Almost never talked about: the fact that many gun related crimes are committed by someone under 21

[C.R.]

Increased penalties can have unintended consequences. Massachusetts increased penalty for DUI; jail time is now punishable up to 30 months for first offense.
As a result of federal law 8 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), this means that anyone convicted of DUI in Massachusetts is now prohibited person and has lost right to possess a firearm.

Maybe they meant to do that though, it could be another way to make lawful gun owners into criminals, thinning the heard as it were

 

[wahsben]

Maybe they meant to do that though, it could be another way to make lawful gun owners into criminals, thinning the heard as it were

Being Massachusetts yes they probably did mean to do it.

 

[Aim1]

Exact case here, school shooter from yesterday only 17 and used his dad's legally owned gun. Also, a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with his gun.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/2...gally-owned-by-gunmans-father-police-say.html

Handgun used in Maryland high school shooting was legally owned by gunman's father, police say

By Ryan Gaydos | Fox News

The handgun used in a shooting at a Maryland high school was legally owned by the gunman’s father, authorities said Wednesday.

Austin Rollins, 17, brought the Glock 9mm pistol to Great Mills High School on Tuesday and opened fire, wounding a 16-year-old girl and a 14-year-old boy, the St. Mary’s County Sheriff’s Office said.

 

[JSH1]

Exact case here, school shooter from yesterday only 17 and used his dad's legally owned gun. Also, a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with his gun.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/2...gally-owned-by-gunmans-father-police-say.html

Sounds like a secure storage failure. A 17 year old should not have unsupervised access to handgun.

Good job by the trained officer.

 

[Aim1]

Sounds like a secure storage failure. A 17 year old should not have unsupervised access to handgun.

Good job by the trained officer.

Yeah, dad may get in trouble for having it not stored properly.

But what if his kids are grown (17 is grown up) and the father left the gun in his nightstand for safety....you don't want to have your self-defense handgun locked up all the time, or have to put it in a safe everytime you leave the room.

Also, I think in this state someone under 21 cannot even possess a handgun.

Obviously didn't stop him.

 

[JSH1]

The fact that this 17 year old got his hands on the gun is a failure on the part of the owner and that owner should be charged

All guns should be securely stored when minors are in the house. I do that with my own guns and I support legislation to make that the law nationally as it is in some states.

A 17 year old is not an adult nor are many “grown up”.

 

[Aim1]

The fact that this 17 year old got his hands on the gun is a failure on the part of the owner and that owner should be charged

All guns should be securely stored. I support legislation to make that the law

A 17 year old is not an adult nor are many “grown up”.

My father always kept a gun in his nightstand for self-defense. He showed it to us once when we were young and taught us gun safety. It stayed in his nightstand drawer all through our childhood and we never touched it.

 

[JSH1]

My father kept a gun in his closet. He taught us gun safety, how to shoot, and told us not to touch it. That didn’t keep my brother or I from touching it.

 

[Sistema1927]

I had unsupervised access to my personally owned guns at age 12 and thereafter.

It isn't the guns folks. We are raising generations of irresponsible persons of all ages these days.

 

[wahsben]

I was born in the 50's and guns were not locked up. They were in closets in corners of rooms, on gun racks hanging on the wall or they might be locked up in a fancy wooden cabinet with glass panels. No problems. I'd say it's more of a parenting problem and everything that these kids are exposed to now. Most can handle it but not all can. Safe storage laws don't guarantee that someone can't access the firearms and in some instances they may cost lives such as this instance: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2003/11/richard-poe/the-merced-pitchfork-murders/

 

[JN01]

Take away the illegal drug trade and a lot of the violence goes away. When the violence goes away the call to ban guns goes away. Until the violence goes away good meaning people are going to attempt to limit that violence by banning or restricting the tools used in the violence (guns). The NFA 1934 came directly from the violence CAUSED by prohibition of alcohol. So it has been for every major gun control legislation since.

Gotta disagree there. Legalizing drugs may lower the amount of drug trade related violence, but it would likely increase for other reasons. The gang bangers and organized crime members are not going to get legit jobs and become productive citizens just becase drugs are legalized- they will always have some way of making "easy" money, and it will likely include violence as side effect.

 

[Aim1]

MS-13 is home grown, founded in Los Angeles back in the 80's. Controlling our borders will not prevent drug violence. Where there is a market there will be a supplier. What we need to do is admit that our decades long prohibition on drugs has failed just as our previous prohibition of alcohol failed. We need to stop treating drug use as a criminal problem and start treating it as a medical problem. When that happens a lot of the crime that comes with drug trafficking will go away. Walgreens and Rite Aid don't shoot it out on the corner over turf.

Take away the illegal drug trade and a lot of the violence goes away. When the violence goes away the call to ban guns goes away. Until the violence goes away good meaning people are going to attempt to limit that violence by banning or restricting the tools used in the violence (guns). The NFA 1934 came directly from the violence CAUSED by prohibition of alcohol. So it has been for every major gun control legislation since.

This hasn’t been the case with legalizing marijuana in Colorado. They have seen people rob and burglarize pot stores shooting people in the process.

Also, people have been hurt and/or killed I believe walking into illegal pot fields.

 

[JSH1]

This hasn’t been the case with legalizing marijuana in Colorado. They have seen people rob and burglarize pot stores shooting people in the process.

Also, people have been hurt and/or killed I believe walking into illegal pot fields.

There is no need for illegal pot fields when you can grow pot legally in the open. Illegal field are likely supplying the illegal trade that exists all around Colorado.

Yes, pot stores will be robbed, just like any store. Liquor stores get robbed too but no one is seriously claiming we should ban booze.

The best example of drug decriminalizing is Portugal. They decriminalized hard and soft drugs back in 2001. The Cato Institute has a good write-up 10 years later.

Unfortunately the politicians on the right side of drug policy are on the wrong side of gun policy. That puts a voter like me in a dilemma.