Gun Control: US and Global II
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,913
- Points
- 1,040
"Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to get guns when he rolled back Obama regulation"
That's how some people saw it.
Others (including the ACLU) saw it differently:
" None of this is a remotely accurate description of what happened. A year ago, Congress and Trump eliminated a proposed rule that would have included in the federal government gun background database people who received disability payments from Social Security and received assistance to manage their benefits due to mental impairments.
This is a regulation that potentially deprived between 75,000 to 80,000 people of a right based not on what they had done but on the basis of being classified by the government in a certain way. The fact that these people may have these impairments did not inherently mean that they were dangerous to themselves or others and needed to be kept away from guns."
To summarize: I realize some people are in the if-it-saves-one-life camp; I am not. I'm happy trading off security for liberty.
That's how some people saw it.
Others (including the ACLU) saw it differently:
" None of this is a remotely accurate description of what happened. A year ago, Congress and Trump eliminated a proposed rule that would have included in the federal government gun background database people who received disability payments from Social Security and received assistance to manage their benefits due to mental impairments.
This is a regulation that potentially deprived between 75,000 to 80,000 people of a right based not on what they had done but on the basis of being classified by the government in a certain way. The fact that these people may have these impairments did not inherently mean that they were dangerous to themselves or others and needed to be kept away from guns."
To summarize: I realize some people are in the if-it-saves-one-life camp; I am not. I'm happy trading off security for liberty.
Technically the ACLU opposed the legislation in regards to an infringement on rights. They actually don’t oppose gun control.
So the law would have made it harder for the mentally ill to get a gun. No doubt. But as your article points out it would have created a database of people that might not otherwise have to be there.
More clarification about ACLU’s position here after previous shooting.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/donald-trump-gun-mentally-ill-rule-1.4538963
Thanks for that article Brad.
So the law would have made it harder for the mentally ill to get a gun. No doubt. But as your article points out it would have created a database of people that might not otherwise have to be there.
More clarification about ACLU’s position here after previous shooting.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/donald-trump-gun-mentally-ill-rule-1.4538963
Thanks for that article Brad.
- Reaction score
- 6,544
- Points
- 1,160
The same discussion, using the same arguments, the same stats, by the same people. Wash, rinse, repeat. Every time there's a shooting.
Confiscating all guns, to stop mad shooters is like cutting off everyone's dicks to stop all rapes.
Start looking towards the actual individuals, their mental state, their upbringing, their social and economic mentality.
A hammer, knife or garden shovel, is as deadly as a gun, when wielded by a madman. One only need look at the nutjobs that go wacky in Japan. Killing and wounding a large number during knife attacks. I don't hear the Japanese calling for a knife ban. 10's if not hundreds are killed daily by the automobile. Doctors kill almost more people than anyone, or anything, daily. The list, of things that kill people more than guns, is long and extensive.
It's not guns, it's the nut on the end of the barrel.
People that want confiscation, as a solution, are too lazy, and self serving, to take care of the real problem. Blaming anyone, including politicians, is just as equally lazy and asinine.
Guns are tools, period. They don't do anything, unless someone is pulling the trigger.
That 'someone' is the problem, not the guns......or knives, or explosives, or...,or...
If governments sunk as much money into mental health as they do trying to confiscate people's property, maybe they could find a solution to counter the people that are doing this.
Confiscating all guns, to stop mad shooters is like cutting off everyone's dicks to stop all rapes.
Start looking towards the actual individuals, their mental state, their upbringing, their social and economic mentality.
A hammer, knife or garden shovel, is as deadly as a gun, when wielded by a madman. One only need look at the nutjobs that go wacky in Japan. Killing and wounding a large number during knife attacks. I don't hear the Japanese calling for a knife ban. 10's if not hundreds are killed daily by the automobile. Doctors kill almost more people than anyone, or anything, daily. The list, of things that kill people more than guns, is long and extensive.
It's not guns, it's the nut on the end of the barrel.
People that want confiscation, as a solution, are too lazy, and self serving, to take care of the real problem. Blaming anyone, including politicians, is just as equally lazy and asinine.
Guns are tools, period. They don't do anything, unless someone is pulling the trigger.
That 'someone' is the problem, not the guns......or knives, or explosives, or...,or...
If governments sunk as much money into mental health as they do trying to confiscate people's property, maybe they could find a solution to counter the people that are doing this.
- Reaction score
- 4,956
- Points
- 1,260
Stand by ...Brihard said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Fishbone Jones said:
Fishbone Jones said:
That’s so utterly inane as to border on mindless. It’s so transparently dishonest I’m amazed you have the gall to think anyone else dumb enough to take the claim credibly.
There’s a reason you aren’t stockpiling knives or hammers to defend your home and hearth from... I don’t know; whoever.
The gun is the most transformative and democratizing tool in the history of interpersonal violence. Never before and with no other implement has someone with so little training, conditioning, strength, or skill been able to do effectively wound and kill so many people in so little time with so little effort. Pretending otherwise is stupid and serves no honest purpose. Any meaningful discussion must at least start with an acknowledgement of that reality.
You are, as always, entitled to your own opinion. Not your own made up set of facts.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 7,682
- Points
- 1,160
[quote author=Brihard] Never before and with no other implement has someone with so little training, conditioning, strength, or skill been able to do effectively wound and kill so many people in so little time with so little effort.
[/quote]
I agree about how deadly and dangerous guns are (and situation depending especially semi autos) but if we're talking physics then vehicles are right up there too. Buddy in France killed more people with 1 truck than the Las Vegas shooter did with 24 guns
86/434 (dead/wounded) vs 59/422.
