CDZ GUNS: a challenge to both liberals and conservatives

[hunarcy]

Before we talk about what to give up, let's go back to the situation as it was in 1960 and THEN begin compromising. Expecting us to compromise after 55+ years of giving up rights isn't reasonable.

Yes it is reasonable if you want a solution to the problem. You know and I know that more gun control won't solve the problem. But when you are dealing with people who are convinced that it will, what we know doesn't count for much.

The conversation includes what each side is willing to do in order to solve a problem they both want solved and there will certainly be some give and take. But a conversation is not agreement or acquiescence to anything. It requires nothing but the time and effort to participate in it. But to refuse to have the conversation makes it really certain that the problem most likely won't get solved.

But, the conversation you propose is one sided from its inception. The anti-gunners have extorted 55 years worth of concessions while anti-gunners are still giving NOTHING, and you want me to begin the discussion there. So, you want to start the conversation where things are now, and will expect me to give up even more while accepting even more erosion of my rights to make more concessions that won't improve anything. So no, nothing reasonable about it at all.

No. I am not suggesting any one side solution. I am suggesting a win-win situation for both side. The 2nd Amendment people should not give a single inch without getting something really valuable in return for it. But we also should not be so obstinate to refuse to even have a conversation about what should happen that no solution is possible anywhere.

We have those conversations here all the time.....we explain our points.....then, they will suggest a new law, or a new item that should be banned....we explain why the new law and the item being banned achieve nothing.....then they start talking about penises........it gets kind of old.....

Sure it gets old when it is all one sided which it has been.

I am suggesting a way to get the problem solved that will give you a whole bunch more of value than what little you would choose to give up to get it.

It is like having a $100 bill. It's wonderful to have. Nobody has any right to take it from you.

But if somebody offers you something of great value that you would rather have than the $100, you willingly hand it over. You've given up nothing of importance and have gained something of great value.

That's what I am shooting for here.

I am sick and tired of people like (the rhetorical, not literal) you telling me that if I support any form of gun control, I want to take away your guns. I don't.

And I am sick and tired of people like the figurative others who tell me that if I propose specific cultural changes that I am forcing my values down their throats. I am not.

When both sides hold on tight to their particular ideology and refuses to even talk about what compromise can get everybody on the same path and fix a problem, both sides are the reason that the problem persists.

The point is they've already TAKEN my $100 bill and now want to start negotiating again. so I'll give up more.

 

[hunarcy]

I would hope that no one would compromise without getting something important to them in return. But again, if we can't even have the discussion of what we would be willing to compromise on in order to get a solution to gun crime, then there will be no solution.

Before we talk about what to give up, let's go back to the situation as it was in 1960 and THEN begin compromising. Expecting us to compromise after 55+ years of giving up rights isn't reasonable.

Yes it is reasonable if you want a solution to the problem. You know and I know that more gun control won't solve the problem. But when you are dealing with people who are convinced that it will, what we know doesn't count for much.

The conversation includes what each side is willing to do in order to solve a problem they both want solved and there will certainly be some give and take. But a conversation is not agreement or acquiescence to anything. It requires nothing but the time and effort to participate in it. But to refuse to have the conversation makes it really certain that the problem most likely won't get solved.

It’s becoming more and more clear you’re why we never get anywhere. You haven’t made it past step one in how many pages? You’re clearly a gun nut just looking to confuse obstruct delay distract misdirect us into status quo

Hey....Foxfyre....want to try compromising with this guy?

No. It's pretty obvious when you can't trust somebody to be honest about much of anything.

That guy is totally unreasonable.

 

[hunarcy]

Yes it is reasonable if you want a solution to the problem. You know and I know that more gun control won't solve the problem. But when you are dealing with people who are convinced that it will, what we know doesn't count for much.

The conversation includes what each side is willing to do in order to solve a problem they both want solved and there will certainly be some give and take. But a conversation is not agreement or acquiescence to anything. It requires nothing but the time and effort to participate in it. But to refuse to have the conversation makes it really certain that the problem most likely won't get solved.

It’s becoming more and more clear you’re why we never get anywhere. You haven’t made it past step one in how many pages? You’re clearly a gun nut just looking to confuse obstruct delay distract misdirect us into status quo

Hey....Foxfyre....want to try compromising with this guy?

No. It's pretty obvious when you can't trust somebody to be honest about much of anything.

You tried to seem neutral but clearly you have a hidden agenda. You have nothing to offer and won’t give anything up. And nothing we say is right. It’s time to let us know your ideas. Or have we already heard enough

I have not pretended to be neutral in any way because I am not at all neutral on this topic. I put some ideas in the OP I have been up front and honest about my agenda.

My agenda is to find a way to fix a culture that I believe is the primary reason we are having all these school shootings and other acts of violence. My agenda is to stop the school shootings and other acts of violence. I am convinced that more gun control won't do it.

I would be willing to accept all the proposals I listed there and invited others to do the same and/or provide their own proposals. One way I could see to get the gun control lobby to cooperate in restoring a non violent culture was to give them something they might want enough to help do that. And that was in very good faith.

