How to prevent a would-be killer with a clean slate from purchasing firearm

[Irredentist]

it also creates massive violence, many collateral criminal activities, and governmental corruption. And when you ban something that is easily supplied, you don't remove the item from those most likely to violate the laws.

gun control laws are not crime control laws--they are a cultural weapon leftwing activists use to attack their political enemies and to pander to stupid people

Heroin and crack aren't easily supplied. They involve a lot of steps for both requisition and production. And it's a good thing that they're banned because crack and heroin are horrible. I don't support sending people to jail over it necessarily. But bans and confiscation, absolutely.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)So now that we have established that price of guns will rise as supply decreases, we can further understand that illegal guns almost always come from legal sources, at least initially. Therefore, if legal sources of guns are dimimished, it will decrease availability and increase price of black market guns.

YES!!!! another meaningless post and zero facts that supports your claim of necessity, this keep getting better and better
so here we are in the same spot according to who and what facts is it a necessity

opcorn2:

 

[Irredentist]

Yes it does. Drug prohibition in the US has resulted in the highest incarceration rate in the world. The drug war is public control of the means of production regarding certain politically incorrect drugs, i.e. socialism. The law which created the modern drug war is literally called "The Controlled Substances Act".




No, it requires prison sentences to deter people from buying and selling the prohibited good. Drug laws and gun laws are both merely "crimes" against the state, as neither drug use nor gun ownership directly harm anyone. Criminalizing peaceful behavior is really just a form of social engineering, which, of course, the left is very fond of.

Drug use harms plenty of people, and so do guns.

 

[Irredentist]

YES!!!! another meaningless post and zero facts that supports your claim of necessity, this keep getting better and better
so here we are in the same spot according to who and what facts is it a necessity

opcorn2:

I've pretty much said my piece, thank you for this opportunity for conversation. I respect you as a member of this community and I appreciate what you bring to the table. I look forward to seeing you again and I hope you have a wonderful night!

 

[TurtleDude]

Drug use harms plenty of people, and so do guns.

heroin and crack have no legitimate use. Guns have tons. it is why our governments buy so many and sold US civilians over a million military rifles.

 

[Irredentist]

heroin and crack have no legitimate use. Guns have tons. it is why our governments buy so many and sold US civilians over a million military rifles.

Heroin is an opiate, and opiates certainly have legitimate uses, as does cocaine. But you need the proper permits to get either one legally.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)I've pretty much said my piece
2.) thank you for this opportunity for conversation. I respect you as a member of this community and I appreciate what you bring to the table.
3.)I look forward to seeing you again
4.) and I hope you have a wonderful night!

1.) yes i understand that you have nothing to support your claim to make it true
2.) you're welcome
3.) me too!!! for your sake i hope you can support your claims in the future
4.) thanks i wish you the same since you already helped make my night wonderful good luck!

 

[TurtleDude]

Heroin is an opiate, and opiates certainly have legitimate uses, as does cocaine. But you need the proper permits to get either one legally.

you keep avoiding the obvious. Heroin has no legitimate use. You also have failed to address my main point-your desired laws would disarm mostly those who never use guns in a deleterious manner, and would have almost no impact on those most likely to harm others. I believe you support such laws because your real goal is disarming people for political reasons

 

[Fledermaus]

Why stop there? Why not get rid of ALL gun deaths, then the total would be zero and we could go back to pretending gun violence isn't a problem.

Unless you ban all guns, all metal tubing, all exposive materials, all chemicals that can make explosive materials, charcoal, sulfur, saltpeter, compressed gasses and about a gazillion other things you will have gun deaths.

Guess how hard it is to create a projectile weapon.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I think everyone from from both sides of the political spectrum can agree that all places that sell guns should have background check systems. However this is likely the only prevention against stopping a would-be killer. If a potential mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs of mental illness, uncontrollable rage or violence, or doesn’t give indications of violent ideas and plans then they can buy as many guns and ammo with no restrictions.

So here’s my question for all you: How could we prevent someone who is planning mass shooting yet has a clean slate from obtaining weapons legally?

Are you kidding me? How can we strip the rights of (any and all?) folks without that pesky "due process of law" step?

 

[ttwtt78640]

So now that we have established that price of guns will rise as supply decreases, we can further understand that illegal guns almost always come from legal sources, at least initially. Therefore, if legal sources of guns are dimimished, it will decrease availability and increase price of black market guns.

Hmm... that plan has worked almost flawlessly to make meth, cocaine and heroin available 24/7/365 via a multi-billion dollar market run entirely by and for criminals.

 

[vegas giants]

Hmm... that plan has worked almost flawlessly to make meth, cocaine and heroin available 24/7/365 via a multi-billion dollar market run entirely by and for criminals.

If meth were as legal to buy as guns....would the meth problem be better or worse?

 

[ttwtt78640]

If meth were as legal to buy as guns....would the meth problem be better or worse?

Better, because legal vendors do not employ street gangs to wipe out their legal competition in drive by shootings (street hits) often resulting in "collateral damage" to those in the area. Let's examine how "as legal to buy as guns" actually works - prohibited person A pays non-prohibited person B (perhaps in meth or in cash from their tax free meth profits) to supply them guns from a FFL dealer (or any other "as legal" or even illegal source).

 

[vegas giants]

Better, because legal vendors do not employ street gangs to wipe out their legal competition in drive by shootings (street hits) often resulting in "collateral damage" to those in the area. Let's examine how "as legal to buy as guns" actually works - prohibited person A pays non-prohibited person B (perhaps in meth or in cash from their tax free meth profits) to supply them guns from a FFL dealer (or any other "as legal" or even illegal source).

