KB, you might start by avoiding even more guns in the street...

Not an answer to the question.

Answer the question and not strawman.

if you make illegal to possess a gun then it makes it a hell of a lot harder to keep them on the streets

@Yoyoyozo I was trying to appease Republicans by attacking liberals, that way they would listen to what I was saying. I would agree with you though I kind of failed and ended up alienating both parties.

"Answer the question and not strawman."
Yes sir

@ML just make illegal to pisses the gun? It’s that easy?

Holy cow. You got it all figured out.

I mean like 95% of gun violence against others is already done with illegal weapons but I’m sure your plan will elimate that.

@KB most guns that are found at crime scenes are stolen from legal gun users. If you make it illegal to own a gun then it harder to steal a gun

That’s been statistically proven inaccurate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.1b4418e62a58

Exactly.

If you actually read the article, it states that 30% of the guns were stolen.

Not sure what math you were taught, but I was taught that 30% is not most.

sorry that was an error on my part, 79% of crimes committed were used by people using other people guns. My argument still stands though if you ban everyone from having guns other people cannot get them stolen or not since they are other peoples guns. Also 30% is still a lot of guns.

If you read the article it stated that most of those 79% were from straw purchases. People buying guns on behalf of others.

Something that is already illegal.

So a large portion of those ‘legally’ purchased guns were actually not legally purchased.

And you do realize that totally banning guns will never happen as that is something that only a small minority of people in this country want.

It literally says "perpetrator was carrying a firearm owned by someone else" that does not imply that it was a straw purchase. Honestly, it doesn't matter whether or not they were straw purchases. If you make guns illegal then you can't purchase a gun for someone else or yourself.

I am going to go to bed, but I enjoyed arguing with you. It is always nice to get an opposing viewpoint.

I know what it literally says. 30% were stolen and most the rest were strawman purchased.

It talks about it in the actual article. Not just the pie chart you seem to be focusing on.

Okay, let me tackle this from a different angle, since this isn't working.

Kansas, our President says that this was a case of mental illness. The majority of mass shooters have exhibited signs of mental illness. And believe it or not, both that statement and orathaic's statement can be true - the majority of people with mental illness are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violence AND the majority of mass violence perpetrators are mentally ill. It's because one has a populations size in the millions, the other in the hundreds (if that). Conservatives have long said that mass shootings stem more from society's inability to handle mental illnesses properly than from the ability to buy weapons themselves.

So, given the conservative standpoint - propose a solution. One that actually prevents the wrong people from getting weapons. Because acceptance of the status quo is intolerable to the majority of society. Something needs to be done. I am interested to hear your thoughts.

As an aside, I am conservative, or at least lean right. People who have been on the forum long enough can vouch for that. That you group me in with liberals shows just how far to the right the alt-right has pushed the political spectrum. I was big on both Romney and McCain.

And until a few years ago, I was all of the opinion that better mental health treatments in the US was the way to go. Early diagnosis and counseling. Separate government run treatment facilities. But that would end up being enormously, and prohibitively, expensive. At this point, the best solution I would have in an ideal world is a constitutional amendment, or a supreme Court reinterpretation. Nothing short of that, followed by massive gun buyback programs (one-time cost vs ongoing cost of treatment) will lead to a relatively safe population. Will there still be incidents? Yes. Will there be fewer? Most likely. I just want to stop reading headlines of people dying, and I'm sick and tired of nothing being done. Arguing. That's all that's ever done - arguing and hot air.

