Where to go from here? (Possible debate, gun control)

[Pea-n-Me]

As has been in the news the past few days, an FBI criminal background check failure allowed the Charleston gunman to legally purchase the weapon used in the tragic shooting of nine innocent people.

Details here: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ch...nn-roof-should-not-have-been-sold-gun-n390056

So now what? Is there a way to fix the current system? Or are new laws necessary?

Keep it nice and respectful, please.

 

[Vaughn4380]

Well the government background check failed completely and allowed those people to be murdered, so I doubt the solution for this is more goverment regulations.

 

[luvsJack]

There have been issues with background checks of any kind for a very long time. We don't need stricter laws or more background checks, they need to fix what we have.

Would a 5 day waiting period rather than 3 day have helped at all?

 

[bdcp]

It was human error. The agent doing the check after seeing his record called the incorrect police department due to clerical errors in records that listed the wrong agency/location and didn't get the correct info. This is not about another solution, but about improving what we have. It wasn't a failure of the overall system perse, but a domino effect of one piece of bad information. Human error will happen a certain percentage of the time no matter what you do. Double and triple checks will help. There is a fine balance between good government control and too much intrusion into people's lives. This shooting was not the fault of the background investigation, but started long before he even bought the gun with his overall history and interests. If it hadn't been a gun, it would have been something else. If you think not being able to get a gun would have stopped him from doing something, you're wrong. When individuals can't get guns, they use machetes, explosives, whatever they can get ahold of and have killed just as many.

 

[luvsJack]

I agree that it is not the fault of the gun that he killed those people. But a drug addict should not have the ability to buy a gun. We can't ignore that there was a breakdown in the system.

And maybe we should look at the fact that he is a drug addict and what those drugs have done to his brain and thought process. Drugs are a horrible problem in this country.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Both sides of the debate are visceral which leads to a bunch of jaw jacking and not toward reasonable solutions imo.

The reality is that you cannot have a perfect system, people are going to slip through. However you can close gaps in the current system to improve background checks. Which leads to the statement above.

It is a merry go round.

 

[Teresa Pitman]

I agree that people who want to harm other people will use other weapons if they can't get guns. But guns are so much more effective at killing. The same day as the 27 children were shot at Sandy Hook, there was an incident in China where a man went into a school with a knife and tried to stab the children to death. He was able to injure some people but none of them died. If he had had a gun, I bet the story would have been rather different. I think anything that can be done to reduce access to guns has got to be helpful.

 

[MickeySP]

When you can invent perfect people, you will have a perfect system.

 

[luvsJack]

I find it interesting that the whole country is debating a flag because of this tragedy but when a breakdown in the supposed background checks is pointed out, the reaponse is "oh well, nothing is perfect". Not just here but in other discussions too.

And its happened before with other shootings. We blame a video game but not the fact that teenagers had access to guns bought at a gun show.

I am all for gun ownership but there has to be responsibility for making sure the wrong people don't end up with those guns. It has to be made harder to purchase a gun. Any kind of gun.

 

[Disneyliscious]

Laws do not stop people from committing crimes. If it did, we'd have very few crimes. Therefore, additional or stricter gun laws is not the answer. The best solution is for businesses, school and entities to allow conceal carry. If a member of that church had been carrying a concealed weapon, 9 people wouldn't have died. Perhaps 3 or 4 would have but the gunman would not have been able to have the time to reload. Some lives would have been saved.

When you create gun free zones, you are creating a vulnerable situation that makes it open season for criminals. Why do you think they are targeting schools and churches? They know there will be no resistance there.

With that said, people need to understand that making entities a conceal carry zone does not mean everything will be perfect. Somewhere down the road a high school student will knock a teacher in the head and take their gun. You can't stop things like that. There are casualties in every aspect of "war" and the war against these deranged gunmen will be no different. But overall, if a school allows teachers and administrators to conceal carry, a gunman will be much less likely to enter. Whats an even better option than that is to physically search every person who enters a school building - even parents of students there. Budgeting for armed guards would stop the intruder before he ever entered the school. Allow them to open the first door which enters a room where they must be scanned (like at the airport) by someone outside the room. After being scanned, a guard enters the room and does a physical check. Then at that point, they can enter the school. Its time consuming, costly, and can be annoying but I bet the parents of Sandy Hook would have given anything to have that. There is -no- price that is too big to keep our kids safe.

