CDZ Gun Control

[2aguy]

Little perspective from a Navy SEAL:

I’ve been in dark rooms with “good-guys and bad guys” going at it with guns, and let me tell you something:

Gunfights are crazy.

Gunfights are hard.

On my final combat mission, I was shot in the leg with an AK-47 from about 30 feet away and it blew my femur in half.

I hope that was my last gunfight.

Here at home, there are almost 13 million Americans who have a license to carry a concealed weapon. The vast majority of them are responsible, law-abiding and good-hearted people. Many of them want to be prepared to be the good guy, to do the right thing and to save lives.

I hope they never have to face being the target of a dangerous person with a gun. Because it’s hard to make the right decisions.

There are groups of individuals, like me and my fellow Special Operators, both military and law enforcement, who train for years to be good at close quarters shooting: shooting with discernment, keeping your head clear and making snap decisions before you pull the trigger — all while being shot at by the enemy.

And after dedicating their lives to being good operators in those extreme circumstances, even those professionals make mistakes.

Then consider that people like us trained for firefights for years, and that in many states there is virtually no training required for someone to legally carry a loaded, hidden gun.

So think about 10 or 15 people, who are weekend shooters with limited tactical training, deciding to shoot it out with a criminal in a crowded office holiday party, a medical clinic or a darkened theater, while people are screaming and running, and no one knows who or how many of the people shooting are the “good guys” and how many of them are the “bad guys.”

In some cases, can a “good guy” with a gun neutralize the threat and help save lives? Absolutely. But it doesn’t happen very often. It is, for the most part, a myth perpetuated by people who’ve never been shot at.

I am a proud Navy combat veteran. I risked and nearly gave my life in dozens of combat situations in defense of our Constitution. I value the Second Amendment and the right of responsible Americans to own guns for self-defense.

But people need to know that it is a fallacy to believe that the everyday gun owner can be expected to make all the right choices in a dangerous, fast-moving situation like a mass shooting with high-powered weapons.

When the bullets are flying, determining “who's who in the zoo” is hard.

And a little perspective for our Navy Seal…..

Here are stories of normal people who haven't been on a Seal Team……

NRA-ILA | Armed Citizen®

 

[westwall]

What in my arguments for rational gun control is incorrect or dishonest or made badly?

The arguments against me have been mostly emotional and disregard the history of gun controls which existed for most of our nation's history. The majority of posts by those opposed to all controls on guns are limited to personal attacks on my intelligence or character.

Thus I've decided the CZ may be the only place for an honest discussion on gun control.

I'm not the least bit intimidated by those obsessed with guns, who have no argument other than: The 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct, their fear of tyrannical government and their (irrational?) fears of going out in public unarmed.

I've taken on the first wo with reasoned remarks which have never been proved wrong.

1. There are already laws against the civilian population owning or having in their possession weapons of war unrestricted by law and or regulated.

Thus the Second Amendment is NOT sacrosanct as so many believe.

2. Only an idiot believes the possession of arms readily affordable and available to the current civilian population are sufficient to repeal a military or para military force of our government.

We live in a time when the government is temporary, and the people (at least those allowed to vote) can choose the civilian population who govern us, and control our military and para military agencies.

[THE GREATER THREAT TO OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES IS WHEN THE VOTE IS SUPPRESSED BY OVERT OR COVERT MEANS - BETTER TO WORRY ABOUT THE IMPACT ON OUR LIBERTY BY THE REALITY OF CU & McCUTCHEON V. FEC AND THE CURRENT EFFORTS BY SOME STATES TO LIMIT THE RIGHT TO VOTE BASED ON THE CANARD OF VOTER FRAUD]

Further more gun control does not outlaws guns, it regulates them. Licensing, registration and restrictions on specific forms of arms are already on the books. And yet loopholes exists, obviously, given who have had guns in their possession legally, and the horrors that they have inflicted in Connecticut, Virginia, Texas, Colorado, etc. etc.

3. I support a licensed person who can pass a background check and thereafter remains legally able to be a responsible gun owner has the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun.

4. Responsible people understand that not everyone should own, possess or ever have a gun in their custody or control.

So, responsible people, any ideas?

