And today's American mass shooting....

brassplyer said:
I'm not "still" saying something I never said to begin with. You posed an invalid, loaded question which goes along with your invalid premises.

Extra licensing on a weapon that's involved in a tiny fraction of gun crimes is pointless.

You call it "my" NRA - I'm not a member. However apparently you're not aware that the NRA has for years promoted tightening the NICS system and having law enforcement uniformly and consistently report felony convictions to the NICS database.

Fun fact - to date no mass shooter has been an NRA member.

Another fun fact - the NRA has never promoted committing crimes with firearms.

Let's acquaint you with some reality regarding how criminals often obtain guns.











Etc, etc.
Click to expand...

Why is the question invalid? Everything is a choice. You’re choosing to resist adding regulations that would keep people more safe. You don’t want to be inconvenienced over something because not enough people are dying from it. So how many would have to die for you to change your mind?

Regarding the NRA, they’ve been preventing legislation for decades. Doesn’t matter if shooters aren’t members, their guns were more easy to get thanks to the NRA. But you knew that.

Regarding stolen guns, there should be stiffer penalties for not securing weapons better. Insurance should be on these weapons to cover liabilities if they end up used in a crime. You treat this like it’s too complicated to actually fix the problem. Gun stores should keep their shit in a safe. Smash and grabs at a gun store shouldn’t be a thing. Maybe we don’t need retail stores for guns at all. Maybe they get purchased on line and shipped to a law enforcement center for pick up. There are solutions, again you just don’t want to be inconvenienced. Not enough people dying for you to be bothered.
 
leddy said:
Why is the question invalid? Everything is a choice. You’re choosing to resist adding regulations that would keep people more safe. You don’t want to be inconvenienced over something because not enough people are dying from it. So how many would have to die for you to change your mind?

Regarding the NRA, they’ve been preventing legislation for decades. Doesn’t matter if shooters aren’t members, their guns were more easy to get thanks to the NRA. But you knew that.

Regarding stolen guns, there should be stiffer penalties for not securing weapons better. Insurance should be on these weapons to cover liabilities if they end up used in a crime. You treat this like it’s too complicated to actually fix the problem. Gun stores should keep their shit in a safe. Smash and grabs at a gun store shouldn’t be a thing. Maybe we don’t need retail stores for guns at all. Maybe they get purchased on line and shipped to a law enforcement center for pick up. There are solutions, again you just don’t want to be inconvenienced. Not enough people dying for you to be bothered.
Click to expand...
You're spewing talking points. Your regulations *wouldn't* keep more people safe. When AR-style rifles were banned altogether there was no demonstrable impact on mass shootings. You're of course going to look up some fringe leftist source that insists it did but they're lying. The very fact that Joe Biden makes the claim tells you it's bs. You keep ignoring that your fixation on AR-style weapons is bogus - they're not a major factor in crime.

There are already laws in place if a child gets hold of a gun and gets hurt or killed.

And of course you're moving the goalpost from your original assertion as to how illicit guns get into circulation because you're only regurgitating talking points someone else handed you, you've never actually looked at reality.

And did you know - murder, armed robbery are universally illegal everywhere? It's already known who commits most of the crime. Are you someone who's all for various soft-on-crime policies "because equity"? Welfare state policies that do nothing but fund the class that serves as an incubator for the vast majority of crime including gun crime? Do you get offended that anyone would ask such a valid question? If so, congratulations - you're part of the problem.
 
brassplyer said:
You're spewing talking points. Your regulations *wouldn't* keep more people safe.
Click to expand...
How can you possibly say that? Compare the US to any country with more regulation and see the result. You are completely delusional.
brassplyer said:
When AR-style rifles were banned altogether there was no demonstrable impact on mass shootings. You're of course going to look up some fringe leftist source that insists it did but they're lying. The very fact that Joe Biden makes the claim tells you it's bs. You keep ignoring that your fixation on AR-style weapons is bogus - they're not a major factor in crime.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying to ban them. I’m saying to require additional permitting and insurance, along with stronger background and mental health checks.
brassplyer said:
There are already laws in place if a child gets hold of a gun and gets hurt or killed.

And of course you're moving the goalpost from your original assertion as to how illicit guns get into circulation because you're only regurgitating talking points someone else handed you, you've never actually looked at reality.
Click to expand...
So ALL illegal guns are from smash and grabs at gun stores? Bullshit. Wtf are you even saying here? Wtf goal posts did I move?
brassplyer said:
And did you know - murder, armed robbery are universally illegal everywhere? It's already known who commits most of the crime. Are you someone who's all for various soft-on-crime policies "because equity"? Welfare state policies that do nothing but fund the class that serves as an incubator for the vast majority of crime including gun crime? Do you get offended that anyone would ask such a valid question? If so, congratulations - you're part of the problem.
Click to expand...
You are probably incapable of understanding all the factors that lead to where we are given the insensitivity you’ve shown so far. You want to have a simple explanation where you and your kind are smarter and more civilized, and life would be fine if everyone walked around with a gun on their hip like the old west.

Whatever. Putting all the bullshit aside, what do you suggest would curb the gun violence, be it gang shootings in Chicago or school shootings elsewhere? Or do you not care?
 
