• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A high school teacher's thoughts on Florida shooting

jaeger19 said:
Actually there is a lot in your post that doesn't make a lot of sense.

If there is a stop.. there has to be a probably cause for the stop.

Also.. if they register the firearm.. and they use it... how can they be identified easily?
Click to expand...

Because ballistics would be recorded for any registered gun prior to sale, so ballistics would be on file for any weapon used in a crime prior to its use. Easy to identify murder weapons.
 
TurtleDude said:
As a retired prosecutor, I feel a duty to edify people on the law

1) if you are a felon or another disqualified person pursuant to 18 USC 922, you commit a federal (and almost always a state felony) by merely possessing a firearm

as a result, if a cop has probable cause to stop you and he sees a firearm in plain sight in your possession, you are guilty of a federal and most likely state felony

2) if the law requires registration of firearms, that Law CANNOT BE USED to prosecute a felon or other 18 USC 922 prohibited person because of US V HAYNES which held that those who incriminate themselves by admitting possession of a firearm, cannot be charged for FAILURE TO SO INCRIMINATE themselves

3) if you pass a law making it illegal to possess an unregistered firearm you are essentially turning anyone who legally owns a firearm (ie has never committed a felony, a domestic violence misdemeanor etc) into a criminal if they failure to register the weapon. Studies in areas that have required registration to KEEP currently owned weapons after the sale of them was banned, show compliance rates of less than 20%.

SO TELL US-how does registration do ANYTHING to impede criminals (people who have committed crime before they obtained guns) who are armed?
Click to expand...

If they have committed a crime, (felony) they wounldn't have access to legal firearms. So if a police sees or searches and finds a firearm, that individual can be arrested and therefore impeded from future crime.

If they intend to commit a crime, they would likely not register the firearm for fear of detection should it be used in a crime. Therefore if a police detected or searched them and found a firearm, they could be apprehended and future crime impeded.

I find it hard to believe you're a former prosecutor. This is pretty basic logic and you just don't seem to understand the scenario.

It's not that you don't agree, perhaps you don't, it's that you don't even seem to understand the words. And that's a bit surprising for someone who once practiced law.

Additionally, a former prosecutor should care more to protect the lives of the innocent and the lives of police.
 
BreadConqueror said:
Because ballistics would be recorded for any registered gun prior to sale, so ballistics would be on file for any weapon used in a crime prior to its use. Easy to identify murder weapons.
Click to expand...

Damn the silliness continues. how are you going to get criminals to come in and give bullets as samples. DO you have even a shred of knowledge about how easy it is to change a barrel in a semi auto pistol or rifle? In a colt 45, a Beretta 92 or a Browning HP you can do it in less than a minute. of course if you run a rat tail file down the barrel three times you've changed the ballistic fingerprint as well.
 
BreadConqueror said:
If they have committed a crime, (felony) they wounldn't have access to legal firearms. So if a police sees or searches and finds a firearm, that individual can be arrested and therefore impeded from future crime.

THIS IS THE CURRENT LAW WITHOUT REGISTRATION

I find it hard to believe you're a former prosecutor. This is pretty basic logic and you just don't seem to understand the scenario.

It's not that you don't agree, perhaps you don't, it's that you don't even seem to understand the words. And that's a bit surprising for someone who once practiced law.

Additionally, a former prosecutor should care more to protect the lives of the innocent and the lives of police.
Click to expand...


i laugh at how silly your arguments are. gun laws that only impact honest gun owners-like registration DO NOT SAVE LIVES, rather they divert LAW ENFORCEMENT resources and actually cost lives
 
TurtleDude said:
Damn the silliness continues. how are you going to get criminals to come in and give bullets as samples. DO you have even a shred of knowledge about how easy it is to change a barrel in a semi auto pistol or rifle? In a colt 45, a Beretta 92 or a Browning HP you can do it in less than a minute. of course if you run a rat tail file down the barrel three times you've changed the ballistic fingerprint as well.
Click to expand...

