• 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!

Do pro gun people have some responsibility to fix the mass shooting problem?

Do pro gun people have some responsibility to fix the mass shooting problem?

  • Need more info

    Votes: 6 6.8%
  • Yes, pro gun people should help fix the problem

    Votes: 26 29.5%
  • No, they're not responsible in the slightest

    Votes: 56 63.6%

  • Total voters
    88
  • Poll closed .
Best way to stop mass shootings is to make it really cool to take out one difficult to shoot high-value world leader rather than a bunch of teens at the mall.

wut? :confused:
 
Thanks for a thoughtful and interesting reply.

The NRA is not innocent in what way?
Let me address this one last

Massachusetts has made bump stock possession punishable by life imprisonment.
Massachusetts makes a lot of really dumb gun laws.

Used to follow the Indy and the Unsers when they were still experimenting with different kinds of engines.

Here's my simple idea for universal background checks to close the private sale loophole.
Excellent ideas. Refreshing to see someone thinking about the problem instead of posting aggressive denial.

The NRA is not innocent in what way?
First let me say; I'm not interested in banning guns. The husband shoots competitively, is a member of the NRA . I used to read "The American Rifleman". In 1977 people with ties to the Republican Party and gun manufacturers took over. The focus turned from hunters, marksmanship and safety to sales political action against gun regulation and aggressive recruiting of elected officials. They were instrumental in getting a huge number of Senators and Representatives elected and working for NRA objectives. They became one of the biggest lobbying organizations in Washington DC using their political power to push laws that weaken regulation, block laws that would close loopholes and expand sales and ownership.

1. Concealed carry reciprocity: federal laws to override the laws of almost every state by forcing them to allow people with out-of-state concealed carry permits to carry a hidden loaded gun within a state that has restrictions again concealed weapons

2. Private gun sales loophole:unlicensed gun sellers are allowed to sell weapons without a background check of the buyer at gun shows and other private sales. Paradoxically, only licensed dealers are required to conduct such background checks, which gun control advocates see as crucial in cutting off the supply of weapons to criminals and mentally unstable individuals. The NRA strongly opposes legislation that would close this glaring loophole by requiring background checks for all gun sales.

Terror watch list:The NRA has strongly opposed legislation to prohibit the sale of guns to people on the federal government's terrorist watch list.

Stand-your-ground laws: lobbied for Florida's stand-your-ground law in 2005. Encouraged the passage of similar legislation in 24 other states, and now it is actively pursuing bills that would codify similar legislation in at least seven states: Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota (where the bill was vetoed by governor), Nebraska, New Jersey, New York and Washington.

Guns in school and on campus :legislation to allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on the campuses of state colleges and universities, primary and secondary schools overriding state laws and regulations.

Guns in the workplace: legislation prohibiting businesses and employers from banning guns in locked cars in parking lots.

Expand the right to carry hidden loaded guns into bars and restaurants.(Hmmm, bars, alcohol, loaded guns. What could possibly go wrong?)

Tracing guns used in shootings: data had been kept on the history of guns used in murders and shootings, which allowed police and policymakers to trace them back to corrupt dealerships and other holes in the system. The rule change, known as the Tiahrt amendment, made this data much harder to acquire. It also forced the justice department to destroy within 24 hours the records of any gun buyer whose background check was approved. The overall impact of the amendments was to make it much harder for police to clamp down on illegally distributed guns.

Revoking licences from corrupt dealers: virtually impossible – to revoke the gun-selling licenses of crooked dealers. If the bill passed – and the NRA is expected to try again soon – the ATF would have to prove the dealer's state of mind, in terms of his or her premeditated intention to break the law.
SOURCE: Mayors Against Illegal Guns; from ‘The Guardian’ 2012

Probably the most damaging: the NRA has successfully lobbied to restrict or stop funding for government agencies and universities studying any crime or violence connected to guns Dr. Garen Wintermute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, who had his C.D.C. financing cut in 1996, said, “For policy to be effective, it needs to be based on evidence,” “The National Rifle Association and its allies in Congress have largely succeeded in choking off the development of evidence upon which that policy could be based.”