Promoting gun safety and training is the answer. Outlawing certain guns does nothing. Criminals will still find semi auto and auto weapons on the "black market" just like they do cocaine and meth. You don't combat a problem by outlawing the weapon, you combat the problem by properly training more people how to responsibly handle the weapons.

People say "Well Australia banned guns and they have very little crime". Australia never had the amounts of guns we have in America. They are a small continent compared to us. You'd never physically be able to confiscate all the guns in America and criminals aren't going to participate in buy backs. There would also be an incredible resistance from hunters and responsible gun owners who have a 2nd Amendment right to own them.

In other countries where guns were restricted, crimes with other objects rose significantly. Cocktail bombs, shards of glass, almost anything you can imagine used as a weapon saw an increase in its use.

But you say "Well I'd rather have him use a shard of glass than a gun". But would you? Because if the criminal couldn't use a gun neither could you. Then you are left to find another weapon to combat him and his bombs which would likely require close up range.

Its a topic people really need to sink their heads into. The liberal media is brainwashing a nation into acting without thinking. If you let them (the gov) outlaw semi automatic weapons, they will then push to outlaw every other weapon. Before you know it, you can't even own a weapon to protect yourself and your family. Its easy to think "well I will agree to ban semi auto because that still lets gun owners have guns and it stops criminals from using them so its a win/win". No. Thats not how it works. If a criminal wants to use a semi automatic weapon he -will- get his hands on one. The law is useless.

Restricting gun laws restricts the responsible gun owners who can and will protect other people. I cannot stress to you enough how important it is to NOT have tougher gun laws. Universal background checks should be mandatory. Waiting periods do nothing. In CA you have to wait 10 days. If I was a criminal I'd just "get a word on the street" and meet up to pay cash for a purchase. Thats how things work. Waiting periods only affect responsible gun owners. The only people who you are restricting with tougher or new gun laws are the people who do things the legal way.

 

[leebee]

I find it interesting that the whole country is debating a flag because of this tragedy but when a breakdown in the supposed background checks is pointed out, the reaponse is "oh well, nothing is perfect". Not just here but in other discussions too.

And its happened before with other shootings. We blame a video game but not the fact that teenagers had access to guns bought at a gun show.

I am all for gun ownership but there has to be responsibility for making sure the wrong people don't end up with those guns. It has to be made harder to purchase a gun. Any kind of gun.

I think the controversy with the Confederate flag was the "perfect diversion" to take media focus off the gun issue. And I agree with luvsJack; it should be harder to get a gun than it is. It's harder to get a driver's license, and in some states it's harder to get a marriage license than it is to get a gun. This makes no sense to me.

 

[JoeA]

...there has to be responsibility for making sure the wrong people don't end up with those guns. It has to be made harder to purchase a gun. Any kind of gun.

There was "responsibility" but human error reared its ugly head. If the person(s) followed protocol this kid would have been denied, from my understanding.

The law worked but people didn't.

 

[luvsJack]

There was "responsibility" but human error reared its ugly head. If the person(s) followed protocol this kid would have been denied, from my understanding.

The law worked but people didn't.

The article said that there was a mistake, while the person was trying to get the correct information the 3 days ran out. That was what got him the gun. We have bad information but times up! And a drug addict gets a gun.

Thats not just human error. There should not be a limit on how long it takes them to get the info needed to issue permission to purchase a deadly weapon. Red tape and finding correct information holds up all kinds of things. Permission to purchase a gun should not be given until all information is checked and rechecked.