Before passing new laws perhaps we should concentrate on enforcing the ones on the books ans tightening up reporting. The air force owns this debacle

@goldfinger

as for solutions, we clearly need a way of streamlining criminal databases... the Air Force apparently screwed up here.

furthermore, I wouldn't be entirely against a gun registry, as long as it were not public, and only on a judge's grant could someone look into it (to avoid any and all possible targeting - or claims of targeting - of gun owners) and this might help track guns.

the private seller's issue also allows guns into the hands of people with suspect character, and we should consider some basic information to be recorded about the seller, even if the idea of background checks would be too difficult to implement.

ban any easy mods that make weapons fully automatic (it think this one has been repeated quite a bit)

have psychological check ups required for gun owners and confirmed by private (non-govt) doctor, once every X- number of years (that'd be an interesting number to debate)

gun laws restricting ownership (or securing of weaponry) if minors or mentally ill are living indoor household

monitor the southern border for gun transfers (interestingly enough, more guns come from usa TO Mexico than the other way around, but it's still a problem).

monitor the types of equipment used to make ghost guns more heavily (specifically the heavy duty 3D printers that are programmed for these types of things... although I did see a youtube video of a guy making a AR 15 lower, just form melted aluminum soda cans, with carpenter's tools.)

increase gun buy-back programs, especially in inner cities where gun crime is truly devastating. there have been weekends in Chicago alone where 30+ people die, and get no national coverage. this last weekend 5 have died from what I can tell, but it's less dramatic than single shooter incidents that are separate from drug crimes and gang violence.

states could put out a vote on whether or not to offer gun safety and training classes, I mean we have many other government sponsored classes, this could help lower accidental deaths quite a bit.

as for the mass shootings, I'm not sure what specific policy can help, targeting mental health perhaps? but then the mandala bay shooter isn't covered in that... although one could consider that attack unique.

one thing we could do is start a massive ostracizing campaign on this shit. whenever a shooting occurs, focus almost solely on the victims in the media, and whenever they refer to the shooter have it be something like "loser" or "bitch-ass fuck boy" or "that one kid who only eats mayonnaise on rye with nothing else, I mean what a disgusting little cunt" but on a serious note: don't give these people spotlights. at all. attack the cultural aspect, but legislatively that'd encroach on rights for free press so I don't know...


I think gun buy backs would be pretty high on the list for these things, attack the financial greed of the sick mind. the problem would be people abusing the system trying to profit off of selling guns back to the government, but from an incentive based perspective I really like them

@ KANSASB...Is your way of thinking and doing things reducing gun deaths now ?

if it is then hey your right but Im fairly sure the current trend is not showing that.

@goldfinger. The current laws we have should have prevented the Texas shooter from having a gun. The Obama restrictions Trump overturned had nothing to do with the current situation.

I have also said many times that instead of wasting money on further restrictions that money would be better served going towards improved mental health care.

Capt Brad you are 100% correct. Let’s work on making sure the current system in place is working as it should prior to adding onto it.

The current trend of increased gun deaths has far more to do with increased gun violence from gangs and such more than the high profile mass shootings that the media loves to glorify. They are awful and no one wants those to happen but look at Chicago. In 2015 they had about 470 gun deaths. Last year over 700. They went over 500 for this year back in Sept.

And Chicago has some of the strictest gun codes in the country. Illinois is one of seven states that require a license to purchase firearms and the City of Chicago has a ban on assault rifles.

Doesn’t seem to be doing much to prevent gun violence does it?

Yes, probably you need to fight gang violence also.
I wonder what happens in the other 6 states

The article I read did not list the other six states.

I just read the Brady rankings for gun laws which ranked California as having the toughest gun laws.

California also ranked first in most murders with over 1900, almost 1400 of them by gun which is more than the total murders in any other state, so they would have to rank first in gun murders as well.

California is also the leader in population so that argument is specious.

But if strong gun restrictions really worked. The state with the toughest gun laws wouldn’t have more gun murders than any other stare had murders.

NYC has extremely tight gun laws and has fewer homicides than Chicago. If you cherry-pick your data, of course you will find some bright spots that stand out from the rest to use as talking points.

But you say mental health spending. How much? What would it entail? Who pays? What programs are you looking to create?

And moreover, you only put forward mental healthcare as a solution, but I fail to see how it would help solve the Chicago problem you highlight

I fail to see how tighter gun controls help the problem in Chicago also.

That’s great that NYC has fewer gun murders than the city with the most gun murders in the country. Wow. Talk about cherry picking your data.

As for money I’d use what ever money the liberals propose on tighter gun controls and I’d let the mental health experts determine what new programs to create or which current programs would be expanded.