You get the bullets from dealers...That's also pretty easy to understand.

All guns manufactured would have a ballistics record prior to sale.

Do you often find criminals take the bullets out of their victims before police arrive?

Should a registered gun be used, the ballistics are already on file and the weapon can be identified. It can be traced to the dealer, and if sold illegally they can be fined or shut down. If sold legally, the owner will be easily identified. If stolen, an additional crime can be charged against the suspect should they be found.

This is what law enforcement want.

They also want an assault weapon ban. We should support them in this.

https://www.policeone.com/gun-legis...d-citizens-the-best-solution-to-gun-violence/
 
TurtleDude said:
i laugh at how silly your arguments are. gun laws that only impact honest gun owners-like registration DO NOT SAVE LIVES, rather they divert LAW ENFORCEMENT resources and actually cost lives
Click to expand...

Seeing as this has never been tried in America, your claim is simply wrong.

You will need to provide evidence otherwise.
 
BreadConqueror said:
You get the bullets from dealers...That's also pretty easy to understand.

Do you often find criminals take the bullets out of their victims before police arrive?
Click to expand...

wow you completely missed the point

let me explain it to you so you won't make the mistake again

a gun has its ballistic fingerprint registered

a criminal gets hold of that gun
he changes the barrel or scrapes the rifling

now unless you catch him with the gun before he modifies it-what good does it do

your silly scenario requires the following suspension of reality

Joe the thug has a gun that has a registered ballistic pattern

Joe the thug shoots someone with that gun and is caught with the gun

you don't need the registration to convict him-you can convict him by matching the bullets to the victim and by punishing Joe for being a felon in possession

Scenario two-I have a gun so registered and it is stolen

A body is found and with the bullets the gun is traced to me
you still have to prove I shot the guy. The best you can do is claim I didn't report a stolen firearm and prove I KNEW IT WAS STOLEN

Scenario Three-Joe the thug had a registered ballistic fingerprint gun before he becomes a thug and he hides it

He knows the ballistic fingerprint IDs him

so he changes the barrel and shoots someone
 
BreadConqueror said:
Seeing as this has never been tried in America, your claim is simply wrong.

You will need to provide evidence otherwise.
Click to expand...

registration has been the law in Hawaii for decades. and de facto, the rule in California since the 50s

want to find any proof it has helped solve any crimes?
 
BreadConqueror said:
Because ballistics would be recorded for any registered gun prior to sale, so ballistics would be on file for any weapon used in a crime prior to its use. Easy to identify murder weapons.
Click to expand...

"Millions of dollars later, Maryland has officially decided that its 15-year effort to store and catalog the "fingerprints" of thousands of handguns was a failure.

Since 2000, the state required that gun manufacturers fire every handgun to be sold here and send the spent bullet casing to authorities. The idea was to build a database of "ballistic fingerprints" to help solve future crimes.

But the system — plagued by technological problems — never solved a single case. Now the hundreds of thousands of accumulated casings could be sold for scrap."

Maryland spent millions on gun database that solved no crimes. - Baltimore Sun
 
TurtleDude said:
wow you completely missed the point

let me explain it to you so you won't make the mistake again

a gun has its ballistic fingerprint registered

a criminal gets hold of that gun
he changes the barrel or scrapes the rifling

now unless you catch him with the gun before he modifies it-what good does it do

your silly scenario requires the following suspension of reality

Joe the thug has a gun that has a registered ballistic pattern

Joe the thug shoots someone with that gun and is caught with the gun

you don't need the registration to convict him-you can convict him by matching the bullets to the victim and by punishing Joe for being a felon in possession

Scenario two-I have a gun so registered and it is stolen

A body is found and with the bullets the gun is traced to me
you still have to prove I shot the guy. The best you can do is claim I didn't report a stolen firearm and prove I KNEW IT WAS STOLEN

Scenario Three-Joe the thug had a registered ballistic fingerprint gun before he becomes a thug and he hides it

He knows the ballistic fingerprint IDs him

so he changes the barrel and shoots someone
Click to expand...