Others have at least been intellectually honest about their position on it and are not willing to deal. You have not been intellectually honest or contributed to the discussion in any honest way.

I honestly don't know why people with your point of view bother to post in this thread at all unless you get your kicks by trolling and derailing threads. Maybe the unwilling to compromise group--which is everybody on the right other than me so far--see everybody on the left as holding your point of view and it is therefore hopeless. Who knows? Do have a pleasant day.

Our ideas are to stop wasting our time proposing more laws that only limit freedoms and don't address the problem and focus on the people who do such things and deal with them so they stop shooting us.

 

[hunarcy]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

I understand the dynamics involved here. I really do.

I understand the frustration of the 2nd Amendment group who feel like our constitutional rights are being steadily eroded and taken away by people with fuzzy values and authoritarian motives. I don't miss the emphasis that would give an authoritarian government--one of their choosing of course--total control over every aspect of our speech, our thoughts, our beliefs, what are now our protected rights. I agree that has been their motive and game plan for quite some time now.

But on the other hand, even though I am a card carrying member of the NRA--thanks to Obama. I never wanted to join the NRA before he came along--and I own guns, I know how to use them, and I would fight to the death for the right of lawful citizens to have any amount of them they want. . .

. . .I am a bit disheartened at those who put so much importance on those guns that they would not even have a conversation about any form of compromise that could be a win-win for both and result in school children not being slaughtered as well as eliminating most other forms of violence.

I don't expect everybody to agree with me, and most of those on 2nd Amendment side as well as a few intellectually honest ones from the gun control side I fully respect and consider friends.

But I sure wish I wasn't the lone vote up there willing to compromise to solve the problem.

The point is that the pro-gun folks have compromised and given up since the 1960's and instead of seeing progress, things are worse than ever. I'll give up no more.

 

[oldsoul]

Of course I don't know because nobody does. Ask any 100 Republicans what they want and you'll likely get 100 different answers. It is irrelevent what Republicans want which is why I deliberately left partisanship out of it. This is purely an ideological issue.

Now then, can you answer what compromises you personally would be willing to make to achieve a more peaceful, more safe America where school children are not at risk? What compromises do you think your ideological group would be willing to make? You have already answered the poll that you wouldn't accept the compromise offered in the OP. Why or why not?

I won’t take your guns away.

That isn't really the point here because that wasn't an option offered.

They think it’s our goal. I’m telling you or them it’s not. They need to realize this if there is to be any compromise. If one side is stubborn because they think giving an inch will cost them a foot

Yes, both sides view each other with disdain. But just as I responded to Task, if we don't get past the point of accusing each other and find a common goal and each side be willing to give up something to get it, we will never find a win-win solution.

I think sometimes we have to ask ourselves whether it really is a solution that we want or are does our desire to expose and punish or thwart the other for the 'evil' people we perceive them to be override any other motive?

Yet a conservative started this thread in bad faith whose premise was predicated on lies about ‘liberals’:

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value personal responsibility

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value the morality expressed in religious doctrine

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value positive role models

Given this and countless other examples of conservatives’ propensity for lying, the disdain ‘liberals’ have for conservatives is both appropriate and warranted.

The first and most important step in finding any solution that divides us is for conservatives to stop lying, if that’s even possible.

Let me attempt to address where I think this "misconception" comes from:

Look at the media. I mean really look. What is being passed as "normal"? When was the last time Hollywood, for example, portrayed religious doctrine in a positive way? When was the last time the lead character in a film was a die-hard religious person, and was also portrayed in a "positive light"? Now ask, when was the last time the opposite was true? How many "liberal leaders" came out and condemned the comments about VP Pence's faith? There are more examples, but I trust you get the point.

Now ask, who are the industry leaders? What are their stated, public, political leanings? This will go a very long way towards understanding how many "conservatives" see "liberals" in a way that may very well be incorrect. As a side note, the opposite is quite true as well, many on the left have misconceptions of those on the right.

Furthermore, look at the division in this country. Who was publicly chastising those who claimed "Not my President", for both of the last two regimes? How many people on the left publicly said that Trump is OUR President, whether you agree with him or not? How many on the right said the same about Obama? More personally, and I really don't need a public answer to this, how "diverse is your circle of friends, politically? What are the political leanings/views of your closest neighbors?

The point here is we don't really know each other anymore. The media produces a product to sell, and we are buying it. No one is without fault. Many people don't have a "diverse" circle of friends politically, nor do they want one. It's hard to discuss things with someone who disagrees, so, we just don't. The result is the deep, and deepening division within our great country.

If we can fix THAT, the rest will come easy.

So, I offer a challenge. Argue the point from someone else's point of view. Maybe you will learn much more than you think. But, first, you have to educate yourself.

 

[oldsoul]

In the wake of yet another tragic school shooting, it is reasonable to have a national discussion on what to do about it. And since the discussion so far is a) more gun control vs b) more guns/protection for the kids, and there seems to be little middle ground, the solution seems to be an unattainable goal for most of American society.

So the challenge is:

Would liberals be willing to consider the truth in the following and consider working toward social policy to achieve it?

