Turkeytider
Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2021
- Messages
- 622
I`m seeing more references to " The majority of Americans being in favor" of a ban. Obviously this would include the multitude of AR platforms.
Exactly the crux. "SOMETHING" needs to happen, even if the "SOMETHING" is a proven failure, because it is easier to be perceived as doing "SOMETHING" than to address the real issues.Regardless of political persuasion, I can`t imagine anyone of ANY political persuasion not agreeing that we have a problem in our nation with violence perpetrated with the use of firearms, and I`m not just referring to these mass shootings, as horrific as they are. I also believe that it goes without saying that the rub comes in when trying to determine what to do about it. SOMETHING needs to happen. Hopefully it can be agreed that there are individuals (we all probably know some! ) in our society that should not have access to firearms. Of course, a firearm is something that`s an easy target for political action. You can see it, feel it, it`s finite, as opposed to hard-to-get-your-arms-around things such as mental health and all that things like that entail. Not to mention the fact that it`s a hell of a lot cheaper to pass laws and bans than to deal with mental health on a grand scale. And that doesn`t even begin to impact the deep societal issues that have played a major role, IMHO, that have gotten us to this point in the first place.
I agree that this is the direction it would take, if anything at all is done. The betting, of course, is that nothing will be done.Considering school shooters are ~18 years old, you're more likely to see legislation proposed to make 21 the age to purchase any firearm.
Regardless of political persuasion, I can`t imagine anyone of ANY political persuasion not agreeing that we have a problem in our nation with violence perpetrated with the use of firearms
This is the time for the pro-gun side to demand concessions. A "compromise" means that we get something, not that we give up less than what is originally proposed. How about repealing the Hughes Amendment?
Negotiation 101 says that you state your maximalist demands first, and then go from there. The problem for gun owners is that they always act defensively when things like this happen.Yeah, and I would like a unicorn to bring be ice cream sprinkled with fairy dust.
Crimes take place because of the confluence of Means, Motive, and Opportunity. Crimes can be prevented if we break the linkages between these three. In the case of mass shootings, the Means are the guns, the Motive is the general craziness of maladjusted people, and the Opportunity is soft targets such as schools, churches, and shopping centers. We're already doing what we can (obviously not enough) to harden the targets. We can't remove the guns or the crazy people. So the only thing left is to try to prevent the crazy people from linking up with the guns. We need to think seriously about how to do this, while letting non-crazy people keep their guns.Do you think that’s because of laws against guns or policies that allow crime to flourish?
Yet another poltical and media lie, as is the lie about "this only happens in the U.S." Sen. Cruz missed a golden opportunity to rebut that. Doesn't he know the worst mass mruders have occurred in other countries? On a per-capita basis the U.S. is well down on the rankings.I`m seeing more references to " The majority of Americans being in favor" of a ban.
If you passed a law that all children have to go to church Sunday school and bible camp, it would a lot farther to ending school shootimgs than any gun law could.Regardless of political persuasion, I can`t imagine anyone of ANY political persuasion not agreeing that we have a problem in our nation with violence perpetrated with the use of firearms, and I`m not just referring to these mass shootings, as horrific as they are. I also believe that it goes without saying that the rub comes in when trying to determine what to do about it. SOMETHING needs to happen. Hopefully it can be agreed that there are individuals (we all probably know some! ) in our society that should not have access to firearms. Of course, a firearm is something that`s an easy target for political action. You can see it, feel it, it`s finite, as opposed to hard-to-get-your-arms-around things such as mental health and all that things like that entail. Not to mention the fact that it`s a hell of a lot cheaper to pass laws and bans than to deal with mental health on a grand scale. And that doesn`t even begin to impact the deep societal issues that have played a major role, IMHO, that have gotten us to this point in the first place.
Agree wholeheartedly with your last two statements. Unfortunately, those may prove too complex and/or expensive to get political traction. Far easier ( and cheaper ) to go after the tools and/or impose blanket restrictions on the public as a whole in the form of sweeping bans or legal dictates.Crimes take place because of the confluence of Means, Motive, and Opportunity. Crimes can be prevented if we break the linkages between these three. In the case of mass shootings, the Means are the guns, the Motive is the general craziness of maladjusted people, and the Opportunity is soft targets such as schools, churches, and shopping centers. We're already doing what we can (obviously not enough) to harden the targets. We can't remove the guns or the crazy people. So the only thing left is to try to prevent the crazy people from linking up with the guns. We need to think seriously about how to do this, while letting non-crazy people keep their guns.
If you passed a law that all children have to go to church Sunday school and bible camp, it would a lot farther to ending school shootimgs than any gun law could.