 

[Christine]

In a perfect world, I would like guns outlawed. Even though that doesn't 100% stop things, I have lived in two countries where guns are illegal and I think it's safer and it's what I prefer. I don't want to go down into some flaming argument over this. It's just how I feel and that opinion will not change having experienced living in places with gun control and without. I'd also add that I have been involved in a mass shooting by a mentally ill individual.

Having said that and knowing that we live in a country where everyone is allowed to own and carry a gun, then we need to do something about how they are obtained.

Any instance of mental disability should, by law, be reported into a central database solely used for gun purchases. If a facility does not report, they should be held liable for injuries or death sustained from a person who performs that act with a controlled weapon. This alone would have stopped the Navy Yard shooter from buying a shotgun the weekend before his rampage on a Monday morning. There were plenty of red flags on this guy and none were officially reported where they should have been. He should have NEVER been sold a gun.

Background checks should be done more thoroughly with possibly a second check done behind them to ensure that the person doing the first check did not make mistakes.

Once you own a gun, you should be subject to continued background checks much like a security clearance as we all know, people change.

If you own a gun, it should be your responsibility to appropriately control it so that no one around you can take it. If you have not demonstrated proper procedure in caring for your gun and someone in your family takes it and shoots up people, the penalty should be severe.

Any human involved with the sale of a gun, who does not adhere to the law, should be suffer stiff penalties if it is discovered that are not being stringent on procedure.

While I believe in the saying that guns don't kill people, people kill people, I have to agree with the poster above who said that guns are very efficient and effective at killing many people in a short amount of time.

 

[3Gsandme]

Step 1: improve our current systems so mistakes like this don't happen anymore

Step 2: stop the sale of semi-automatic and automatic weapons. Allow current owners to keep their semi-automatic and automatic guns through registration. Not sure how I think we should handle the sale Of those existing guns.

Step 3: anyone who wants to purchase a gun must either attend a gun safety course or prove that they attended a gun safety course. Guns are serious weapons and so many death from guns are from people being stupid. If you can't pass a gun safety class, you cannot own a gun until you can. I think like drivers licenses you should have to be recertified every so often.

 

[Disneyliscious]

Step 3: anyone who wants to purchase a gun must either attend a gun safety course or prove that they attended a gun safety course. Guns are serious weapons and so many death from guns are from people being stupid. If you can't pass a gun safety class, you cannot own a gun until you can. I think like drivers licenses you should have to be recertified every so often.

Agreed. This was what I was saying when I said "more training". A person should not be able to buy a gun unless they can prove they have been trained in how to use it or accept training from the retailer which involves oral, written, and hands on training covering 8+ hours of training time, and 4 subsequent hours of training time for each different type of gun purchased thereafter. People need to be taught how to properly clean guns, store them, fully break them down and put them together, how to take control of a gun from someone else, proper ammunition, learn about different styles of holsters and cases, how the weight of the gun affects it, how barrel length affects the gun, etc. Its a mountain of knowledge that is being assumed people know when they buy a gun. Responsibly owning a gun is not just being able to say "It isn't loaded".

My bf is a gun safety trainer and its utterly sad at what people don't know when they walk out of the store/range when they purchase a gun. There are no laws to say they should have any kind of training and that is something we both feel very strongly about.

Also, did you know that police officers receive less gun training than someone who is a range instructor at a gun range?

))

 

[Vaughn4380]

by

Step 1: improve our current systems so mistakes like this don't happen anymore

Step 2: stop the sale of semi-automatic and automatic weapons. Allow current owners to keep their semi-automatic and automatic guns through registration. Not sure how I think we should handle the sale Of those existing guns.

Step 3: anyone who wants to purchase a gun must either attend a gun safety course or prove that they attended a gun safety course. Guns are serious weapons and so many death from guns are from people being stupid. If you can't pass a gun safety class, you cannot own a gun until you can. I think like drivers licenses you should have to be recertified every so often.

New York and Chicago have already implemented all of your ideas, and yet they still have a high number of murders with guns. The criminals just ignore the new laws and continue to commit crimes.

 

[Colleen27]

The article said that there was a mistake, while the person was trying to get the correct information the 3 days ran out. That was what got him the gun. We have bad information but times up! And a drug addict gets a gun.