--kids need a responsible mom and a dad in the home. Very very few criminals or violent people of any sort come from such homes.

--kids benefit from a religious faith that teaches love, respect for life and authority, caring from others. Good churches and synagogues aren't producing many criminals.

--kids need role models that demonstrate some of the best to which we can aspire instead of heaping admiration and fame, making heroes out of, or generating sympathy for those who promote hate, anger, violence, and lawless behavior.

--kids need to be taught personal responsibility and accountability in which the norm is educating yourself, staying away from illegal substances and activities, meriting a good reputation, learning a trade, getting married before having kids, and contributing to your family, your community, your country. Such people are rarely involved in any kind of bad acts.

--kids need video games, television programs, and movies that promote real heroism, good triumphing over evil, and rejection of violence except in self defense. When video games have the player having to do bad, even evil things to win, how can that not translate how they relate to their real world? When what passes for entertainment promotes the worst kind of violence, promiscuity, immorality, and sympathy for the bad guys, it is no wonder that children become desensitized to violence or the pain of others and see bad acts as glorious acts. It all is teaching the kids and it is invariable that some of them will be motivated to act on it.

Maybe correlation isn't causation when it comes to kids being violent, but I sure think we need to look at what we really are teaching and how that contributes to the social problems we have.
​

And if the liberals were willing to acknowledge the advantage in all or most of that, would the conservatives/libertarians be willing to consider:

Reasonable restrictions on civilian guns that are not likely to ever be used for hunting or self protection or recreational target shooting but that are designed to effect maximum damage?

Reasonable gun registration even at gun shows, so that effective background checks can be run and guns can be denied or confiscated from those who are clearly incompetent to have them or who are a danger to themselves or society?

Maybe the problem is the people who do bad things with the guns and not the gun themselves, and certainly bad people who do terrible things don't care what laws they break to do them, but can we admit that at least some reasonable restrictions are worthwhile to consider? Could we compromise on some things in order to achieve agreement and cooperation from most everybody to actually fix the problem?
​

So that's it. This is the CDZ so keep it reasonably civil if the topic interests you. And the poll is designed so that you can change your choices if you are inspired to change your point of view during the discussion.

Discuss.

​

​

Why didn't Rosa Parks compromise and sit in the middle of the bus when the democrats wouldn't let her sit at the front of the bus.....why didn't the kids sitting at the lunch counters simply compromise with the democrats and eat standing up.....? Why did blacks not compromise when the democrats imposed Poll Taxes and Literacy tests....they could have compromised by getting the democrat Poll Tax simply lowered and the number of tests on the Literacy Tests reduced....

This is what happens when you compromise on a God given Right.....

Rosa Parks is irrelevant to the question posed in the OP. I am not interested in what anybody has compromised on or has not compromised on in the distant or more recent past.

The question is what would you and others be willing to compromise on in order to achieve safer schools, a safer society for everybody?

Here is the only compromise that actually works.....everything else is Security Theater.....

Increase the prison sentence for actual crimes committed with guns to 30 years , and life if the weapon is fired.

Increase the prison sentence for a felon caught in possession of an illegal gun to 30 years, life if they fire the gun for any reason.....

That works. It doesn't target law abiding gun owners. It doesn't increase the paperwork or fees on owning a gun

It works in Japan, it would work here.

I agree that strong deterrence works, but only AFTER the fact. In the case of the shooter in Florida, this could, and SHOULD have been prevented. This should never have happened, and if we need new laws to make that happen in the future, I am willing to listen to well thought out proposals. Just saying, "lock 'em up for longer," will do NOTHING to stop the next mentally ill person from killing more kids.

 

[oldsoul]

[ The question is, what would you be willing to compromise on in order to get a solution to the problem?

Nothing, of course! There is no problem from the conservative point of view. I don't see why you suppose there is a problem for us? Just one for you, you want to grab everyone's guns but we won't let you.

Typical knee-jerk response. "Fox" has spelled out many things that directly refute what you just posted, you just didn't take the time to EDUCATE yourself before shooting off at the keyboard (or mouth). YOU are part of the PROBLEM!!! For the reasons I have spelled out above.

 

[2aguy]

In the wake of yet another tragic school shooting, it is reasonable to have a national discussion on what to do about it. And since the discussion so far is a) more gun control vs b) more guns/protection for the kids, and there seems to be little middle ground, the solution seems to be an unattainable goal for most of American society.

So the challenge is:

Would liberals be willing to consider the truth in the following and consider working toward social policy to achieve it?

--kids need a responsible mom and a dad in the home. Very very few criminals or violent people of any sort come from such homes.

--kids benefit from a religious faith that teaches love, respect for life and authority, caring from others. Good churches and synagogues aren't producing many criminals.

--kids need role models that demonstrate some of the best to which we can aspire instead of heaping admiration and fame, making heroes out of, or generating sympathy for those who promote hate, anger, violence, and lawless behavior.

--kids need to be taught personal responsibility and accountability in which the norm is educating yourself, staying away from illegal substances and activities, meriting a good reputation, learning a trade, getting married before having kids, and contributing to your family, your community, your country. Such people are rarely involved in any kind of bad acts.