The NRA's political activities have hampered police, prevented research, expanded the use and sales and have nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment right to "own and bear arms" and in this sense they are not "innocent".
 

Back in my day, they were called assassins, and they shot really famous people with bodyguards. World leaders knew they were potential targets and measures were taken for security. Now, rather than try to shoot someone like JFK they go after Walmart shoppers.
 
Yes, you can bear arms. Nothing in the Constitution prevents the government from defining what arms you can have.

Nothing in the constitution allows the federal government to ban arms that citizens would normally keep and bear. Now that has been modified a bit by Heller and it means firearms that are in common use and not UNUSUALLY Dangerous are protected. The Author of Heller stated (by his concurrence of a dissent on a denial of a writ of cert) that this means semi automatic rifles with detachable magazines.
 
Thanks for a thoughtful and interesting reply.


Let me address this one last


Massachusetts makes a lot of really dumb gun laws.


Used to follow the Indy and the Unsers when they were still experimenting with different kinds of engines.


Excellent ideas. Refreshing to see someone thinking about the problem instead of posting aggressive denial.


First let me say; I'm not interested in banning guns. The husband shoots competitively, is a member of the NRA . I used to read "The American Rifleman". In 1977 people with ties to the Republican Party and gun manufacturers took over. The focus turned from hunters, marksmanship and safety to sales political action against gun regulation and aggressive recruiting of elected officials. They were instrumental in getting a huge number of Senators and Representatives elected and working for NRA objectives. They became one of the biggest lobbying organizations in Washington DC using their political power to push laws that weaken regulation, block laws that would close loopholes and expand sales and ownership.

1. Concealed carry reciprocity: federal laws to override the laws of almost every state by forcing them to allow people with out-of-state concealed carry permits to carry a hidden loaded gun within a state that has restrictions again concealed weapons

2. Private gun sales loophole:unlicensed gun sellers are allowed to sell weapons without a background check of the buyer at gun shows and other private sales. Paradoxically, only licensed dealers are required to conduct such background checks, which gun control advocates see as crucial in cutting off the supply of weapons to criminals and mentally unstable individuals. The NRA strongly opposes legislation that would close this glaring loophole by requiring background checks for all gun sales.

Terror watch list:The NRA has strongly opposed legislation to prohibit the sale of guns to people on the federal government's terrorist watch list.

Stand-your-ground laws: lobbied for Florida's stand-your-ground law in 2005. Encouraged the passage of similar legislation in 24 other states, and now it is actively pursuing bills that would codify similar legislation in at least seven states: Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota (where the bill was vetoed by governor), Nebraska, New Jersey, New York and Washington.

Guns in school and on campus :legislation to allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on the campuses of state colleges and universities, primary and secondary schools overriding state laws and regulations.

Guns in the workplace: legislation prohibiting businesses and employers from banning guns in locked cars in parking lots.

Expand the right to carry hidden loaded guns into bars and restaurants.(Hmmm, bars, alcohol, loaded guns. What could possibly go wrong?)

Tracing guns used in shootings: data had been kept on the history of guns used in murders and shootings, which allowed police and policymakers to trace them back to corrupt dealerships and other holes in the system. The rule change, known as the Tiahrt amendment, made this data much harder to acquire. It also forced the justice department to destroy within 24 hours the records of any gun buyer whose background check was approved. The overall impact of the amendments was to make it much harder for police to clamp down on illegally distributed guns.

Revoking licences from corrupt dealers: virtually impossible – to revoke the gun-selling licenses of crooked dealers. If the bill passed – and the NRA is expected to try again soon – the ATF would have to prove the dealer's state of mind, in terms of his or her premeditated intention to break the law.
SOURCE: Mayors Against Illegal Guns; from ‘The Guardian’ 2012

Probably the most damaging: the NRA has successfully lobbied to restrict or stop funding for government agencies and universities studying any crime or violence connected to guns Dr. Garen Wintermute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, who had his C.D.C. financing cut in 1996, said, “For policy to be effective, it needs to be based on evidence,” “The National Rifle Association and its allies in Congress have largely succeeded in choking off the development of evidence upon which that policy could be based.”


