Harvard Study Shows Gun Control Does Not Save Lives

[White 6]

Just as a matter of curiosity, what is the popular gun control measures we're talking about?

From a Canadian POV, I'm pretty confident that it has to be some control measures on hand guns. I wonder if it would be possible for Americans and Canadians to reach a common ground on anything to do with hand gun control?

As a Canadian, I couldn't offer much, but maybe something is possible? Perhaps some easing of restrictions in Canada for special cases in which the intent is clearly well intentioned?
Can you offer something that could find some common ground?

In the least, we may be able to demonstrate that a discussion can take place on this forum?

Several things that would be a positive, though highly unpopular at the moment.
Permit requirement for all personal carry, but not used as a moneymaker for state and local government. I am against what is known as constitutional carry. If you can afford to buy a weapon, you can afford to go through the process of obtaining a permit, as long as assholes don't make the process a state moneymaker to prevent citizens from exercising their rights.
Requiring training and qualification as part of the permit process.
Stop and frisk to take guns off the street from people that have committed crimes, including juvenile weapons crimes.
No long guns carried in public on city streets, restricting them to hunting, practice ranges, home defense and private property outside of city limits.
No silencers, except on indoor ranges.
I have no problem with large capacity magazines as it is better on weapons ranges and that should be the primary place of use, most states restricting the number of rounds a rifle or shotgun carries for hunting purposes.
Strict requirement on background checks for all sales or gift transfers outside of direct family, but the giver retaining some shared liability for the misuse, in family transfers of control.
These are common sense to me, but highly controversial to the all the guns, all the time crowd and their misguided elected representative.

 

[2aguy]

Several things that would be a positive, though highly unpopular at the moment.
Permit requirement for all personal carry, but not used as a moneymaker for state and local government. I am against what is known as constitutional carry. If you can afford to buy a weapon, you can afford to go through the process of obtaining a permit, as long as assholes don't make the process a state moneymaker to prevent citizens from exercising their rights.
Requiring training and qualification as part of the permit process.
Stop and frisk to take guns off the street from people that have committed crimes, including juvenile weapons crimes.
No long guns carried in public on city streets, restricting them to hunting, practice ranges, home defense and private property outside of city limits.
No silencers, except on indoor ranges.
I have no problem with large capacity magazines as it is better on weapons ranges and that should be the primary place of use, most states restricting the number of rounds a rifle or shotgun carries for hunting purposes.
Strict requirement on background checks for all sales or gift transfers outside of direct family, but the giver retaining some shared liability for the misuse, in family transfers of control.
These are common sense to me, but highly controversial to the all the guns, all the time crowd and their misguided elected representative.

Permits are a prior restriction on the Right...so no deal for me. As soon as you put a permit requirement from the government on journalists, priests, rabbis, any time you want to publish a book or news article, then you can push permits for gun ownership and carrying.

Training requirements are an infringement....they use training requirements in Europe to deny normal people the Right......as soon as you require literacy tests, history and poiltical science tests for voting, literacy and other tests for journalists and anyone who wishes to write or publish books, then you might have a case....till then, nope.

If you are poor and can barely afford to buy a gun you are likely unable to take classes....I am all for training in gun ownership but expecting the poor to be able to afford training is just silly, and the fact that guns are not complicated, it simply becomes another way to keep people from owning and carrying guns.

Stop and frisk? The cops should be able to stop and frisk known criminals...as determined by running their names through databases to see if they have prior arrests or current warrants......stop and frisk actually saves black lives.

Universal background checks are only desired by anti-gunners because they know it gives them the ability to then demand gun registration...without which background checks on private sales make no sense.

 

[Donald H]

Several things that would be a positive, though highly unpopular at the moment.
Permit requirement for all personal carry, but not used as a moneymaker for state and local government. I am against what is known as constitutional carry. If you can afford to buy a weapon, you can afford to go through the process of obtaining a permit, as long as assholes don't make the process a state moneymaker to prevent citizens from exercising their rights.

There are going to be assholes but you're envisioning assholes on the pro-gun control side. The situation that exists has generated assholes on both sides unfortunately, and that makes to job much harder. Some on the 'gun control' side are of the opinion that there should be no guns, while some on the other side would permit rocket launchers.

Requiring training and qualification as part of the permit process.

That would be a big step forward. In my gun days nothing was required and I shudder to look back on my own behaviour.

Stop and frisk to take guns off the street from people that have committed crimes, including juvenile weapons crimes.

I would only mention the caution of the police deciding who to frisk based on skin colour, and leave it at that being a positive move forward.

No long guns carried in public on city streets, restricting them to hunting, practice ranges, home defense and private property outside of city limits.

Yes, I see that as highly reasonable and of merit.

No silencers, except on indoor ranges.