Thats not just human error. There should not be a limit on how long it takes them to get the info needed to issue permission to purchase a deadly weapon. Red tape and finding correct information holds up all kinds of things. Permission to purchase a gun should not be given until all information is checked and rechecked.

Absolutely! There was an error in DH's background check for starting his new job that caused a delay in getting the results. Did they let him start anyway and sort it out later? Of course not - they pushed his start date back a week to get complete and accurate information. Gun background checks should work the same way, none of this "Time's up" crap. But I'm sure given the current state of things in Washington that would reveal understaffed agencies and result in unacceptable delays, much like the whole IRS/identity theft issue has.

We also need new rules demanding more responsible gun ownership. Not restrictions on ownership, necessarily, but requirements that stolen guns be reported immediately (to crack down on the problem of people who can pass background checks buying guns, selling them on the black market, and claiming they were "stolen" when those guns are later used in the commission of crimes) and stricter safety requirements for concealed carry permits (it takes a 6 week class, 6 months of practice, and a skills test to get a driving permit but you can get a CCW after a one-day 6 hour class). There should also be a mechanism to revoke the right to gun ownership following actions that would disqualify one from legally purchasing a firearm, and less of an "accidents happen" mindset excusing irresponsible handling of firearms.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Step 1: improve our current systems so mistakes like this don't happen anymore

Step 2: stop the sale of semi-automatic and automatic weapons. Allow current owners to keep their semi-automatic and automatic guns through registration. Not sure how I think we should handle the sale Of those existing guns.

Step 3: anyone who wants to purchase a gun must either attend a gun safety course or prove that they attended a gun safety course. Guns are serious weapons and so many death from guns are from people being stupid. If you can't pass a gun safety class, you cannot own a gun until you can. I think like drivers licenses you should have to be recertified every so often.

Automatic weapons have all but been eliminated from private hands due to a rider on the McClure-Volkmer act of 1986. You CAN still get one, but it's very expensive ($20,000 each) & there is a much more stringent background check. And they've been highly regulated since 1934. There has only been one instance since that time of a legally owned automatic weapon being used in a crime in the US.

Banning semi-autos will be a tough sell. More than half of all rifles and ~90% of all handgun sales are semi-auto.


Back to the original point, you can't just remove someone's rights on a psychiatrist's recommendations. You won't just be fighting the NRA; you'll be fighting the ACLU. But, we have to do a better job of reporting. The VA Tech shooter did have his day in court, and he was declared incompetent. But, the state failed to pass that info on to the Federal Government. Both sides of the gun debate have been screaming about this for years & very little has been done about it. Obama called for better reporting, but I don't know if it's happened yet.

Most people would like to see face to face, private party sales of used fireams (the ONLY legal gun sales without a background check) brought into the background system. Unfortunately, enforcing that would require registration & that isn't going to happen.

My idea is a national firearms owners card - but with a twist. Give it to EVERYONE (whether you want a gun or not) when they get their driver's license. That gets everyone into the database & doesn't single out gun owners. And let's face it, if you've been declared incompetent, you probably shouldn't be driving either. If you've done anything to make yourself ineligible, your ID is confiscated and you would have to go to the DMV for a new ID that declares you ineligible. This lets private party sellers know they're not selling to an ineligible buyer - and make it a crime not to check.

In the meantime, we need to allow access to the NICS to private party sellers at no cost.

 

[3Gsandme]

by

New York and Chicago have already implemented all of your ideas, and yet they still have a high number of murders with guns. The criminals just ignore the new laws and continue to commit crimes.

They have gun safety licensing in Chicago? I didn't know that. I need to do some reading on that. That's a great step and hopefully they'll see some benefit.

Regrading gun violence in geneal on the South Side, I don't have an answer for that except to say it goes beyond mere gun control laws and encompasses something that needs psychologists and psychiatrists more than police officers. Those communities need help to end the violence and if it's not with guns (which make it easy, admittedly) it will be with someone else.