--kids need video games, television programs, and movies that promote real heroism, good triumphing over evil, and rejection of violence except in self defense. When video games have the player having to do bad, even evil things to win, how can that not translate how they relate to their real world? When what passes for entertainment promotes the worst kind of violence, promiscuity, immorality, and sympathy for the bad guys, it is no wonder that children become desensitized to violence or the pain of others and see bad acts as glorious acts. It all is teaching the kids and it is invariable that some of them will be motivated to act on it.

Maybe correlation isn't causation when it comes to kids being violent, but I sure think we need to look at what we really are teaching and how that contributes to the social problems we have.
​

And if the liberals were willing to acknowledge the advantage in all or most of that, would the conservatives/libertarians be willing to consider:

Reasonable restrictions on civilian guns that are not likely to ever be used for hunting or self protection or recreational target shooting but that are designed to effect maximum damage?

Reasonable gun registration even at gun shows, so that effective background checks can be run and guns can be denied or confiscated from those who are clearly incompetent to have them or who are a danger to themselves or society?

Maybe the problem is the people who do bad things with the guns and not the gun themselves, and certainly bad people who do terrible things don't care what laws they break to do them, but can we admit that at least some reasonable restrictions are worthwhile to consider? Could we compromise on some things in order to achieve agreement and cooperation from most everybody to actually fix the problem?
​

So that's it. This is the CDZ so keep it reasonably civil if the topic interests you. And the poll is designed so that you can change your choices if you are inspired to change your point of view during the discussion.

Discuss.

​

​

Why didn't Rosa Parks compromise and sit in the middle of the bus when the democrats wouldn't let her sit at the front of the bus.....why didn't the kids sitting at the lunch counters simply compromise with the democrats and eat standing up.....? Why did blacks not compromise when the democrats imposed Poll Taxes and Literacy tests....they could have compromised by getting the democrat Poll Tax simply lowered and the number of tests on the Literacy Tests reduced....

This is what happens when you compromise on a God given Right.....

Rosa Parks is irrelevant to the question posed in the OP. I am not interested in what anybody has compromised on or has not compromised on in the distant or more recent past.

The question is what would you and others be willing to compromise on in order to achieve safer schools, a safer society for everybody?

Here is the only compromise that actually works.....everything else is Security Theater.....

Increase the prison sentence for actual crimes committed with guns to 30 years , and life if the weapon is fired.

Increase the prison sentence for a felon caught in possession of an illegal gun to 30 years, life if they fire the gun for any reason.....

That works. It doesn't target law abiding gun owners. It doesn't increase the paperwork or fees on owning a gun

It works in Japan, it would work here.

I agree that strong deterrence works, but only AFTER the fact. In the case of the shooter in Florida, this could, and SHOULD have been prevented. This should never have happened, and if we need new laws to make that happen in the future, I am willing to listen to well thought out proposals. Just saying, "lock 'em up for longer," will do NOTHING to stop the next mentally ill person from killing more kids.

Prison sentences don't work on mass shooters, they do work on actual criminals.....they use long prison sentences in Japan to stop th

In the wake of yet another tragic school shooting, it is reasonable to have a national discussion on what to do about it. And since the discussion so far is a) more gun control vs b) more guns/protection for the kids, and there seems to be little middle ground, the solution seems to be an unattainable goal for most of American society.

So the challenge is:

Would liberals be willing to consider the truth in the following and consider working toward social policy to achieve it?

--kids need a responsible mom and a dad in the home. Very very few criminals or violent people of any sort come from such homes.

--kids benefit from a religious faith that teaches love, respect for life and authority, caring from others. Good churches and synagogues aren't producing many criminals.

--kids need role models that demonstrate some of the best to which we can aspire instead of heaping admiration and fame, making heroes out of, or generating sympathy for those who promote hate, anger, violence, and lawless behavior.

--kids need to be taught personal responsibility and accountability in which the norm is educating yourself, staying away from illegal substances and activities, meriting a good reputation, learning a trade, getting married before having kids, and contributing to your family, your community, your country. Such people are rarely involved in any kind of bad acts.

--kids need video games, television programs, and movies that promote real heroism, good triumphing over evil, and rejection of violence except in self defense. When video games have the player having to do bad, even evil things to win, how can that not translate how they relate to their real world? When what passes for entertainment promotes the worst kind of violence, promiscuity, immorality, and sympathy for the bad guys, it is no wonder that children become desensitized to violence or the pain of others and see bad acts as glorious acts. It all is teaching the kids and it is invariable that some of them will be motivated to act on it.

Maybe correlation isn't causation when it comes to kids being violent, but I sure think we need to look at what we really are teaching and how that contributes to the social problems we have.
​

And if the liberals were willing to acknowledge the advantage in all or most of that, would the conservatives/libertarians be willing to consider:

Reasonable restrictions on civilian guns that are not likely to ever be used for hunting or self protection or recreational target shooting but that are designed to effect maximum damage?

Reasonable gun registration even at gun shows, so that effective background checks can be run and guns can be denied or confiscated from those who are clearly incompetent to have them or who are a danger to themselves or society?