I would go the extra step on making them illegal. I think that suffering the noise for those who refuse hearing protection would be worth it.

I have no problem with large capacity magazines as it is better on weapons ranges and that should be the primary place of use, most states restricting the number of rounds a rifle or shotgun carries for hunting purposes.

I can't see how large capacity magazines should be required on a range. In my past experience, a single round loaded served all purposes. So I would see them as equivalent to not being anymore necessary than the silencers. And tremendous value to be gained by outlawing them.

Strict requirement on background checks for all sales or gift transfers outside of direct family, but the giver retaining some shared liability for the misuse, in family transfers of control.

Yes, and also because the background checks present no pain to the pro gun community.

These are common sense to me, but highly controversial to the all the guns, all the time crowd and their misguided elected representative.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to lay out your opinions on gun control. I don't see anything in that list that would unduly restrict the use of guns or the owning of guns. but I can see some positive benefits in some of them!

There's a lot to address in that. Anything further on the topic?
I'm pleased that we've been permitted to discuss the topic without the flak.

 

[White 6]

Permits are a prior restriction on the Right...so no deal for me. As soon as you put a permit requirement from the government on journalists, priests, rabbis, any time you want to publish a book or news article, then you can push permits for gun ownership and carrying.

Training requirements are an infringement....they use training requirements in Europe to deny normal people the Right......as soon as you require literacy tests, history and poiltical science tests for voting, literacy and other tests for journalists and anyone who wishes to write or publish books, then you might have a case....till then, nope.

If you are poor and can barely afford to buy a gun you are likely unable to take classes....I am all for training in gun ownership but expecting the poor to be able to afford training is just silly, and the fact that guns are not complicated, it simply becomes another way to keep people from owning and carrying guns.

Stop and frisk? The cops should be able to stop and frisk known criminals...as determined by running their names through databases to see if they have prior arrests or current warrants......stop and frisk actually saves black lives.

Universal background checks are only desired by anti-gunners because they know it gives them the ability to then demand gun registration...without which background checks on private sales make no sense.

We obviously disagree. You are part of the all the guns, to all the people, anywhere, all the time crowd.

Nothing wrong with guns regulated as some people misuse them, those people being a relatable danger to the public and themselves.

Lack of training make people unsafe to use weapons around others.

Permits should not cost more than drivers permits and there is no reason they should ever have been, if not for legislatures seeing it a money making opportunity to restrict access, a double whammy in for leftest controlling legislators. High fees for any government service that exceeds actual (not trumped-up) costs are a scourge that should get representatives voted out of office, yet governments love anything that brings in money and are hard to get rid of.

We agree on stop and frisk.

If background checks are not universal they cannot hope to prevent criminals from walking into a gun shop, plunking down the money and walking out, same for private sellers, gun shows and other transfers.

 

[2aguy]

We obviously disagree. You are part of the all the guns, to all the people, anywhere, all the time crowd.

Nothing wrong with guns regulated as some people misuse them, those people being a relatable danger to the public and themselves.

Lack of training make people unsafe to use weapons around others.

Permits should not cost more than drivers permits and there is no reason they should ever have been, if not for legislatures seeing it a money making opportunity to restrict access, a double whammy in for leftest controlling legislators. High fees for any government service that exceeds actual (not trumped-up) costs are a scourge that should get representatives voted out of office, yet governments love anything that brings in money and are hard to get rid of.

We agree on stop and frisk.

If background checks are not universal they cannot hope to prevent criminals from walking into a gun shop, plunking down the money and walking out, same for private sellers, gun shows and other transfers.

There is no need for universal background checks. We already have all the laws we need to arrest felons caught with guns. The only reason to want universal background checks is to next demand universal gun registration.

We already have background checks for gun stores....so what you posted doesn't make sense. And the criminals get past those by using straw buyers, which they will use for private sales under universal background checks.

I am all for keeping violent felons and the dangerously mentally ill....as proven through a due process procedure.....from buying, owning or carrying guns.....anyone else should be able to buy, own or carry a gun. Any attempt to require training, applying taxes or fees, will simply be used to deny access....as we see all across the world.

 

[Donald H]

There is no need for universal background checks. We already have all the laws we need to arrest felons caught with guns. The only reason to want universal background checks is to next demand universal gun registration.

We already have background checks for gun stores....so what you posted doesn't make sense. And the criminals get past those by using straw buyers, which they will use for private sales under universal background checks.

I am all for keeping violent felons and the dangerously mentally ill....as proven through a due process procedure.....from buying, owning or carrying guns.....anyone else should be able to buy, own or carry a gun. Any attempt to require training, applying taxes or fees, will simply be used to deny access....as we see all across the world.

Your opinion should be heard but it shouldn't be allowed to drown out the opinions of all others, and that's just what you think you need to do.