Gun laws have never reduced crime. Ever. They only criminalize the innocent. By all means punish the hell out of the criminal misuse of guns, but merely banning does nothing to reduce crime. Never has, never will.

What evidence do you have to prove gun laws have never prevented crime? Even if you cherry pick an example or two, consider how many rapes, robberies or run of the mill petty thefts have been prevented because there are laws against them?

None? One? a score? more? But, do we toss away the penal code based on your logic? Or do we do the best we can to prevent rape, robbery, theft and mass murder by firearm?

What evidence do you have that gun laws reduce crime. You are making the assertion thus it is YOU who must support your claim.

Wrong. I've postulated gun controls will reduce gun violence. The evidence comes when a postulate is tested.

Your "postulation" has been tried. There is more gun violence in the USA now than there ever was before the 20,000 anti gun laws were enacted. So here in the States we know for certain that anti gun legislation actually seems to cause more crime.

In Europe the same is true. The UK and France are far more violent than the USA. The one stat we lead in is murder, and in the overwhelming majority of cases it is bad guys killing bad guys. And, the murder rate in Europe is increasing as they are invaded by ever more third world people who bring their violent cultures with them as the US has been enduring for the last 75 years.

Your proposal has been PROVEN to be wrong.

 

[Elvis Obama]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

First of all, who's we? Second of all, your definition is inadequate, to say the least. As I said, it's silly, in response to a very serious subject.

 

[westwall]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

First of all, who's we? Second of all, your definition is inadequate, to say the least. As I said, it's silly, in response to a very serious subject.

No. The definition is very accurate. 80% of all violent crime is committed by black and Hispanic gang members. That is not in doubt. The "gun culture" is not the problem. The problem is the violent culture imported into our country from the third world by those very same gangbangers.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Stop selling guns to that group of people who commit the most gun crimes; young men under 30.

This aint xxxxxxx rocket science.

After age 30, you can buy as many guns as your pocket will allow. Of any type.
Under 30, you can still shoot, hunt, go to gun ranges. etc.

Ther reason the NRA stops the CDC from studying this issue is that the CDC will show what age group and sex commits the most henious gun crimes;
young men under 30.

Again, it won't do a thing to stop gun violence.

Again to the 100th power, laws do not prevent crime.

Do we eliminate laws against theft or speeding since they do not prevent stealing or driving at an unsafe speed in a school zone?

Exactly. Laws don't reduce crime. So why have them? Riddle me that batman.

Laws don't prevent crime, laws reduce crime. Of course that is simplistic but IMO it is fitting for an Internet Message Board. If you really want that "Riddled" take some time to review the Philosophy of Law:

Law, Philosophy of | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Special attention for Part 2 on Normative Jurisprudence will serve us well.

 

[Elvis Obama]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

It starts with reducing criminality, and begins at birth. That discussion is for another forum. Society needs to find root causes and seek solutions, which means social science, education and parenting (it takes a village) ideas are debate and tested.

And this of course meets the roadblock of conservative dogma.

That's part of the problem, and I agree that it, of course, is in turn part of a much larger problem with poverty in the US. Step one, it seems to me, is to lay out the problem in its entirety. Then discuss its scale and historic antecedents, then try to fashion solutions.

Here's my very brief analysis. The problem with gun violence in the US is primarily a problem of suicide. Secondarily it is a problem of violence in the inner cities. Part of the reason we cannot analyse the problem properly is the deep sense of shame connected with both these separate, yet connected problems.

 

[Arianrhod]

I have been personally responsible for getting two young nurses at work interested in guns to the point where they purchased one. One other approached me yesterday asking for advice on purchasing one, and we have a group of nurses and other healthcare workers who go to the range regularly. Half of them don't yet own a gun.

The anti-gun paranoids can fool themselves all they want to. We will continue to fight for our rights and continue to win.

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

You have evidence to the contrary that I have helped two nurses buy guns?

You have evidence to the contrary that there is a group of us that go to the range?

You have evidence to the contrary that we will fight for our rights?

I have evidence that shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

I was referring to the last sentence in your previous post.

 

[westwall]

Stop selling guns to that group of people who commit the most gun crimes; young men under 30.