Maybe the problem is the people who do bad things with the guns and not the gun themselves, and certainly bad people who do terrible things don't care what laws they break to do them, but can we admit that at least some reasonable restrictions are worthwhile to consider? Could we compromise on some things in order to achieve agreement and cooperation from most everybody to actually fix the problem?
​

So that's it. This is the CDZ so keep it reasonably civil if the topic interests you. And the poll is designed so that you can change your choices if you are inspired to change your point of view during the discussion.

Discuss.

​

​

Why didn't Rosa Parks compromise and sit in the middle of the bus when the democrats wouldn't let her sit at the front of the bus.....why didn't the kids sitting at the lunch counters simply compromise with the democrats and eat standing up.....? Why did blacks not compromise when the democrats imposed Poll Taxes and Literacy tests....they could have compromised by getting the democrat Poll Tax simply lowered and the number of tests on the Literacy Tests reduced....

This is what happens when you compromise on a God given Right.....

Rosa Parks is irrelevant to the question posed in the OP. I am not interested in what anybody has compromised on or has not compromised on in the distant or more recent past.

The question is what would you and others be willing to compromise on in order to achieve safer schools, a safer society for everybody?

Here is the only compromise that actually works.....everything else is Security Theater.....

Increase the prison sentence for actual crimes committed with guns to 30 years , and life if the weapon is fired.

Increase the prison sentence for a felon caught in possession of an illegal gun to 30 years, life if they fire the gun for any reason.....

That works. It doesn't target law abiding gun owners. It doesn't increase the paperwork or fees on owning a gun

It works in Japan, it would work here.

I agree that strong deterrence works, but only AFTER the fact. In the case of the shooter in Florida, this could, and SHOULD have been prevented. This should never have happened, and if we need new laws to make that happen in the future, I am willing to listen to well thought out proposals. Just saying, "lock 'em up for longer," will do NOTHING to stop the next mentally ill person from killing more kids.

Actually, you have different methods for different killers.

Long prison sentences work on regular criminals....this is how Japan stopped their Yakuza from using guns.

Mass public shooters you need deterrence...they go to gun free zones because they are looking to murder unarmed people, they are not looking for a gun fight...that is why the commit suicide, surrender or run away as soon as someone, cop or civilian, shows up with a gun.

Muslim terrorists have to be outgunned......in every case they fight anyone who stands up to them...Fort Hood, San Bernadino, Pulse Night club......

 

[sealybobo]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

How have they trampled your 2nd amendment rights? I'm not aware that we've done anything in the last 50 years.

What is the big picture? How would you try to prevent future shootings? You would do nothing? Well then why even try to compromise with you? What are you offering?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

You seem to be talking in generalizations because I don't think you have any specific examples to give us.

What are the true problems? Why does America have more rampages than every other country combined? You think the people in the greatest and freest country in the world would be the happiest.

Should we bring back cop killer ammo? The ammo that goes through armor?

Should a boyfriend you have a restraining order be able to buy a gun?

 

[sealybobo]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

I understand the dynamics involved here. I really do.

I understand the frustration of the 2nd Amendment group who feel like our constitutional rights are being steadily eroded and taken away by people with fuzzy values and authoritarian motives. I don't miss the emphasis that would give an authoritarian government--one of their choosing of course--total control over every aspect of our speech, our thoughts, our beliefs, what are now our protected rights. I agree that has been their motive and game plan for quite some time now.

But on the other hand, even though I am a card carrying member of the NRA--thanks to Obama. I never wanted to join the NRA before he came along--and I own guns, I know how to use them, and I would fight to the death for the right of lawful citizens to have any amount of them they want. . .

. . .I am a bit disheartened at those who put so much importance on those guns that they would not even have a conversation about any form of compromise that could be a win-win for both and result in school children not being slaughtered as well as eliminating most other forms of violence.

I don't expect everybody to agree with me, and most of those on 2nd Amendment side as well as a few intellectually honest ones from the gun control side I fully respect and consider friends.

But I sure wish I wasn't the lone vote up there willing to compromise to solve the problem.

What should the gun advocates give up?

 

[2aguy]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

How have they trampled your 2nd amendment rights? I'm not aware that we've done anything in the last 50 years.

What is the big picture? How would you try to prevent future shootings? You would do nothing? Well then why even try to compromise with you? What are you offering?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

You seem to be talking in generalizations because I don't think you have any specific examples to give us.

What are the true problems? Why does America have more rampages than every other country combined? You think the people in the greatest and freest country in the world would be the happiest.

Should we bring back cop killer ammo? The ammo that goes through armor?

Should a boyfriend you have a restraining order be able to buy a gun?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

That's easy.....you created gun free zones for law abiding gun owners on school grounds.....and you had more school shootings...not less.....

 

[2aguy]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

I understand the dynamics involved here. I really do.

I understand the frustration of the 2nd Amendment group who feel like our constitutional rights are being steadily eroded and taken away by people with fuzzy values and authoritarian motives. I don't miss the emphasis that would give an authoritarian government--one of their choosing of course--total control over every aspect of our speech, our thoughts, our beliefs, what are now our protected rights. I agree that has been their motive and game plan for quite some time now.