The NRA's political activities have hampered police, prevented research, expanded the use and sales and have nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment right to "own and bear arms" and in this sense they are not "innocent".

there are no "gun show loopholes" and the federal government does not have the proper power to demand private sellers-who are LIMITED TO INTRA STATE sales conduct them. and when the law was passed, there was not nearly any support for making the new requirements apply to people who are neither required to keep records of what firearms they own, nor can engage in interstate commerce
 
Mandatory death penalty applied within 48 hours of conviction for all involved in a crime where a gun was present.
 
Mandatory death penalty applied within 48 hours of conviction for all involved in a crime where a gun was present.

Present or used ?
 
Mandatory death penalty applied within 48 hours of conviction for all involved in a crime where a gun was present.

That would put a big dent in the minority population.
 
All citizens have a responsibility to fix the mass-shooting problems. All should be discussing the problem, and offering solutions.
 
That would put a big dent in the minority population.

Criminals should be a very small minority of our population, with zero being the ultimate goal.
 
Medice, cura te ipsum
A frog leaves his native swamp and proclaims himself a wonder-working doctor. He is then asked by a sceptical fox how it is that he cannot cure his own lameness and sickly complexion. The fox’s taunt echoes the Greek proverb, "Physician, heal thyself", (Medice, cura te ipsum) which was current in Aesop’s time

The fable was Latinised by Avianus. When William Caxton featured the fable in 1484, cautioned against hypocrisy, quoting Luke 4:23, in which Jesus is quoted as saying, "Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, '"Physician, heal thyself”. Later when hanging on the Cross he is taunted by the Roman soldiers, “"He saved others; himself he cannot save”.

The moral of the proverb, a criticism of hypocrisy, is to attend to one's own defects before those in others.

(from pieces of Wikipedia)

Well that’s magical, and if I meant it in that context I’d have added the “Medice” in front of it. As it stand the words mean cure thyself. Taken in response to your quote that would mean look out for yourself or mind your own, which would clearly go with the implications I made when I asked why I would be responsible for another?

See in common usage what you wrote regarded 13 colonies making one nation, and in that makes little to no sense, so I figured you were going the more ancient route and going all Cicero on me, which make more sense and as such responded in kind.

I wonder, since it seems you don’t speak Latin are you aware that the vocabulary for that particular language is limited? Thereby demanding multiple levels of interpretation for the same words based on........context?

I’m choosing to view what you have done here as a mistake on your part rather than believing your intent was what for all appearances it looks like.
 
America should never settle for second best

Which is a hollow sentiment to make. Because one can just as easily equate that to telling all the other countries that suffer from gun violence, to simply go **** themselves.

We are nowhere near in as bad a way, as people are trying to make it.

You would need to define what you mean by more gun control, and then see if that meshes with the sensibilities of other Americans first, at the very least.
 
there are no "gun show loopholes" and the federal government does not have the proper power to demand private sellers-who are LIMITED TO INTRA STATE sales conduct them. and when the law was passed, there was not nearly any support for making the new requirements apply to people who are neither required to keep records of what firearms they own, nor can engage in interstate commerce




H. R. 820

To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 28, 2019
Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL
To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2019”.
 
Well that’s magical, and if I meant it in that context I’d have added the “Medice” in front of it. As it stand the words mean cure thyself. Taken in response to your quote that would mean look out for yourself or mind your own, which would clearly go with the implications I made when I asked why I would be responsible for another?

See in common usage what you wrote regarded 13 colonies making one nation, and in that makes little to no sense, so I figured you were going the more ancient route and going all Cicero on me, which make more sense and as such responded in kind.

I wonder, since it seems you don’t speak Latin are you aware that the vocabulary for that particular language is limited? Thereby demanding multiple levels of interpretation for the same words based on........context?

I’m choosing to view what you have done here as a mistake on your part rather than believing your intent was what for all appearances it looks like.

Right, no Latin, but I know Aesop, Mark and Luke and it's a commentary on hypocrisy with or without "physician"
 
How does a right that the founders believed existed long before the new government was created, demand membership in a government controlled entity to vest? a question NONE of the "militia rights" revisionists have even attempted to answer

Uh....guns were not very common or effective even in 1790 but especially long before then. You have to be quite a fantasist to think Hamilton and Madison cared so much about an indentured servants safety that they added this to the BOR so this poor wretch could use a flintlock against another poor wretch. Come on people.
 