Using an ar15 or any gun really seems to been romantasized in (North) American culture. Dave Grossman would probably have something articulate to say about the psychology differences and instant gratification behind shooting someone and running them over. Not having a car between the attacker and victim probably makes it more personal.
I don't think the US would do bad to have the same kind of registration/accountability as we do for handguns in Canada (minus the stupid range rules). I've never had an issue buying or selling a gun through the RCMP's system, they've helped me out numerous times including helping me de-escalate bad situations with people who had guns.
I get that in places like Vermont make it work where you can carry guns around all day and don't need a licence to buy one. On the other end of the spectrum a city of 2.7 million has had 1600 shootings in 8 months, they have super strict rules but the guns are coming from somewhere. Maybe the US needs one national level set of rules and not state by state?
[/quote]
I agree about how deadly and dangerous guns are (and situation depending especially semi autos) but if we're talking physics then vehicles are right up there too. Buddy in France killed more people with 1 truck than the Las Vegas shooter did with 24 guns
86/434 (dead/wounded) vs 59/422.
Using an ar15 or any gun really seems to been romantasized in (North) American culture. Dave Grossman would probably have something articulate to say about the psychology differences and instant gratification behind shooting someone and running them over. Not having a car between the attacker and victim probably makes it more personal.
I don't think the US would do bad to have the same kind of registration/accountability as we do for handguns in Canada (minus the stupid range rules). I've never had an issue buying or selling a gun through the RCMP's system, they've helped me out numerous times including helping me de-escalate bad situations with people who had guns.
I get that in places like Vermont make it work where you can carry guns around all day and don't need a licence to buy one. On the other end of the spectrum a city of 2.7 million has had 1600 shootings in 8 months, they have super strict rules but the guns are coming from somewhere. Maybe the US needs one national level set of rules and not state by state?
Jarnhamar said:
This is a key point right here. There is no inhibition to freely moving about the US, practically nothing stopping the movement of legally acquired firearms in one place into another. So, de facto, the entirely of the continental US is at the mercy of the weakest gun laws.
I analogize it as akin to trying to designate a corner in the pool where you’re allowed to pee to keep the rest of us in the pool free from it. It just doesn’t work like that.
We are to a still considerable extent at the mercy of US gun laws. We cannot possibly resource CBSA and police sufficiently to stop all trafficking of firearms across the border. Similarly, within Canada, once a firearm is in country and being possessed/trafficked illicitly, there are few internal measures to combat that beyond the sheer distance of some ‘trade routes’. That has more of an impact on price than on overall availability...
- Reaction score
- 6,544
- Points
- 1,160
While we're arguing who is promoting gun violence, I'll just leave this here:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/hollywood-film-depicts-trump-supporters-being-hunted-for-sport-by-liberals/?fbclid=IwAR0qpENR7wJdvK7m9XdT6RtS2t_sXbbYIG8_4oSnfpNxXP9q5zFtYLwowB8
https://pjmedia.com/trending/hollywood-film-depicts-trump-supporters-being-hunted-for-sport-by-liberals/?fbclid=IwAR0qpENR7wJdvK7m9XdT6RtS2t_sXbbYIG8_4oSnfpNxXP9q5zFtYLwowB8
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 14,429
- Points
- 1,160
Fishbone Jones said:
This film is no more "promoting" gun violence against anyone than, say, "Godzilla" is "promoting" violence against the Japanese.
Its the product of a producer who makes a good living out of creating dreck horror movies seeing the opportunity for making another buck. There is no message here and no hidden agenda; just mindless entertainment built around the usual penchant for horror and murder that has an audience amongst the usual audience that watches this crap.
Not everything is a liberal conspiracy.
:cheers:
- Reaction score
- 6,544
- Points
- 1,160
FJAG said:
I made no statement one way or another. You drew your own conclusions.
However, is it your contention that movies don't contribute to the way people think or act?
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,913
- Points
- 1,040
>There is no message here and no hidden agenda
Except to the people who choose to hear a message. But if they act on it we can blame it on something we'd like to blame it on, particularly if they don't provide a shopping list of what set them off.
Except to the people who choose to hear a message. But if they act on it we can blame it on something we'd like to blame it on, particularly if they don't provide a shopping list of what set them off.
- Reaction score
- 6,544
- Points
- 1,160
Brihard said:
I guess knives and other objects can be deadly after all. :
These are not made up facts.I guess these people were just stupid, as some contend.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/world/asia/knife-japan-stabbing-sagamihara.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2289445.stm
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
They sure can. Great ‘research’ s/Fishbone Jones said:I guess knives and other objects can be deadly after all. :
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/world/asia/knife-japan-stabbing-sagamihara.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2289445.stm
PS
of the 40 deadliest US mass shootings since 1949 (8 or more people killed):
--7 occurred in the 10 years before US enacted assault weapons ban
--2 occurred in the 10 years assault weapons ban was in effect
--26 have occurred in the 15 years since assault weapons ban expired
of the 40 deadliest US mass shootings since 1949 (8 or more people killed):
--7 occurred in the 10 years before US enacted assault weapons ban
--2 occurred in the 10 years assault weapons ban was in effect
--26 have occurred in the 15 years since assault weapons ban expired
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Reaction score
- 6,544
- Points
- 1,160
Nobody is discounting the fact that guns are proficient.
I'm just saying that guns are tools and madmen have lots of options. It's obvious that a lack of guns does not stop mass murders.
That is all the point I was trying to make.
I'm just saying that guns are tools and madmen have lots of options. It's obvious that a lack of guns does not stop mass murders.
That is all the point I was trying to make.