But on the other hand, even though I am a card carrying member of the NRA--thanks to Obama. I never wanted to join the NRA before he came along--and I own guns, I know how to use them, and I would fight to the death for the right of lawful citizens to have any amount of them they want. . .

. . .I am a bit disheartened at those who put so much importance on those guns that they would not even have a conversation about any form of compromise that could be a win-win for both and result in school children not being slaughtered as well as eliminating most other forms of violence.

I don't expect everybody to agree with me, and most of those on 2nd Amendment side as well as a few intellectually honest ones from the gun control side I fully respect and consider friends.

But I sure wish I wasn't the lone vote up there willing to compromise to solve the problem.

What should the gun advocates give up?

We already gave up fully automatic weapons for the most part....and we gave you the federal background check system......and waiting periods......

We are waiting for Concealed carry reciprocity, and the ability to buy a gun noise suppressor.........

 

[Foxfyre]

[ The question is, what would you be willing to compromise on in order to get a solution to the problem?

Nothing, of course! There is no problem from the conservative point of view. I don't see why you suppose there is a problem for us? Just one for you, you want to grab everyone's guns but we won't let you.

Typical knee-jerk response. "Fox" has spelled out many things that directly refute what you just posted, you just didn't take the time to EDUCATE yourself before shooting off at the keyboard (or mouth). YOU are part of the PROBLEM!!! For the reasons I have spelled out above.

Misconceptions happen. Sometimes they are due to failure to read what has been posted which I'm pretty sure was the case with Circe who obviously did not read the thread.

I mean really. He called me a liberal.

It's okay though really. At that point I needed a good laugh. And unlike some he hasn't been in derail the thread mode.

And thanks for being one of the very few willing to give the challenge a go here.

 

[sealybobo]

I won’t take your guns away.

That isn't really the point here because that wasn't an option offered.

They think it’s our goal. I’m telling you or them it’s not. They need to realize this if there is to be any compromise. If one side is stubborn because they think giving an inch will cost them a foot

Yes, both sides view each other with disdain. But just as I responded to Task, if we don't get past the point of accusing each other and find a common goal and each side be willing to give up something to get it, we will never find a win-win solution.

I think sometimes we have to ask ourselves whether it really is a solution that we want or are does our desire to expose and punish or thwart the other for the 'evil' people we perceive them to be override any other motive?

Yet a conservative started this thread in bad faith whose premise was predicated on lies about ‘liberals’:

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value personal responsibility

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value the morality expressed in religious doctrine

The lie that ‘liberals’ don’t value positive role models

Given this and countless other examples of conservatives’ propensity for lying, the disdain ‘liberals’ have for conservatives is both appropriate and warranted.

The first and most important step in finding any solution that divides us is for conservatives to stop lying, if that’s even possible.

Let me attempt to address where I think this "misconception" comes from:

Look at the media. I mean really look. What is being passed as "normal"? When was the last time Hollywood, for example, portrayed religious doctrine in a positive way? When was the last time the lead character in a film was a die-hard religious person, and was also portrayed in a "positive light"? Now ask, when was the last time the opposite was true? How many "liberal leaders" came out and condemned the comments about VP Pence's faith? There are more examples, but I trust you get the point.

Now ask, who are the industry leaders? What are their stated, public, political leanings? This will go a very long way towards understanding how many "conservatives" see "liberals" in a way that may very well be incorrect. As a side note, the opposite is quite true as well, many on the left have misconceptions of those on the right.

Furthermore, look at the division in this country. Who was publicly chastising those who claimed "Not my President", for both of the last two regimes? How many people on the left publicly said that Trump is OUR President, whether you agree with him or not? How many on the right said the same about Obama? More personally, and I really don't need a public answer to this, how "diverse is your circle of friends, politically? What are the political leanings/views of your closest neighbors?

The point here is we don't really know each other anymore. The media produces a product to sell, and we are buying it. No one is without fault. Many people don't have a "diverse" circle of friends politically, nor do they want one. It's hard to discuss things with someone who disagrees, so, we just don't. The result is the deep, and deepening division within our great country.

If we can fix THAT, the rest will come easy.

So, I offer a challenge. Argue the point from someone else's point of view. Maybe you will learn much more than you think. But, first, you have to educate yourself.

I'm on the right and Trump is my president. Unfortunately.

Even Trump makes fun of the religious people.

Trump reportedly mocks Mike Pence's ultraconservative views, once joking that he 'wants to hang' all gay people

Trump often mocked Pence's conservative views, like his desire to see Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that established women's constitutional right to have an abortion, overturned.

When a legal scholar pointed out to Trump and Pence in a meeting that even if the case were overturned, many states would legalize abortion on their own, Trump ribbed Pence, according to Mayer.

"You see? You've wasted all this time and energy on it, and it's not going to end abortion anyway," Trump said, according to Mayer.

Mayer reports that when the topic of rights for gay US citizens came up, Trump pointed to Pence and said: "Don't ask that guy — he wants to hang them all!"