Scenario 1 - If he scraped the rifling, or changes the barrel, he has violated the registration and would be in possession of an illegal firearm.

If someone is found with such a weapon it would be seized and they charged. Again, proving my point of the effectiveness.

Scenario 2 - Why the HELL didn't you report it stolen? You would be an idiot. You would also be rightly a suspect. And police would be right to investigate you.

Even now, if a crime is committed with a stolen weapon and you failed to report it, you would be a suspect if it had your prints or if it were discovered to be yours.

So this scenario makes very little sense.

Scenario 3 - Where did her get the new barrel? It would also have ballistic registration. Did he mar that one too? If so, he is in possession of an illegally modified part, another possible charge and another barrier to easy criminal action. Also another cost. Why do you not want to impede easy crime? It seems like you are resigned to enable criminals and prevent law enforcement from having avenues to prevent crime.
 
Last edited:
BreadConqueror said:
They also want an assault weapon ban. We should support them in this.

https://www.policeone.com/gun-legis...d-citizens-the-best-solution-to-gun-violence/
Click to expand...

From your link:

"And when it comes to finding ways to reduce gun violence and large scale shootings, most cops say a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” isn’t the answer. More than 91 percent of respondents say it would either have no effect or a negative effect in reducing violent crime. This is an overwhelming response by those whose job it is to actually deal with this issue on the front lines."
 
Rucker61 said:
"Millions of dollars later, Maryland has officially decided that its 15-year effort to store and catalog the "fingerprints" of thousands of handguns was a failure.

Since 2000, the state required that gun manufacturers fire every handgun to be sold here and send the spent bullet casing to authorities. The idea was to build a database of "ballistic fingerprints" to help solve future crimes.

But the system — plagued by technological problems — never solved a single case. Now the hundreds of thousands of accumulated casings could be sold for scrap."

Maryland spent millions on gun database that solved no crimes. - Baltimore Sun
Click to expand...

It is not something that a single state can do. It has to be universal. Otherwise criminals just go to a different state.

So this argument isn't very strong either.

This is also why city-based gun control is ineffective. You just go outside of the city.

But it's a hell of a lot harder to go to Mexico for a gun than to go to the nextdoor city.
 
Rucker61 said:
From your link:

"And when it comes to finding ways to reduce gun violence and large scale shootings, most cops say a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” isn’t the answer. More than 91 percent of respondents say it would either have no effect or a negative effect in reducing violent crime. This is an overwhelming response by those whose job it is to actually deal with this issue on the front lines."
Click to expand...

You're right, that poll did demonstrate that opinion, allow me to provide another:

Police officers tend to be gun owners and advocates of the second amendment, that doesn't mean they don't want reasonable gun laws.

https://www.npr.org/2015/10/09/446866939/gun-debate-divides-nations-police-officers-too

“What is alarming to the police is that they have no power to ascertain the potential criminal background of an armed individual until a crime is committed, and by then it is too late,” said Ladd Everitt, the spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, an advocacy group."

"The objections to these laws are not only about officer safety. Law enforcement officials also argue that creating more exceptions to gun regulations will impede investigations. The discovery of an unpermitted weapon typically gives officers probable cause to conduct searches, but some of the new laws could take away that option."

'“It is absolutely ludicrous to me that we require people to go take a test to get a driver’s license, but we are allowing people to carry a deadly weapon on their person without any procedures regulating it,” Chief Sauschuck said.'



My suggestion would help with this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/us/as-states-expand-gun-rights-police-join-opposition.html

"Our bad guys with guns learn nothing because the laws are so weak, and we need help," Flynn said. "And I would like to think that people who think of themselves as advocates for law enforcement could get that through their skull."
 
BreadConqueror said:
My father was an NRA member for decades, but after Sandy Hook, when I was first beginning to teach, he told me he could no longer give money to an organization which refused to address this real issue.