This aint xxxxxxx rocket science.

After age 30, you can buy as many guns as your pocket will allow. Of any type.
Under 30, you can still shoot, hunt, go to gun ranges. etc.

Ther reason the NRA stops the CDC from studying this issue is that the CDC will show what age group and sex commits the most henious gun crimes;
young men under 30.

Again, it won't do a thing to stop gun violence.

Again to the 100th power, laws do not prevent crime.

Do we eliminate laws against theft or speeding since they do not prevent stealing or driving at an unsafe speed in a school zone?

Exactly. Laws don't reduce crime. So why have them? Riddle me that batman.

Laws don't prevent crime, laws reduce crime. Of course that is simplistic but IMO it is fitting for an Internet Message Board. If you really want that "Riddled" take some time to review the Philosophy of Law:

Law, Philosophy of | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Special attention for Part 2 on Normative Jurisprudence will serve us well.

No, they don't. Laws merely codify crime. They make it possible to punish the perpetrators AFTER they have committed the crime. Incarceration DOES prevent crime so in a way you can attribute the incarceration to the laws so in that respect you are correct. But the actual law itself truly does nothing to reduce crime.

If you want to talk about the philosophy of law I suggest you read John Rawls' "A Theory of Justice".

 

[OldLady]

Why is it so hard to find/stop the bad guys with the guns? Why are our cops and ATF so woefully incompetent at this? I think it may have something to do with LEGAL EAGLES who have tied law enforcement's hands. We as citizens have so many RIGHTS that we forget there are some responsibilities that go along with them. I've been listening to the same jokers for weeks now, complaining that our government didn't know about the San Bernardino couple beforehand, but OH NO...YOU CAN'T VIOLATE MY PRIVACY BY LOOKING AT MY E-MAILS OR MONITORING WHO I CALL. I'd be in favor of restricting gun ownership for EVERYONE, but not until I see the bad guys have actually been disarmed to a great degree. That would take violating our rights, you know, letting law enforcement look in our closets. It's all impossible if we want EVERYTHING and will give nothing.

 

[Elvis Obama]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We on the side of gun rights have been talking about a solution for years. No one on the left wants to hear it.

The problem is not the tool used, but the motivation. As we just saw, any crazy idiot can kill, a woman in Las Vegas just used her car to kill. If we really want to stop the violence, we need to find out why it's happening, and stop trying to blame the tool.

But what if the "crazy idiot" is a veteran who has served their country honorably? What if their service has damaged them so badly that they raise a gun to their head and pull the trigger? Suicide is the number one cause of gun death in the US, and it is an epidemic amongst our veterans. What does the so-called gun-rights side say about that (I am completely pro-gun rights, btw, and I don't believe gun control would be an effective solution)?

 

[westwall]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We on the side of gun rights have been talking about a solution for years. No one on the left wants to hear it.

The problem is not the tool used, but the motivation. As we just saw, any crazy idiot can kill, a woman in Las Vegas just used her car to kill. If we really want to stop the violence, we need to find out why it's happening, and stop trying to blame the tool.

But what if the "crazy idiot" is a veteran who has served their country honorably? What if their service has damaged them so badly that they raise a gun to their head and pull the trigger? Suicide is the number one cause of gun death in the US, and it is an epidemic amongst our veterans. What does the so-called gun-rights side say about that (I am completely pro-gun rights, btw, and I don't believe gun control would be an effective solution)?

Yes suicide is tragic, and unfortunate and as Japan and Korea and the Scandinavian countries show us someone who is intent on killing themselves will do so. All of those countries have strict gun control and much higher suicide rates than we do. It ain't the tool, it's the desire to kill oneself that determines success.

 

[Elvis Obama]

"Only an idiot believes the possession of arms readily affordable and available to the current civilian population are sufficient to repeal a military or paramilitary force of our government."

You do know that's precisely what the 2nd amendment is for right? Protection against a tyrannical Government. Wether you believe it is possible or not is irrelevant history has shown that it can happen time and time again.

