill people as fast as a person can repeatedly pull the trigger, versus just holding the trigger down. Is that really a discussion you want to participate in? 120-150 shots per minute isn't an assault weapon?

Fair enough, I had just looked at I think the wikipedia definition but I see even merriam webster includes something like an AR-15. BTW, I'd be open to figuring out the most appropriate way to regulate those. Off the top of my head, I'd say what makes most sense is to allow them to still be used, but only with 10 round magazines or maybe 15 or 17 tops (to equalize them with millions of handguns that we're not going to be able to confiscate). And to be 21 or older to purchase with a military service member exemption (you can't justify allowing 18-21 year olds to serve in war but be outarmed by 22 year old criminals at home).
https://august-shop.com/ - sneakers and streetwear
TheStig
RealGM
Posts: 14,795
And1: 3,973
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
Location: Get rid of GarPaxDorf

Re: OT: Highland Park 4th of July Parade Mass Shooting 

Post#260 » by TheStig » Thu Jul 7, 2022 12:50 am

Ctownbulls wrote:
TheStig wrote:
_txchilibowl_ wrote:

That's cherry picking your argument...

Unless I missed the story about a person driving through a school and taking out an entire elementary classroom...

Remind me again of the time that guy who took out a large number of concert goers with his SUV...

Maybe that one time when that guy knifed an entire gay bar to death...

Oh right...those were guns.

Anti-Gun Control people love to bring up the Waukesha driver and the guy who stabbed people on the bridge in London as proof that crazy people will still crazy. No ****. But it happens magnitudes less than it does with guns.

It's not the same thing.

You're being naive. Do you think these people with this hatred and mission will just fold because a gun is not available? Or more plausible they will find another way. There are plenty of examples of people using cars, knives and bombs. It's not like violent crime will stop the minute guns are not allowed. Like everything else, where there is a will, there is a way.
So is your solution just to say "**** it" it's going to happen anyway?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Look, Opoids kill more people and is a much higher epidemic. We still have those. Tons of people die from alcohol abuse, dui and alcohol related diseases, we still have that. Why are guns a bigger issue? We love the splashy headline because it's a big event but it's really not a signifigant source of death in this country from legally purchased guns. Most gun violence is from those involved in illegal activity and can't actually legally get a gun.

Return to Chicago Bulls