School shooting in Parkland, FL

[kamik86]

But, if we're assuming gun control works, we'd have to assume even a mild inconvenience is still an inconvenience.

I think sometimes those mild inconveinences make people do things more because they hate the idea.

My state bans fireworks. There are fireworks here quite often, because I live within 20 min of two states that don't ban fireworks.

It is VERY common for people to go to those states. So just picking something up when I was there already is easy enough.

Heck many people when I was a kid would go to the next state for cigarettes just because the taxes were so much lower that they saved significant amount of money on them. They would just buy several cartons each time they crossed to the other state.

I'm not saying banning certain types of guns won't work but I will say banning them when you can very close by get to a place that doesn't ban them will certainly not work.

 

[Klayfish]

So incredibly sad. But, IMO, until we have incredibly strict gun control laws across the entire country, and enforce them hard, this type of tragedy will happen over and over and over. I am staunchly, firmly anti-gun and always have been. Never had one, never will, don't understand why people do. I know it may not be a popular opinion, but it's just my opinion.

 

[Hikergirl]

When I say rifle, I mean, I don't know, a muzzle loader? I know very little about guns, I'm not going to lie or pretend otherwise. I could Google the difference or ask my husband who owns several. When I say "guns like this" I mean precisely that. Guns that have the capability to fire this many shots this quickly have no reason to be in our society. They don't. If you like them for target practice, use something else, if that bums you out but saves dozens of lives, then I can live with that (and anyone should be able to).

And people who are telling me that banning these sorts of weapons "Clearly won't work because of x, y & z" are not offering any alternative solution. Don't tell me what won't work if you know so much more about it than I do, tell me what WILL. If you don't have any ideas, let's try the suggestions on the table because something has to be done.

And let's also not forget in the course of this conversation, that the second amendment protects a "well regulated militia" not any nut job who is 18 and has a driver's license and no priors.

(ETA the "you" above is generalized "you" and not directed at anyone in particular.)

I've written a lengthy response but deleted it. I can't respond further to this post without being point blank direct, and I'm sure given the subject matter that will subject me to points.

All I know if we had the answers we wouldn't have these problems. It isn't as simple as some seem to think it is.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

But, if we're assuming gun control works

When was the last mass shooting in Australia? Great Britian? Canada? Japan?

Yes, they exist. But look:

Last one in Canada? Over a year ago. There were none between 2007 and 2010. None.

Australia? There was a car attack last year. A stabbing attack in 2014. Nothing in between. The last gun related incident was a hostage situation in 2014 and a husband killed his wife and children in a separate incident in 2014. Family-related shooting happens all the time in the United States.

England? The last school shooting was in 1996. If you don't include terrorist attacks, there was an knife attack in March 2017, and none between then and June 2010.

Japan? An arson in 2017, a knife attack in 2016, an arson in 2008 and a car/stabbing attack in 2008.


So, knives and cars are weapons, too, in places with strict gun control.

But look at the rate of incidents.

 

[lifesavacation]

So incredibly sad. But, IMO, until we have incredibly strict gun control laws across the entire country, and enforce them hard, this type of tragedy will happen over and over and over. I am staunchly, firmly anti-gun and always have been. Never had one, never will, don't understand why people do. I know it may not be a popular opinion, but it's just my opinion.

Our nation would be a safer place if it existed with guns. But much like nuclear weapons, if even just one person/nation has them, then everyone else argues they need them for protection.

 

[Hikergirl]

Our nation would be a safer place if it existed with guns. But much like nuclear weapons, if even just one person/nation has them, then everyone else argues they need them for protection.

No, there is no need to argue, we have a Constitutional right to own them. Whether we feel we need, or just want them is irrelevant.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

No, there is no need to argue, we have a Constitutional right to own them. Whether we feel we need, or just want them is irrelevant.

The constitution can be changed. It has 27 times, in fact.

 

[lifesavacation]

I'm not a fan of sheltering in place, either.

But the first mass shooting I can think of happened at Grover Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego, CA in 1979. The shooter shot at children on the playground outside. 8 children were wounded and 2 died.

Ten years later, a similar incident took place on Stockton, CA, where children were shot (also at a school called Cleveland Elementary School). 5 children were killed and 32 were injured.

So many school shootings And it’s just not possible to account for every scenario. Not sure what the answer is.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

James Beal‏
I've now covered the 1st, 2nd, 5th and 9th deadliest shootings in American history. Been in the States just 2 years.

 

[Hikergirl]

The constitution can be changed. It has 27 times, in fact.

Of those 27 times, can you point to one where American's rights were TAKEN away?

I'm not familiar with the changes, but if you are I'd love to read up on any that have.

IMO the 2nd amendment is not going away. That doesn't mean that there can't e gun control though. Not every pro-gun, pro 2nd amendment person is against that.
However I think that alone will not work, we have a cultural problem, we have a mental health problem. We need to look for a multi faceted solution.
I will argue that we also have 2 sides that don't want to work together problem as well. I think that is the first thing that needs to be fixed in this country.

 

[lifesavacation]

No, there is no need to argue, we have a Constitutional right to own them. Whether we feel we need, or just want them is irrelevant.

I know. The 2nd amendment isn’t going anywhere unless everyone can agree to give up their weapons, and that will never happen. We need to look at things we CAN do, like redesigning schools.

 

[mnrose]

I know. The 2nd amendment isn’t going anywhere unless everyone can agree to give up their weapons, and that will never happen. We need to look at things we CAN do, like redesigning schools.