Do majority of NRA members support gun background checks?

Some lawmakers are pushing for changes to gun laws including universal background checks following the fatal mass shooti

www.politifact.com

Your opinions can be considered to be minority opinions and thus demand no more courtesy of being heard than the 15 or 20% who agree with your opinions.

 

[2aguy]

Your opinion should be heard but it shouldn't be allowed to drown out the opinions of all others, and that's just what you think you need to do.

Do majority of NRA members support gun background checks?

Some lawmakers are pushing for changes to gun laws including universal background checks following the fatal mass shooti

www.politifact.com

Your opinions can be considered to be minority opinions and thus demand no more courtesy of being heard than the 15 or 20% who agree with your opinions.

Again, as has been explained to your simple brain, the people who say they support universal background checks have no idea what the anti-gunners want to do with universal background checks.......if it was explained to them, they would not support them.

The question on the poll should be prefaced with these facts.

--criminals avoid current, already required, Federal Background checks by stealing their guns or using straw buyers.

--Straw buyers will be used to get around universal background checks the same way they currently are used to get around current Federal background checks.

--without universal gun registration, universal background checks for private sales would not be able to know who originally owned which guns. Universal gun registration would be required for universal background checks for private sales.

--Gun registration was followed by gun banning and confiscation in Britain, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Russia, Cuba, Canada and many other countries.

Do you support universal gun registration?

Do that, and see what the poll says.

 

[2aguy]

Your opinion should be heard but it shouldn't be allowed to drown out the opinions of all others, and that's just what you think you need to do.

Do majority of NRA members support gun background checks?

Some lawmakers are pushing for changes to gun laws including universal background checks following the fatal mass shooti

www.politifact.com

Your opinions can be considered to be minority opinions and thus demand no more courtesy of being heard than the 15 or 20% who agree with your opinions.

As another example....ask the question....

Do you support sex education in public schools?

Most people would say yes....

Then explain that instruction for sex between children would also be taught as part of sex education, and then see what the poll says.....

 

[Donald H]

Again, as has been explained to your simple brain, the people who say they support universal background checks have no idea what the anti-gunners want to do with universal background checks.......if it was explained to them, they would not support them.

The question on the poll should be prefaced with these facts.

--criminals avoid current, already required, Federal Background checks by stealing their guns or using straw buyers.

--Straw buyers will be used to get around universal background checks the same way they currently are used to get around current Federal background checks.

--without universal gun registration, universal background checks for private sales would not be able to know who originally owned which guns. Universal gun registration would be required for universal background checks for private sales.

--Gun registration was followed by gun banning and confiscation in Britain, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Russia, Cuba, Canada and many other countries.

Do you support universal gun registration?

Do that, and see what the poll says.

You've greatly exceeded your quota of 15% opinions representing NRA gun owners or even non-NRA.
And the more you blow off steam, the further everybody gets from finding any concensus on what is needed in gun control.

That wasn't my intention for this thread and I'm pretty sure it wasn't White's either.

 

[White 6]

There is no need for universal background checks. We already have all the laws we need to arrest felons caught with guns. The only reason to want universal background checks is to next demand universal gun registration.

We already have background checks for gun stores....so what you posted doesn't make sense. And the criminals get past those by using straw buyers, which they will use for private sales under universal background checks.

I am all for keeping violent felons and the dangerously mentally ill....as proven through a due process procedure.....from buying, owning or carrying guns.....anyone else should be able to buy, own or carry a gun. Any attempt to require training, applying taxes or fees, will simply be used to deny access....as we see all across the world.

No. They have not mentioned it in Tennessee. Maybe you should move. Here, we just don't want felons going to the gun show, when it come through town, buying guns, as we don't think felons should have guns. The guy that puts his wife or girlfriend in the hospital and threatened to kill her next time? We don't think he needs to own pistols either. We're funny like that.
I personally think, if you have a gun you want to sell, and you sell it to somebody, that is buying from you, because they have a record, that would prohibit them from legally buying one, but you sell it to them anyway, as a private sale (whether you know they are still on probation after getting out of prison from robbing a convenience store at gun point, or not) the state and federal government should be able to prosecute the hell out of you, along with jail and fine you, if the dumbass you sold it to, uses it to shoot somebody or just in commission of another felony weapon assault, as he would not have had your gun, if you had done a background check through the automated system. We'd like it, if it was legal to stop him onsite, knowing who he was, and pat him down for any weapons he had illegally, knowing he gave up the right to be free from searches when he held up his last liquor store and went to jail. I have literally no respect for criminal and think paying their debt to society should only be free from further incarceration on the offense they are in jail for. I like people who don't commit felonies and am prejudiced against those that do, for showing what pitiful judgement and lack of respect for the law and other people. I'm just like that.