Uh....guns were not very common or effective even in 1790 but especially long before then. You have to be quite a fantasist to think Hamilton and Madison cared so much about an indentured servants safety that they added this to the BOR so this poor wretch could use a flintlock against another poor wretch. Come on people.

How did the men in 1792 comply with the Militia Acts and provide a rifle, musket, or firelock within 6 months of registration? My cousin Judy on my mother's side has a rifle that may have been used by an ancestor during the American Revolution. She also has a collection of letters where he wrote of being at Valley Forge and wounded at Monmouth, after which he was given a pass to return home to heal. IIRC, he wrote of basic needs such as clothes, shoes, and food being in short supply, but never guns.

Here's something interesting about counting guns in early America. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1489&context=wmlr
 
Uh....guns were not very common or effective even in 1790 but especially long before then. You have to be quite a fantasist to think Hamilton and Madison cared so much about an indentured servants safety that they added this to the BOR so this poor wretch could use a flintlock against another poor wretch. Come on people.

I need a really good laugh given the US was able to break away from Britain, partially because citizens were able to use firearms to fight British regulars. Why don't you tell me what the wrong interpretation of the second amendment is
 
H. R. 820

To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 28, 2019
Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL
To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2019”.

How incredibly idiotic-==-a left wing gun banning asshole calls her unconstitutional nonsense a "loophole closing act" and you cite that as if it means anything.

Wow, talk about gullible

You clearly are ignorant of the brady law, why private sales were not and COULD NOT be included.
 
Thanks for a thoughtful and interesting reply ...


... The NRA's political activities have hampered police, prevented research, expanded the use and sales and have nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment right to "own and bear arms" and in this sense they are not "innocent".

You're welcome. Isn't that what debates are supposed to be about? I'm new here so I don't know the culture.

1. I think concealed carry reciprocity is a good thing. I used to date a flight attendant from Oklahoma based at BWI. She had a crash pad in Baltimore. I sure wanted my .380 Walther PPK I had at the time in that town at the very least. I would have preferred the 10th Mountain Division. Law-abiding citizens should be able to have the tools to defend themselves anywhere. I had that Walther PPK stolen. My brother was a law enforcement officer who borrowed it without telling me to use as a back-up weapon. When I found out, I said he could use it. When he quit to open a garage, I asked for it back. He had sold it. Which brings us to Point 2.

2. It would be great if we could register our guns where they couldn't be sold without the rightful owner being the seller like we do with cars and boats. I wouldn't have been out a handgun and a couple hundred dollars. The problem is that anyone can steal a gun and file off the serial number. On an episode of Homicide Hunter, a gun the police were trying to track down made its way into the criminal element and was passed through a ridiculous number of hands in a single day for drugs, prostitution, etc. My dad died and left me his .300 Savage, a kayak, and a Honda CRV. I'm a pick-up truck guy so I put a "For Sale" sign on the CRV and parked it near the road at my girlfriend's apartment in a very nice area along the Delaware River. While I was in Bermuda, someone stole it. Never recovered. For sure, vehicles have a VIN and registration. Yet, they get stolen all the time. The only benefit I can see for gun owners to a background check system for private sales, is something like I proposed, where you could get a background check card that would pre-clear you annually for firearms and any other hassles such as applying for jobs working with kids or even coming along to chaperone a scout camping trip. But, it could be skirted so easily as to be ineffective. If someone was selling an AR15 at a gun show, do you think they'd be persuaded to sell the gun outside the show for triple the money? Even if it had to be registered, it can easily vanish. We live in a world where "something needs to be done" but rarely the effective thing. Did you see the movie, "Air America," with Robert Downey, Jr. and Mel Gibson about the CIA pilots in Vietnam and SE Asia? There was a scene where Mel Gibson and Tim Thomerson begin to color in a coloring book while their plane is under anti-aircraft attack. Robert Downey, Jr. was left at the controls. That scene always reminds me of the "something needs to be done" atmosphere today. "We'll we can't do anything about the flak, but let's color to do something and make us feel better."