Why can't we read the 2nd Amendment like it was read for more than two hundred years....you know, the part about "well-regulated militia" and all? But, no, that's too easy. Better that we permit anyone to own any kind of gun they want. Heller needs to be overturned. Go back to the way it was before. At least then, we'd have a fighting chance if states want to regulate guns heavily.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Of those 27 times, can you point to one where American's rights were TAKEN away?

Well, depending on your point of view:

• The 11th amendment makes states immune from lawsuits from out-of-state citizens.
• The 13th amendment abolished slavery. Previously people had the right to own others. I think we can agree the right to own slaves was a bad idea. That particular right was not previously enumerated in the Constitution, but it was legal at the time of the original articles (hence the 3/5ths compromise).
• The 18th banned the manufacturing an sale of alcohol. That one didn't turn out well.
• The 22nd enacts a Presidential term limit. Is being President for life a right? Eh.

But yeah, there hasn't been a amendment that removes the 1st or 4th or 5th or whatever. I agree it's not going to happen. But it's not physically impossible. Just will never happen politically.

 

[MamaBelle4]

However I think that alone will not work, we have a cultural problem, we have a mental health problem. We need to look for a multi faceted solution

I completely agree with this.

And for the record, I am not anti gun. I'm anti weapons that are combat or made to appear or mimic combat weapons. And, in regards to the second amendment, it provides for a "well regulated militia". Unfortunately it is horribly vague. It doesn't say "any American can own whatever firearm tthey chose."

 

[Gumbo4x4]

When was the last mass shooting in Australia? Great Britian? Canada? Japan?

Yes, they exist. But look:

Last one in Canada? Over a year ago. There were none between 2007 and 2010. None.

Australia? There was a car attack last year. A stabbing attack in 2014. Nothing in between. The last gun related incident was a hostage situation in 2014 and a husband killed his wife and children in a separate incident in 2014. Family-related shooting happens all the time in the United States.

England? The last school shooting was in 1996. If you don't include terrorist attacks, there was an knife attack in March 2017, and none between then and June 2010.

Japan? An arson in 2017, a knife attack in 2016, an arson in 2008 and a car/stabbing attack in 2008.


So, knives and cars are weapons, too, in places with strict gun control.

But look at the rate of incidents.

I think we all agree that there will be no gun issues if there are no guns. I think it’s also impractical to believe we’ll see that in our lifetimes in the US.

And regarding Canada, 22% of Canadian homes have guns compared to 33% of American homes. The “lack” of firearms in Canada is a myth. But, the lack of shootings is a real thing. Moreover, civilians are even MORE likely to possess firearms in Switzerland and Israel than in the US. These countries also have extremely low rates of gun violence.

 

[Hikergirl]

I completely agree with this.

And for the record, I am not anti gun. I'm anti weapons that are combat or made to appear or mimic combat weapons. And, in regards to the second amendment, it provides for a "well regulated militia". Unfortunately it is horribly vague. It doesn't say "any American can own whatever firearm tthey chose."

I do believe somewhere it is outlined what falls under that. Don't really know enough about though, but I believe one can find the info out there.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

I completely agree with this.

And for the record, I am not anti gun.

I know I've rather militant on the issue, but honestly, I've got no problems with people owning a handgun for protection or a bolt or level action rifle for hunting or what not. I just don't understand the reasoning behind owning a a large caliber weapon with a large clip. I am also for registering all weapons and having stricter background checks. The perpetrator of this crime should not have been able to buy a gun. But he did, legally. Reports suggested he had abused animals previously and had been expelled. He should not have had a weapon.

 

[MamaBelle4]

I know I've rather militant on the issue, but honestly, I've got no problems with people owning a handgun for protection or a bolt or level action rifle for hunting or what not. I just don't understand the reasoning behind owning a a large caliber weapon with a large clip. I am also for registering all weapons and having stricter background checks. The perpetrator of this crime should not have been able to buy a gun. But he did, legally. Reports suggested he had abused animals previously and had been expelled. He should not have had a weapon.

Exactly. Agree 100%

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Reports suggested he had abused animals previously and had been expelled. He should not have had a weapon.

And by "he should not have had a weapon", I am actually suggesting that his gun that he bought legally should have been confiscated after his animal abuse incidents and expulsion.

People found guilty of domestic abuse should have their weapons confiscated. People who have made terroristic threads should have their weapons confiscated. Your second amendment rights should stop at the point where you are a danger to others. The 1st amendment right of freedom of speech has limits. You can't threaten the life of the president, even though it's just speech. You can't incite panic. Your 2nd amendment rights should work the same way. If you are a danger to others, you don't get to own weapons.

 

[lifesavacation]

Well, depending on your point of view:

• The 11th amendment makes states immune from lawsuits from out-of-state citizens.
• The 13th amendment abolished slavery. Previously people had the right to own others. I think we can agree the right to own slaves was a bad idea. That particular right was not previously enumerated in the Constitution, but it was legal at the time of the original articles (hence the 3/5ths compromise).
• The 18th banned the manufacturing an sale of alcohol. That one didn't turn out well.
• The 22nd enacts a Presidential term limit. Is being President for life a right? Eh.

But yeah, there hasn't been a amendment that removes the 1st or 4th or 5th or whatever. I agree it's not going to happen. But it's not physically impossible. Just will never happen politically.

I think that eventually the 2nd amendment will get repealed. Maybe when this generation of kids grow up and become the leaders of our country, they’ll be better able to work together politically.