My father is one of the most conservative people I personally know. He and I argue constantly about taxation, spending, militarism, etc., yet on this issue, we are in agreement.

The NRA is not a force protecting gun rights. It is an organization which shields manufacturers and distributors, not owners.
Click to expand...
Yes I prefer the GOA over the NRA myself.

BreadConqueror said:
We have a crisis in this nation, born of desperation and hateful rhetoric. This is the same cause for the rise of fascism and Trump. The same cause for the perpetuation of our historically inherited sectarian struggles.

Our schools are highly organized, structured and rigid. They are designed and scheduled with this concern in mind, that at any time, some crazed or distraught individual could harm dozens of our children on a whim. Because they certainly will have access to the tools to make that easy.
Click to expand...
Yet school shootings were virtually non existent some 50 to 60 years ago and guns were easier to legally get back then.

BreadConqueror said:
A crazed teen with a knife is much less dangerous than one with a long-rifle.
Click to expand...
A crazed anybody is dangerous to have running loose period.

BreadConqueror said:
I am southern, I hunt, (especially ducks), I fish, (brim and perch are delicious!), i own guns. I advocate for responsible gun laws.

I would voluntarily register my weapons. I would submit to mental health screening. I would apply for licenses for those firearms were they mandated.
Click to expand...
So you want to have mommy government take care of you, just like all those snowflake leftists. That's what you portray when you talk about registering your guns and wanting licenses and all.

BreadConqueror said:
I am an anarchist. I believe in resistance to illegitimate authority. I believe violence is sometimes necessary and appropriate to preserve liberty.
Click to expand...
You're not an anarchist judging from the content of your post. An anarchist believes in no rules whatsoever. You certainly believe in rules. Im not saying that's a bad thing, Im just saying you're not an anarchist.

BreadConqueror said:
Why is it so difficult for gun-rights advocates to give some ground on this issue? Innocent children are dead, again. Dozens have been killed this year alone.
Click to expand...
And that is why we need to put away people who do stuff like this. There were warning signs.
BreadConqueror said:
This is not an issue isolated to firearm availability. That is only one VERY LARGE aspect of this issue.
Click to expand...
And if the psychopaths don't have guns available they will just build bombs or use gasoline and light up buildings or drive vehicles into crowds. They will find ways to hurt people, its that simple.

BreadConqueror said:
This is an issue of mental health, and the causes for distress among Americans. The causes are clear. Economic anxiety, a fear-culture propagated by the media and state for the purpose of control, segmentation of society and communities along arbitrary grounds, xenophobia and isolationist culture, interpersonal politics, the structure of the classroom-to-retail education for the lucky, the classroom-to-prison pipeline for the unlucky.
Click to expand...
This is a mental health issue , that is for sure.

BreadConqueror said:
This is a cultural issue, and a large part of that culture is born of this refusal to even address, discuss and consider legislative solutions and voluntary sacrifices to make the nation a safer, healthier place.

I would give up every gun I had, every future morning on the lake or in the woods, if it meant one of these 17 kids would still be alive today.
Click to expand...
None of your guns were used in the shooting, were they? Therefore giving them up wouldn't've stopped the shooting. Giving them up now and giving up your mornings on the lake and in the woods certainly won't bring them back.
 
Last edited:
BreadConqueror said:
Because ballistics would be recorded for any registered gun prior to sale, so ballistics would be on file for any weapon used in a crime prior to its use. Easy to identify murder weapons.
Click to expand...

Oh.. so now you have "ballistics that have been recorded". And of course then when a criminal points a firearm at a clerk.. and she hands them the money.. and he runs away... the clerk will be able to identify the bullets in the firearm.

Oh wait.. so the criminal whenever they fire the weapon.. will be sure to hit a surface in which the bullet is not deformed so that the rifling is clear and evident on the bullet!!!

Hey.. maybe we should see how effective such programs have been? What a novel idea..