Mayer also cited a campaign staff member as saying Trump had mocked Pence's religious practices. When visitors came to see Trump after meeting Pence, The New Yorker said, the president asked, "Did Mike make you pray?"

The Danger of President Pence

 

[Foxfyre]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

I understand the dynamics involved here. I really do.

I understand the frustration of the 2nd Amendment group who feel like our constitutional rights are being steadily eroded and taken away by people with fuzzy values and authoritarian motives. I don't miss the emphasis that would give an authoritarian government--one of their choosing of course--total control over every aspect of our speech, our thoughts, our beliefs, what are now our protected rights. I agree that has been their motive and game plan for quite some time now.

But on the other hand, even though I am a card carrying member of the NRA--thanks to Obama. I never wanted to join the NRA before he came along--and I own guns, I know how to use them, and I would fight to the death for the right of lawful citizens to have any amount of them they want. . .

. . .I am a bit disheartened at those who put so much importance on those guns that they would not even have a conversation about any form of compromise that could be a win-win for both and result in school children not being slaughtered as well as eliminating most other forms of violence.

I don't expect everybody to agree with me, and most of those on 2nd Amendment side as well as a few intellectually honest ones from the gun control side I fully respect and consider friends.

But I sure wish I wasn't the lone vote up there willing to compromise to solve the problem.

What should the gun advocates give up?

We already gave up fully automatic weapons for the most part....and we gave you the federal background check system......and waiting periods......

We are waiting for Concealed carry reciprocity, and the ability to buy a gun noise suppressor.........

In all honesty we didn't give them those things. They just took them.

Good thing? Bad thing? The statistics sure don't show us much in results other than much more determined 2nd Amendment advocates. There seems to be just as much gun violence as before and the horrendous mass killings are still happening plus the 2nd Amendment people are so dug in to protect their rights now that they may not be seeing the forest for the trees. Probably much more bad than good as a result.

So I think we need a much different approach which involves addressing what the real problems are and not simply ignoring them which the left seems prone to do. And it involves addressing the real problems rather than just protecting our gun rights which seems to be the primary focus on the right.

I am all for protecting the gun rights. But I am also all for protecting the kids. With the right kind of agreement and compromise I believe we can accomplish both.

 

[hunarcy]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

How have they trampled your 2nd amendment rights? I'm not aware that we've done anything in the last 50 years.

What is the big picture? How would you try to prevent future shootings? You would do nothing? Well then why even try to compromise with you? What are you offering?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

You seem to be talking in generalizations because I don't think you have any specific examples to give us.

What are the true problems? Why does America have more rampages than every other country combined? You think the people in the greatest and freest country in the world would be the happiest.

Should we bring back cop killer ammo? The ammo that goes through armor?

Should a boyfriend you have a restraining order be able to buy a gun?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

That's easy.....you created gun free zones for law abiding gun owners on school grounds.....and you had more school shootings...not less.....

People like that troll demanded that people not carry weapons and the streets became unsafe...Whether it be NYC in the 70s or Houston in the 80s or Los Angeles in the 90s or Chicago today.

 

[sealybobo]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

I understand the dynamics involved here. I really do.

I understand the frustration of the 2nd Amendment group who feel like our constitutional rights are being steadily eroded and taken away by people with fuzzy values and authoritarian motives. I don't miss the emphasis that would give an authoritarian government--one of their choosing of course--total control over every aspect of our speech, our thoughts, our beliefs, what are now our protected rights. I agree that has been their motive and game plan for quite some time now.

But on the other hand, even though I am a card carrying member of the NRA--thanks to Obama. I never wanted to join the NRA before he came along--and I own guns, I know how to use them, and I would fight to the death for the right of lawful citizens to have any amount of them they want. . .

. . .I am a bit disheartened at those who put so much importance on those guns that they would not even have a conversation about any form of compromise that could be a win-win for both and result in school children not being slaughtered as well as eliminating most other forms of violence.

I don't expect everybody to agree with me, and most of those on 2nd Amendment side as well as a few intellectually honest ones from the gun control side I fully respect and consider friends.

But I sure wish I wasn't the lone vote up there willing to compromise to solve the problem.

What should the gun advocates give up?

We already gave up fully automatic weapons for the most part....and we gave you the federal background check system......and waiting periods......

We are waiting for Concealed carry reciprocity, and the ability to buy a gun noise suppressor.........

We need to change it so semi's can't be turned into fully automatic weapons.

Do you not like the federal background check system? You don't think this has saved lives?

You have a problem with a waiting period?

Why do you need a silencer?

And what do you mean when you say you are waiting for concealed carry reciprocity? We have it here in Michigan

LANSING - Attorney General Bill Schuette today announced that Michigan has achieved full reciprocity for concealed carry with every state that has a "shall issue" concealed carry law on the books, for a total of 40 states, including Michigan. As a result of agreements negotiated and signed by the Attorney General's Office, Michigan holders of concealed pistol licenses (CPL) can lawfully carry in 40 states without obtaining separate licenses for each state. To date, Michigan is the first and only state to achieve maximum reciprocity for its CPL holders.