There are already background checks in place in every state in the Union, In each of those states there are laws in place that should stop shootings from happening so why are still occurring? Criminals do not follow the law. The gun control that some want will only make it harder for law abiding citizens to practice the Constitutional rights and when that happens that tyrannical Government you dismiss as unlikely will be here.

Yes, that was the purpose of the second amendment, and it was a wise provision in it s day. That day ended with the establishment of a standing army at the start of the Twentieth Century. Anyone who thinks that the same purpose is being served today is delusional. Anyone who thinks that laws (and that is all the constitution is, laws) will remain viable throughout all of history is ignorant of what law and government is. The same people who made the constitution made it amendable. It's up to us, the people who are alive, to determine whether any law on the books is still viable. All of this, of course, is completely irrelevant to the subject of this thread, which is how to reduce gun violence.

 

[Elvis Obama]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

First of all, who's we? Second of all, your definition is inadequate, to say the least. As I said, it's silly, in response to a very serious subject.

No. The definition is very accurate. 80% of all violent crime is committed by black and Hispanic gang members. That is not in doubt. The "gun culture" is not the problem. The problem is the violent culture imported into our country from the third world by those very same gangbangers.

Gun deaths are principally caused by suicide.

 

[Elvis Obama]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We on the side of gun rights have been talking about a solution for years. No one on the left wants to hear it.

The problem is not the tool used, but the motivation. As we just saw, any crazy idiot can kill, a woman in Las Vegas just used her car to kill. If we really want to stop the violence, we need to find out why it's happening, and stop trying to blame the tool.

But what if the "crazy idiot" is a veteran who has served their country honorably? What if their service has damaged them so badly that they raise a gun to their head and pull the trigger? Suicide is the number one cause of gun death in the US, and it is an epidemic amongst our veterans. What does the so-called gun-rights side say about that (I am completely pro-gun rights, btw, and I don't believe gun control would be an effective solution)?

Yes suicide is tragic, and unfortunate and as Japan and Korea and the Scandinavian countries show us someone who is intent on killing themselves will do so. All of those countries have strict gun control and much higher suicide rates than we do. It ain't the tool, it's the desire to kill oneself that determines success.

So, that's it? Forgive me, but why in the world should anyone be interested in your defeatist opinion about suicide? Suicide prevention is the province of mental health professionals. Your casual dismissal of the problem is both typical and truly shameful. The so-called "pro gun rights" crowd have obsessively blocked the study of gun violence by health care professionals. Former Rep. Jay Dickey, who wrote the 1996 amendment which prevented the CDC from researching this problem now regrets that action. The president supposedly freed them to take up this study, and they have refused to do so. Why? Because they fear the NRA. The NIH has, at least, made a very small start in conducting such research.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

It starts with reducing criminality, and begins at birth. That discussion is for another forum. Society needs to find root causes and seek solutions, which means social science, education and parenting (it takes a village) ideas are debate and tested.

And this of course meets the roadblock of conservative dogma.

That's part of the problem, and I agree that it, of course, is in turn part of a much larger problem with poverty in the US. Step one, it seems to me, is to lay out the problem in its entirety. Then discuss its scale and historic antecedents, then try to fashion solutions.

Here's my very brief analysis. The problem with gun violence in the US is primarily a problem of suicide. Secondarily it is a problem of violence in the inner cities. Part of the reason we cannot analyse the problem properly is the deep sense of shame connected with both these separate, yet connected problems.

Your first paragraph is spot on; the second touches on the issues I see (mental health unrecognized and thus untreated for one) but shame isn't in my frame of reference.

The issue today IMO are the demagogues and charlatans and their followers fear mongering, and preaching xenophobic reforms. It's as if we have been transported to an earlier age, likely a time too many on the right consider desirable.

 

[PredFan]

I have been personally responsible for getting two young nurses at work interested in guns to the point where they purchased one. One other approached me yesterday asking for advice on purchasing one, and we have a group of nurses and other healthcare workers who go to the range regularly. Half of them don't yet own a gun.

The anti-gun paranoids can fool themselves all they want to. We will continue to fight for our rights and continue to win.

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

You have evidence to the contrary that I have helped two nurses buy guns?

You have evidence to the contrary that there is a group of us that go to the range?