I went to a festival today. 4 great bands, good food, good beer, good company.

Although it was hot it didn’t bother me. I was in the mixing tent shaded from the direct sunlight.

It was a good day and no one argued or got shot.

Nice to take a break and just live life.
 
brassplyer said:
You're spewing talking points. Your regulations *wouldn't* keep more people safe.
Click to expand...

leddy said:
How can you possibly say that? Compare the US to any country with more regulation and see the result. You are completely delusional.
Click to expand...
Easy - I look at reality and report what the reality is.

So you want to do it like England where they also arrest people for hurting people's feelings online? No thanks.

One big difference between other places and the US - they don't have a Chicago, Compton, S. Central LA, Memphis, Newark, etc. etc.

leddy said:
I’m not saying to ban them. I’m saying to require additional permitting and insurance, along with stronger background and mental health checks.
Click to expand...
Still pointless for the same reason - their use in the commission of crimes represents a tiny fraction of the crime problem.

leddy said:
You are probably incapable of understanding all the factors that lead to where we are given the insensitivity you’ve shown so far. You want to have a simple explanation where you and your kind are smarter and more civilized, and life would be fine if everyone walked around with a gun on their hip like the old west.
Click to expand...
Actually I think open carry is a bad idea. I'm aware that it makes a lot of people uncomfortable but primarily tactically it's dumb - ideally the first awareness a criminal should have that you have a gun is when they're bleeding out on the floor.

What I *am* for is that if someone is shot in the commission of a crime they don't get to sue the person who shot them. That happens far too often - Larry Lowlife or his Lowlife relatives suing someone who shot Larry in self defense.

I see you dodged the topic of whether you support soft on crime policies. Gave you a chance to disavow them, you didn't.
 
brassplyer said:
I see you dodged the topic of whether you support soft on crime policies. Gave you a chance to disavow them, you didn't.
Click to expand...
I absolutely do not support being soft on crime. You make too many assumptions. Speaking of dodging questions,
leddy said:
what do you suggest would curb the gun violence, be it gang shootings in Chicago or school shootings elsewhere? Or do you not care?
Click to expand...
 
I keep seeing this "insurance" thing mentioned. I'm not sure how that is supposed to work. What happens if you allow your insurance coverage to lapse, or fail to renew.

My auto insurance is due for renewal on the 6th of this month, actually expires at midnight in the 5th. I checked a box when I registered that vehicle which stated I have an insurance policy on that vehicle. Signed, gave my word. I could renew my policy, I could either by mistake or on purpose allow the insurance to lapse. Could be it slipped my mind, could be I figured I'm a safe driver with no use of insurance for decades, no claims waste of dough, could be having financial issues. What happens if I don't pay? Nothing. Well, I could be chosen randomly and sent a letter by the department of motor vehicles requiring me to provide proof of insurance. What happens then? If I cannot provide proof because I do not have insurance, do they come take my car? No. They suspend my license to drive. What happens then? Nothing. Well, nothing unless in still choosing to drive I am stopped by the police and they determine I am driving without a license, at which point they will probably determine I am uninsured as well. Seems to me, if I fail to insure that vehicle, nothing happens, or something happens only after I have already driven the vehicle.

So I ask, how would this gun ownership insurance thing work? Create a huge bureaucracy, to what end? I'm listening, but it doesn't seem as simple a (partial?) solution as one might suggest.
 
Mick Doobie said:
I keep seeing this "insurance" thing mentioned. I'm not sure how that is supposed to work. What happens if you allow your insurance coverage to lapse, or fail to renew.
Click to expand...
I think there’s a fallacy that if something doesn’t work as intended 100% of the time, it’s not worth doing at all. With respect to curbing gun violence, there’s probably a dozen small things we could do that would all make a small impact, but put together might be significant.

In your example, it could simply cause your insurance company to be obligated to send notice to the state and they could impose fines etc to force compliance. Difficult, not really. Bureaucratic? For sure. So is going to the DMV. I get that, but at the same time we’re talking about devices that make it really easy to end someone’s life. In a civilized society, I think some bureaucracy is a small price to pay.
 
RFR said:
I went to a festival today. 4 great bands, good food, good beer, good company.

Although it was hot it didn’t bother me. I was in the mixing tent shaded from the direct sunlight.

It was a good day and no one argued or got shot.

Nice to take a break and just live life.
Click to expand...

Legit argument.

Sounds like fun. What kind of bands did you see? (Among others) That's one thing I'm going to miss about the beach. Although I hadn't been for a while, and not even sure they still hold it, one of my favorites was the Bayou Boogaloo. Cajun festival. Good food(crawfish ettoufee, mm), Zydeco and some squeeze box action, maybe a little Dr. John(if he was still alive), a Neville brother, or two, or more, New Orleans jazz, just an all around good vibe. Them Cajuns know how to have a good time. Aieeee!
 
Mick Doobie said:
What happens if I don't pay? Nothing. Well, I could be chosen randomly and sent a letter by the department of motor vehicles requiring me to provide proof of insurance. What happens then? If I cannot provide proof because I do not have insurance, do they come take my car? No.
Click to expand...
Here in England, police cars automatically scan all the license plates. If the car has no insurance, they seize it, and crush it, you walk home, and get fined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top