Michigan Republicans own the entire state and one Republican proposed that Michiganders can conceal carry without having to take the class. Republicans voted on it and voted it DOWN I believe. It was passed in the House but I don't think it made it all the way through

Michigan House passes bills allowing concealed pistol carry without a license

This is a great example of how the GOP aren't nearly as right wing as you guys are. What possible reason would they have to shoot down that law? I'll tell you why. For all the reasons us liberals say it's a bad idea. The number of shootings will skyrocket. It won't make us more safe it'll make us less safe.

Now I wanted to carry a gun and I don't want to take the class. I was disappointed they didn't pass that law.

 

[sealybobo]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

How have they trampled your 2nd amendment rights? I'm not aware that we've done anything in the last 50 years.

What is the big picture? How would you try to prevent future shootings? You would do nothing? Well then why even try to compromise with you? What are you offering?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

You seem to be talking in generalizations because I don't think you have any specific examples to give us.

What are the true problems? Why does America have more rampages than every other country combined? You think the people in the greatest and freest country in the world would be the happiest.

Should we bring back cop killer ammo? The ammo that goes through armor?

Should a boyfriend you have a restraining order be able to buy a gun?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

That's easy.....you created gun free zones for law abiding gun owners on school grounds.....and you had more school shootings...not less.....

People like that troll demanded that people not carry weapons and the streets became unsafe...Whether it be NYC in the 70s or Houston in the 80s or Los Angeles in the 90s or Chicago today.

I haven't said once that you shouldn't be allowed to conceal carry after you take the class and go through the background checks.

 

[sealybobo]

It IS a highly charged topic which is why I did NOT want this to be just another angry gun control thread.

I wish everybody would re-read the the OP and back up a little bit.

My hope is to stop the senseless violence that is all too prevalent in American culture and the only way I see to stop it is not with more gun control but with changing the culture.

Too many on the right think more guns in more places are the answer. It isn't. Yes, hardening vulnerable sites will help and save lives but it won't fix the problem.

Too many on the left think fewer guns or less dangerous guns are the answer. It isn't. Those intent on doing violence are going to find a way to do it regardless of what laws we pass.

So this thread was intended to start a conversation of what each side could agree to in order to achieve fewer violent people and a far more safe America for school children and everybody else.

And that has much less to do with guns than it does with changing the culture.

Unless everybody coming to the table for that conversation has something to gain from it, however, they won't come to the table. And nothing constructive can happen. That is what the compromise in the OP was all about.

And I am discouraged that anybody other than me is interested in having the conservation at all.

I think it is pretty clear (at least from my point of view) why there is no compromising with liberal demands. You cannot trust them. They are extremely dishonest, they fail to see or even to acknowledge the big picture and the unintended consequences, and things have gotten worse and worse since we have allowed them to trample on our 2nd A rights. NOTHING has gotten better as they have promised MANY times, but things have instead gotten worse. They will NEVER stop saying, just one more inch, just one more inch. They don't even realize or want to realize what the true problems are or where they come from. They just want to keep imposing themselves on the citizens and our rights.

How have they trampled your 2nd amendment rights? I'm not aware that we've done anything in the last 50 years.

What is the big picture? How would you try to prevent future shootings? You would do nothing? Well then why even try to compromise with you? What are you offering?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

You seem to be talking in generalizations because I don't think you have any specific examples to give us.

What are the true problems? Why does America have more rampages than every other country combined? You think the people in the greatest and freest country in the world would be the happiest.

Should we bring back cop killer ammo? The ammo that goes through armor?

Should a boyfriend you have a restraining order be able to buy a gun?

What did we do that we said would result in things getting better because we did those things and then instead things got worse?

That's easy.....you created gun free zones for law abiding gun owners on school grounds.....and you had more school shootings...not less.....

People like that troll demanded that people not carry weapons and the streets became unsafe...Whether it be NYC in the 70s or Houston in the 80s or Los Angeles in the 90s or Chicago today.

What good are gun free zones when you give anyone a gun? Of course things aren't getting better if a guy like Nicholas Cruz can get a high powered assault weapon clearly we haven't done enough.

In Sydney, thousands of banned firearms were collected in 1997 as part of the Australian government’s buyback program after the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre, in which 35 people died when a gunman went on a shooting rampage. Credit

 

[sealybobo]

[ The question is, what would you be willing to compromise on in order to get a solution to the problem?

Nothing, of course! There is no problem from the conservative point of view. I don't see why you suppose there is a problem for us? Just one for you, you want to grab everyone's guns but we won't let you.

A majority of Americans say that politicians' views on gun control and gun ownership will have an influence on their votes in November's midterm elections, a Marist poll finds.

More than eight in ten Americans, 85 percent, say a candidate's views on gun control will affect their vote, including 59 percent who said such positions would be a "major factor" on their vote.

When it comes to what Americans want to see done about mass shootings, more still support tougher gun laws. Seventy-one percent of Americans, including 58 percent of gun owners, say restrictions on gun ownership should be tightened, up from 64 percent in the same poll last October.

Just 23 percent of Americans say gun laws should remain the same while 5 percent say the laws should be less strict.

We will win.