3. The terror watch list is no different than the police in your area tailing you because they think you might have done something. We are a nation of due process of law. Sure, if the police thought maybe you were involved in kidnapping a little girl, they should be able to grab you, waterboard you for information, threaten to crucify your husband if you don't talk ... I mean it's a LITTLE GIRL! At what point do we throw away due process?

4. Stand your ground laws put the law on the side of the lawful. Someone has a right to interpret a threat in context. The phrase, "You have a very beautiful daughter. I hope nothing happens to her," means one thing if you are talking to someone whose daughter is an army nurse going overseas and quite another if you have some Italian guys with broken noses asking for protection money.

5. When I was on my high school rifle team we could carry guns on the bus and put them in our lockers. I remember people bringing hunting rifles into school if they were going hunting after school with another kid. I brought a dummy grenade into school. Friends and I were setting it up with a trip wire to scare people. Someone told the vice principal. He took me out of lunch and asked if I had a grenade in my locker. I said I did. He wanted me to go get it. He looked at it and said, "Oh, it's a dummy!" Of course it was a dummy. He asked me if I knew how a grenade works, then gave it back and told me not to scare any teachers old enough to have a heart attack. This was Pennsylvania in the 80's. Now, it was in Pennsylvania where that kid was suspended for biting a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun.
 
Last edited:
6. If someone is going into a business to do harm, he's probably not going to obey gun laws. The closest police stations to me are both 20 - 25 minutes away. I live in a country town where I'm one of the few locals who ever went to college. Most of the men here have served in the military. I'm sure they'd do just fine if they could get to guns in their vehicles. The media tries to present the picture that modern man is dangerous and inept, like TV dads. I've been in lots of situations where the community came together in times of crisis and common people have done extraordinary things. We're losing faith in each other. There are lots of stories of a regular Joe using a gun to save co-workers.

7. A buddy of mine in college bartended in a biker bar. I asked him how that was. He said it was great. No drama. "Everyone's packing." Don't know how true that was. We have lots of bar shootings and stabbings on the local news. Typical northeastern PA bar shooting: Black guy with a criminal record from NYC, metro NJ, or Philly gets into a bar altercation in Wilkes-Barre or Hazelton and shoots 1 - 3 people. I don't think the bad guys are respecting the, "Please leave your guns at the Sheriff's office before enjoying the saloon," Dodge City ordinance now.

8. I really didn't know about gun tracing or dealer licensing. Interesting.

9. As for funding, the U of Pitt just did a study finding that only 18% of crimes were committed by gun owners. Don't know who funded it. But, I can understand why the NRA might feel uneasy about government. Look at the IRS abuses of conservative and Christian groups during the Obama years. The Democrats seem to be weaponizing government against Republicans and conservatives. I'm not sure gun studies would be conducted fairly. Scientists used to worship the purity of science. Now, more and more, we see scientists placing their beliefs ahead of data. My best friend from college uncovered that a popular drug didn't work during her Ph.D, thesis research in Psych. She wanted me to come to Philly and talk to her about a moral dilemma. At dinner, she told me that the head of the board that would review her thesis was a major shareholder in the very drug she proved didn't work. He threatened her saying if she didn't change data and support the drug he'd ruin her career. I told her truth is always the right way to go. She ended up falsifying her data to get her Ph.D. and have the guy's support in her career. She ended up becoming the Chief Behavioral Analyst of the Directorate of Counter-Intelligence and Field activity for the DOD. She really wrestled with his demands vs. her natural inclination to be honest.
 
Last edited:
How incredibly idiotic-==-a left wing gun banning asshole calls her unconstitutional nonsense a "loophole closing act" and you cite that as if it means anything.

Wow, talk about gullible

You clearly are ignorant of the brady law, why private sales were not and COULD NOT be included.

Hey, I didn't write the bill. Don't complain to me about what the House of Representatives calls their bills. If you have a quarrel with "This Act may be cited as the “Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2019” take it up the House; call them idiots.
 
Back
Top Bottom