Oh wait:


November 7, 2015, 8:31 PM



Millions of dollars later, Maryland has officially decided that its 15-year effort to store and catalog the "fingerprints" of thousands of handguns was a failure.

Since 2000, the state required that gun manufacturers fire every handgun to be sold here and send the spent bullet casing to authorities. The idea was to build a database of "ballistic fingerprints" to help solve future crimes.


But the system — plagued by technological problems never solved a single case. Now the hundreds of thousands of accumulated casings could be sold for scrap.
Click to expand...
"

Maryland spent millions on gun database that solved no crimes. - Baltimore Sun

New York State Abandons Useless CoBIS Ballistics Database

When New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the NY state budget into law last week, this had the effect of immediately eliminating the Combined Ballistics Identification System (CoBIS), New York’s ineffective ballistic identification database. (Importantly, the New York budget bill did NOT contain a microstamping provision.) The end of CoBIS is a major victory for law-abiding firearms owners throughout the state of New York. CoBIS was set up and launched in 2000 by then Gov. George Pataki. In the words of the New York Post: “Trouble is, the Pataki program NEVER worked. Despite the hundreds of thousands of spent shells submitted, not one criminal was ever captured using the extensive and costly-to-maintain database, state officials concede.”
Click to expand...
 
BreadConqueror said:
It is not something that a single state can do. It has to be universal. Otherwise criminals just go to a different state.

So this argument isn't very strong either.

This is also why city-based gun control is ineffective. You just go outside of the city.

But it's a hell of a lot harder to go to Mexico for a gun than to go to the nextdoor city.
Click to expand...


Ahhh .. the old snake oil salesmans trick... if it didn't work.. then you need to TAKE MORE.

Certainly you would think.. if it was so effective.. then at least ONE crime would have been solved by it..

By the way.. It wasn;t city based gun control.. it was state based gun control. Over 15 years.. not one case solved.
 
I don't see why this kid in Florida would have objected to his gun being registered anyway. It's the last time he was planning on using it.
 
BreadConqueror said:
Scenario 1 - If he scraped the rifling, or changes the barrel, he has violated the registration and would be in possession of an illegal firearm.
.
Click to expand...

and pray tell how would that be determined in your traffic stop? By the way. the barrels are often changed when they wear out.

Scenario 2 - Why the HELL didn't you report it stolen? You would be an idiot.
Click to expand...

I use my firearm so rarely I had no idea that it had been stolen.

Even now, if a crime is committed with a stolen weapon and you failed to report it, you would be a suspect if it had your prints or if it were discovered to be yours.
Click to expand...

So a ton of time would be wasted investigating an innocent person.

Where did her get the new barrel? It would also have ballistic registration
Click to expand...

Nope. not true. replacement barrels are not ballistically registered.

Why do you not want to impede easy crime
Click to expand...
?

you haven't impeded anything. REgistration does not impede crime. Heck.. Canada has registration of handguns... and the preferred weapon among Canadian criminals? Handguns.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
No. Crazy people having easy access to guns is a problem.
Click to expand...
That being the case crazy people should be put away. And I don't care if doing so is expensive just look at how much we spend putting and keeping people in prison.

<alt>doxygen said:
I think these two things are true:
We will always have crazy people. We will always have guns.
Click to expand...
And if we had just guns but not crazy people there would be no problem. If we had just crazy people and not guns that would be a big problem. Crazy people are dangerous and taking away guns isn't going to change that. As I've said time and time again crazy people don't need guns to harm people.

<alt>doxygen said:
So, as a society, what should we do?
Click to expand...
As I said, we should put crazy people away.
 
upsideguy said:
Sorry, but guns are tools of death. They are in the wrong hands. They are part of the problem. A hard, honest look at guns is part of the answer.....
Click to expand...
No guns are tools for throwing small pieces of metal at high speeds. What purpose that serves depends on the user.
 