You have evidence to the contrary that we will fight for our rights?

I have evidence that shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

I was referring to the last sentence in your previous post.

But you quoted that one instead? What specific statement do you have contrary evidence to?

 

[PredFan]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We on the side of gun rights have been talking about a solution for years. No one on the left wants to hear it.

The problem is not the tool used, but the motivation. As we just saw, any crazy idiot can kill, a woman in Las Vegas just used her car to kill. If we really want to stop the violence, we need to find out why it's happening, and stop trying to blame the tool.

But what if the "crazy idiot" is a veteran who has served their country honorably? What if their service has damaged them so badly that they raise a gun to their head and pull the trigger? Suicide is the number one cause of gun death in the US, and it is an epidemic amongst our veterans. What does the so-called gun-rights side say about that (I am completely pro-gun rights, btw, and I don't believe gun control would be an effective solution)?

Exactly the same thing I just said. Did you bother to read it?

We won't solve the problem by blaming the tool used. We need to spend our time finding out why they are killing themselves, why they aren't getting help, and how can we fix it.

 

[PredFan]

There isn't a single type of violence or death by gun that can be rationally blamed on the gun.

The thing that angers me the most is that the left pretends to care about human lives but it is a lie. If they cared about lives they would understand the ignorance and futility of blaming the tool. But the plain fact is that the left only cares about their agenda, and lives do not matter at all.

 

[2aguy]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We have defined the problem. the Criminal culture in the United STates…..they use guns to murder each other at high rates. The normal gun culture….doesn't.

How do you reduce gun crime among criminals….?

It starts with reducing criminality, and begins at birth. That discussion is for another forum. Society needs to find root causes and seek solutions, which means social science, education and parenting (it takes a village) ideas are debate and tested.

And this of course meets the roadblock of conservative dogma.

That's part of the problem, and I agree that it, of course, is in turn part of a much larger problem with poverty in the US. Step one, it seems to me, is to lay out the problem in its entirety. Then discuss its scale and historic antecedents, then try to fashion solutions.

Here's my very brief analysis. The problem with gun violence in the US is primarily a problem of suicide. Secondarily it is a problem of violence in the inner cities. Part of the reason we cannot analyse the problem properly is the deep sense of shame connected with both these separate, yet connected problems.

The problem with gun violence in the US is primarily a problem of suicide.

Wrong.....Japan, South Korea, China, have absolute gun control....and higher suicide rates than we do....guns are not the problem....they manage do kill themselves without guns...so guns are not the problem with suicide.

Our criminals murder each other more than the criminals in other western nations do.......research why that is...and it isn't guns....European and Australian criminals get guns easily....and in europe they favor fully automatic rifles....which are completely illegal and banned.......and they don't have gun stores, gun shows or individual sales.....

 

[2aguy]

A silly thread, as every thread I've ever read about gun violence has been. People on both sides of the question talking past one another. No one defining the problem properly and no one advancing a thoughtful approach.

Step one: Is there a problem with gun violence in the USA? If so, what is it, precisely?

Unless both sides of the issue can agree that there is a problem, and can agree on what exactly that problem is, discussing solutions is a waste of time.

We on the side of gun rights have been talking about a solution for years. No one on the left wants to hear it.

The problem is not the tool used, but the motivation. As we just saw, any crazy idiot can kill, a woman in Las Vegas just used her car to kill. If we really want to stop the violence, we need to find out why it's happening, and stop trying to blame the tool.

But what if the "crazy idiot" is a veteran who has served their country honorably? What if their service has damaged them so badly that they raise a gun to their head and pull the trigger? Suicide is the number one cause of gun death in the US, and it is an epidemic amongst our veterans. What does the so-called gun-rights side say about that (I am completely pro-gun rights, btw, and I don't believe gun control would be an effective solution)?

that it is a mental health issue that needs the help of medical professionals....remember, Japan, South Korea and China...they don't have a gun problem.....their suicide rate is higher than ours.........and also...according to table 10 of the CDC final homicide stats......19,900 people committed suicide without guns in the United States.....

So if the veteran doesn't have a gun...he is taking pills, hanging himself, or sitting in his garage as the car runs....