Thousands more would die. Meth is so addictive that treatment success rates are in the single digits. People get hooked and will steal anything to get money for it.


It would be a nightmare

 

[DebateChallenge]

I think everyone from from both sides of the political spectrum can agree that all places that sell guns should have background check systems. However this is likely the only prevention against stopping a would-be killer. If a potential mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs of mental illness, uncontrollable rage or violence, or doesn’t give indications of violent ideas and plans then they can buy as many guns and ammo with no restrictions.

So here’s my question for all you: How could we prevent someone who is planning mass shooting yet has a clean slate from obtaining weapons legally?

Background checks check a person's past for any criminal acts, they obviously can't predict future intentions. We don't have crystal balls that can tell the future so there is no 100% way to tell if a person buying a gun will ever use it in a crime, but the fact of the matter is most people who legally buy guns don't use them in crimes and in the USA you're given the benefit of the doubt when you buy a gun, its called being innocent until proven guilty.

 

[vegas giants]

Background checks check a person's past for any criminal acts, they obviously can't predict future intentions. We don't have crystal balls that can tell the future so there is no 100% way to tell if a person buying a gun will ever use it in a crime, but the fact of the matter is most people who legally buy guns don't use them in crimes and in the USA you're given the benefit of the doubt when you buy a gun, its called being innocent until proven guilty.

No dude. That is not what that means

 

[Eriech]

I think everyone from from both sides of the political spectrum can agree that all places that sell guns should have background check systems. However this is likely the only prevention against stopping a would-be killer. If a potential mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs of mental illness, uncontrollable rage or violence, or doesn’t give indications of violent ideas and plans then they can buy as many guns and ammo with no restrictions.

So here’s my question for all you: How could we prevent someone who is planning mass shooting yet has a clean slate from obtaining weapons legally?

You can not prevent someone inclined to kill who fully expects to die in the process.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[BahamaBob]

Tobacco kills a half million people every year. Why don't we have background checks on anyone trying to buy cigarettes? And don't forget cars. Just because someone is buying a car to drive to work today does not mean he won't flip out tomorrow and fill it with fertilizer and blow up a grade school. That is another one, we have to put fertilizer on the list too. If McVeigh had had a background check surely he never would have killed all those people.

Background checks are fools gold. Only an idiot would believe they would make any difference.

 

[vegas giants]

Tobacco kills a half million people every year. Why don't we have background checks on anyone trying to buy cigarettes? And don't forget cars. Just because someone is buying a car to drive to work today does not mean he won't flip out tomorrow and fill it with fertilizer and blow up a grade school. That is another one, we have to put fertilizer on the list too. If McVeigh had had a background check surely he never would have killed all those people.

Background checks are fools gold. Only an idiot would believe they would make any difference.

How a little form can bring such terror to people's lives is beyond me

 

[jaeger19]

It seems fairly obvious that current casualty rates from gun violence do not constitute an acceptable level of risk to most Americans.

Violent crimes are at an all time low.. or are darn near.

 

[jaeger19]

I think everyone from from both sides of the political spectrum can agree that all places that sell guns should have background check systems. However this is likely the only prevention against stopping a would-be killer. If a potential mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs of mental illness, uncontrollable rage or violence, or doesn’t give indications of violent ideas and plans then they can buy as many guns and ammo with no restrictions.

So here’s my question for all you: How could we prevent someone who is planning mass shooting yet has a clean slate from obtaining weapons legally?

Actually no.. rational people can agree that background check systems are an absolute failure.

However, I believe its a fallacy to say " a mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs".

I don't think that's a fact. In fact.. most cases in which mass murderers are studied.. their were certainly telling signs from their past. That's how profiles on mass murderers.. terrorists etc.. are developed.

The problem is that as long as we.. as a people.. think it makes sense to spend valuable resources on doing background checks on the vast vast majority of people that DON"T need them"... and in order to stop a "mass murderer"...from "getting a gun"... (while not worrying about home made bombs.. using knives, using arson. using a car.. etc)...we will continue to see mass murder.

The real solution is to identify those with issues and get them help before it manifests itself into mass murder.

 

[BahamaBob]

How a little form can bring such terror to people's lives is beyond me

No fear, just common sense that many seem to lack. Why spend time, hassle, and government money on something that will not work? In fact, it makes more sense for those with the irrational fear of guns to move where strict gun laws exist like Chicago or England.

 

[vegas giants]

No fear, just common sense that many seem to lack. Why spend time, hassle, and government money on something that will not work? In fact, it makes more sense for those with the irrational fear of guns to move where strict gun laws exist like Chicago or England.

Oh the terror this form brings. Lol. It is kryptonite to gun nuts

 

[TurtleDude]

No fear, just common sense that many seem to lack. Why spend time, hassle, and government money on something that will not work? In fact, it makes more sense for those with the irrational fear of guns to move where strict gun laws exist like Chicago or England.

the entire purpose is to harass lawful gun owners with stupid laws that cannot even be used to prosecute criminals.

 

[Drawdown]

I think everyone from from both sides of the political spectrum can agree that all places that sell guns should have background check systems. However this is likely the only prevention against stopping a would-be killer. If a potential mass murderer can go their whole lives without showing signs of mental illness, uncontrollable rage or violence, or doesn’t give indications of violent ideas and plans then they can buy as many guns and ammo with no restrictions.

So here’s my question for all you: How could we prevent someone who is planning mass shooting yet has a clean slate from obtaining weapons legally?

You probably cannot. Now, we do have a local gun store whose owner won't sell to anybody he has an uneasy feeling about even if it is legal for them to purchase a weapon. Have heard quite a few stories of incidents in which he said no because he wasn't comfortable with them having a firearm and them trying to create a scene as a result.