DebateChallenge said:
That being the case crazy people should be put away. And I don't care if doing so is expensive just look at how much we spend putting and keeping people in prison.


And if we had just guns but not crazy people there would be no problem. If we had just crazy people and not guns that would be a big problem. Crazy people are dangerous and taking away guns isn't going to change that. As I've said time and time again crazy people don't need guns to harm people.


As I said, we should put crazy people away.
Click to expand...

No argument from me there. The issue people will have with that is allowing anyone the authority to "put people away". If this didn't concern the 2ndA and guns, most of those objecting voices would probably stop objecting.

I generally try to stay out of gun debates because many who get involved are running on pure emotion and they just sling slogans and absolutist stances at each other. I don't think guns are the problem. Not even some subset of guns. Guns are tools. Some people clearly can't handle those tools safely.
 
BreadConqueror said:
Your post really isn't very useful. This happens in churches and concerts. This is not a school issue. This is a cultural one.
Click to expand...


So what you are now claiming is that this is a "diversity" issue?
 
A crime requires means, motive, and opportunity.

So, which is most important to address?
 
BreadConqueror said:
I am a high school teacher living and working in Louisiana.

I am a southern born conservative, who years ago rejected party politics. I am not a partisan, and I have no political loyalties.

My father was an NRA member for decades, but after Sandy Hook, when I was first beginning to teach, he told me he could no longer give money to an organization which refused to address this real issue.

My father is one of the most conservative people I personally know. He and I argue constantly about taxation, spending, militarism, etc., yet on this issue, we are in agreement.

The NRA is not a force protecting gun rights. It is an organization which shields manufacturers and distributors, not owners.

We have a crisis in this nation, born of desperation and hateful rhetoric. This is the same cause for the rise of fascism and Trump. The same cause for the perpetuation of our historically inherited sectarian struggles.

Our schools are highly organized, structured and rigid. They are designed and scheduled with this concern in mind, that at any time, some crazed or distraught individual could harm dozens of our children on a whim. Because they certainly will have access to the tools to make that easy.

A crazed teen with a knife is much less dangerous than one with a long-rifle.

I am southern, I hunt, (especially ducks), I fish, (brim and perch are delicious!), i own guns. I advocate for responsible gun laws.

I would voluntarily register my weapons. I would submit to mental health screening. I would apply for licenses for those firearms were they mandated.

I am an anarchist. I believe in resistance to illegitimate authority. I believe violence is sometimes necessary and appropriate to preserve liberty.

Why is it so difficult for gun-rights advocates to give some ground on this issue? Innocent children are dead, again. Dozens have been killed this year alone.

This is not an issue isolated to firearm availability. That is only one VERY LARGE aspect of this issue.

This is an issue of mental health, and the causes for distress among Americans. The causes are clear. Economic anxiety, a fear-culture propagated by the media and state for the purpose of control, segmentation of society and communities along arbitrary grounds, xenophobia and isolationist culture, interpersonal politics, the structure of the classroom-to-retail education for the lucky, the classroom-to-prison pipeline for the unlucky.

This is a cultural issue, and a large part of that culture is born of this refusal to even address, discuss and consider legislative solutions and voluntary sacrifices to make the nation a safer, healthier place.

I would give up every gun I had, every future morning on the lake or in the woods, if it meant one of these 17 kids would still be alive today.

I'll cut this short, because it's hard to write without thinking about my kids and my students and what it would feel like to have this happen where I teach.
Click to expand...
Last a checked a background check was needed to get a license for a gun. Last I checked owning a gun was a right, cars kill many times more innocent people every day and driving is not a right, but there are still cars and drunks allowed on the roads.
 
BreadConqueror said:
Scenario 1 - If he scraped the rifling, or changes the barrel, he has violated the registration and would be in possession of an illegal firearm.
Click to expand...

Scraping the rifling on the barrel or changing barrels does not make a gun illegal. People change barrels all the time. Scraping out or defacing the serial number is what makes it illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom