- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
Does the news regularly check how the mass shooters that are autistic/mentally ill obtain their weapons? Or is that usually too boring for their reports? Should the blame be on lackadaisical background checks?
Study shows gun control would prevent mass shootings
- Thread starter CatParty
- Start date
- Joined
- May 15, 2014
- Joined
- May 25, 2015
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Nah man, what would make you think that? Just cuz I'm kinda liberal and love surfing does not mean I am from California, bro. When I am not hear on the kiwi board, I am totally on my surfboard, dude.
Seriously, I am pretty conservative on some things and actually believe that some gun ownership is good. I just want tougher standards and people to be responsible with weapons. We have too many idiots in the US who are careless with weapons and no place for crazy people to be treated and locked away when they need it. Just like the first amendment has limitations, the second should too.
I cannot yell fire in a crowded theatre or slander someone with my freedom of speech, because that would be irresponsible and it harms others.
Is it too much to ask for people to have any standards or responsibility for gun ownership and sales activity? Rights have responsibilities attached to them. They are always double edged swords.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
Can you give concrete examples on what you mean by this, I'm kind of curious.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Actually enforcing the existing background check laws that are on the books would be a nice start.
Dylann Roof, for instance, was not legally entitled to purchase a gun because of his criminal background, but was allowed to purchase one anyway.
This wouldn't even require passing any new laws.
Roof is far from the only person who would be excluded from possessing a firearm under any reasonable regime.
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Alright, a valid question. In the US we are supposed to have background checks. Still people can often sell guns to each other and even give guns to people who have no business having them. Example Adam Lanza.
1. National Gun Database: While a lot info about Guns is tracked. I really don't think enough is. I think if you have a gun registered to you and it is involved in a crime - if you did not report it stolen within a reasonable time frame. You should go to jail. That gun was your responsibility and you have a duty to report it. If people were suddenly concerned that they could be jailed for allowing their guns to go missing, it would end a number of loop holes real quick. Register every gun and every gun that is unregistered, destroy them. Having a comprehensive national database registering guns is completely reasonable. If you want to say that criminals will still get guns, then register the Ammo, too. Gun stores and retailers have to consistently control their inventory from shrink and expecting them to be more careful who they sell ammo to is not unreasonable. If the crooks have the guns already in circulation, then starve them of Ammo! We control Explosives in the US. Why not Ammo?
2. Required training and Certification for Semi-automatic and High-powered weapons: Another easy idea. These weapons are unique and their sale should be allowed, but restricted to people who have had enough training to use them properly. It is perfectly fine for you to own an AR-15. You should at least have enough training to know where the safety is and how to reload a weapon that is this potent.
3. This!
4. Mandatory gun safety training for pistols, shotguns, and light rifles for everyone, not just gun owners. I would even incorporate it in school curriculum. I have no problem with people having guns. I would even encourage more responsible citizens having them. Too many people want their 2nd amendment rights without learning how to use them properly. Train everyone how to use a gun. Make it mandatory. The level of ignorance in America involving guns is horrible, especially with how prevalent they are.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2015
we have here 26.something murders per 100.000 gun banning here dont work and we voted against it,but it the law went into effect anyway,im glad we can pass soon a law relaxing this retarded gun control.
Obviously it wouldn't be american levels of gun control,we would still require to be 21 years old and have a gun training,mental and health checks every year.
Obviously it wouldn't be american levels of gun control,we would still require to be 21 years old and have a gun training,mental and health checks every year.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
I can't really argue with tougher standards. Even the NRA supports tougher standards.
Q
QI 541
Guest
kiwifarms.net
You know what else would prevent mass shootings? Human extinction.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
NRA members do, but the organization itself doesn't, because they are also a gun industry lobby.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
All that really needs to be done is to fix the gap between the mental health industry and the background check system. In theory, that would cull quite a few of these autists from going on rampages, or at least make it slightly more difficult for them to arm themselves, without violating anyone's rights. I don't put any faith in the law myself, but in theory, this may cut off at least a few. I doubt it, though.
An Australian style "turn them all in" ban would never work in America. In fact, people would bury their stuff and/or a civil war could break out over something like this. Of course, the government is way too incompetent for any grand plan to force its citizens to give up 300 million privately owned firearms.
They can't even build a functioning website.
Gun control is like trying to prevent drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars. It does absolutely nothing but punish the innocent for the crimes of a very few. Besides, the vast majority of firearm deaths in America are either suicides, or between gangs of drug dealers in poor, ghetto, inner-city neighborhoods, often with illegally obtained firearms. That shit doesn't make for sensational headlines though, so the gun grabbers and their scumbag politician allies have to wait until a tragedy they can exploit comes along.
An Australian style "turn them all in" ban would never work in America. In fact, people would bury their stuff and/or a civil war could break out over something like this. Of course, the government is way too incompetent for any grand plan to force its citizens to give up 300 million privately owned firearms.
They can't even build a functioning website.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
Ya but you used a gun to do the drive by on Phil.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2014
1.) The mentally ill/autistic tend to have one of two types of parents: the very anti-gun Liberal sort that shelter the fuck out of them, and the staunch Republican right-wingers who believe Jesus cursed them with a shit child and that guns are life. Typically, mass shooters have the latter type of parent, in which the fault can be traced back to the parents' lack of protection of their gun storage. Hypothetically, if we made it mandatory for gun safes to be purchased with every firearm, the number of shootings done by the mentally ill and/or edgy teens would drop. Then there's also the fact that in many states, background checks don't include mental health, and in even more states, a "background check" consists of sizing up the buyer. Unless the guy at the gun show looking to buy your vintage Luger P08 is wearing Opa Klaus's German electrician's helmet from 1942, you're probably not going to realise he's up to some shit.
2.) Police incompetence can be pinned on how the physical requirements to become a police officer are extremely lax. You could be a whale and still take on the blue in this country. The number of brutality cases in which
3.) It's not the standard cops' job to swarm buildings. That's SWAT. I don't know why they didn't just swat the school. In fact, it's not even a cop's job to protect citizens (which was actually upheld in a Supreme Court case or something), because their primary duty is to enforce the law.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2015
Although this is about drugs it applies equally to guns
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
Good points made, but honestly, mass shooters come from political backgrounds of all stripes. Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris's partner in the Columbine High School massacre, was Jewish and raised in a staunch anti-gun Democratic household. I'm not entirely sure about Eric Harris's background though. I believe Jared Loughner's family was Democrat as well. Of course, this does not necessarily imply that either party is necessarily "good" or "evil," it just proves that no particular background or upbringing has a monopoly on raising violent children (or violent adults). Also, nearly all mass shooters have shitty social lives, a lot like the "incels" discussed elsewhere on this site.
Now I'm not saying irresponsible parents aren't a problem. My dad let me shoot his guns, but only under strict supervision, and they are locked up when we are not using them. I am a gun owner myself and I always lock them up when not in use. And what's with these Jesus nuts loving firearms so much? Get real, like he would own one in the first place.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2015
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
Do you have evidence to support this claim? I've heard quite the opposite.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2015
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
Well I knew he had friends and stuff, but never really thought of him as popular. Most mass murderers are not very socially savvy to begin with. Cho Seung Hui certainly wasn't. There is variation and most tend to gravitate towards not having many friends or romantic successes from what I have observed.
Just because someone isn't popular in school doesn't mean we have a future mass murderer on our hands, either.