Gun Violence in America

[ptatc]

There is one single gun shop in Riverdale that sold guns used in 1500 crimes in Chicago in a 5 year period.

I've been there. It's just like you would suspect. I walked out of there and told my friend "you know we are on the FBI watch list now."

[Balta1701]

Just remember everyone who is agreeing that there should be some training or registration or literally anything that anyone has said that we should do - if you vote for a single Republican at the state or national level, you are voting against that. You are currently voting for less registration, less training, for legal gun sales to people who are being treated for various mental illnesses.

[Wanne]

Ok...I'm as pro gun as they come but agree some things need to be done. Everybody is on the Slide Fires now...which I've always thought those should be illegal.

 

First and foremost and I've harped on this for quite some time...everybody is talking about changing the "gun laws"...but why aren't people complaining or wanting to change the HIPAA laws? It makes absolutely zero sense a person can go purchase a weapon legally if they're under the care of a psychologist or psychiatrist does it? Or someone that's been prescribed antidepressant...or anxiety. Why not have it like the ATF forms when you're filling out to purchase a weapon? I know this was a hot topic a while back of whether it was legal for a doctor to ask if you owned firearms. However...if this doctor KNOWS you own firearms and they're still treating someone who's having some deep psychological issues...wouldn't that make the doctor just as liable as any shooter? Anyway...my point is...that would be one place to start IMO.

 

The other...eliminate the websites that allow sale between individuals locally... ie: armslist...backpage...etc. People harp on the gunshows...but honestly if you've ever been to a gunshow...you still have to go thru the background checks when you purchase a weapon. The only cases where you don't are the individuals walking around selling personal firearms (out here they can do that). But honestly...gun shows really aren't the issue.

 

Gun training really has very little to do with the entire issue...

[Balta1701]

Ok...I'm as pro gun as they come but agree some things need to be done. Everybody is on the Slide Fires now...which I've always thought those should be illegal.

 

First and foremost and I've harped on this for quite some time...everybody is talking about changing the "gun laws"...but why aren't people complaining or wanting to change the HIPAA laws? It makes absolutely zero sense a person can go purchase a weapon legally if they're under the care of a psychologist or psychiatrist does it? Or someone that's been prescribed antidepressant...or anxiety. Why not have it like the ATF forms when you're filling out to purchase a weapon? I know this was a hot topic a while back of whether it was legal for a doctor to ask if you owned firearms. However...if this doctor KNOWS you own firearms and they're still treating someone who's having some deep psychological issues...wouldn't that make the doctor just as liable as any shooter? Anyway...my point is...that would be one place to start IMO.

 

The other...eliminate the websites that allow sale between individuals locally... ie: armslist...backpage...etc. People harp on the gunshows...but honestly if you've ever been to a gunshow...you still have to go thru the background checks when you purchase a weapon. The only cases where you don't are the individuals walking around selling personal firearms (out here they can do that). But honestly...gun shows really aren't the issue.

 

Gun training really has very little to do with the entire issue...

It wasn't a perfect rule, but see the CNN link in my last post. The Obama Administration issued a rule through the ATF that would have no longer allowed gun sales to people under such treatment if that treatment was registered through or funded by the Social Security Administration or something like that - information the government would already have (so not even trying to make a dent in getting that sort of information from other doctors). It would not have made a dent in this massacre, but it was what you just asked for.

 

Using the Congressional Review Act, the Republican Congress and Donald Trump overturned that rule in February of this year. Because of how that Act works, any executive branch is now blocked from issuing a similar rule unless Congress acts to authorize it.

 

So to stress again, if you voted for a Republican, any national level Republican, you voted against that statement. Against even trying.

@ABCPolitics

.@SpeakerRyan says rolling back regulation potentially restricting mentally ill people from buying guns about "protecting people's rights."

[Wanne]

It wasn't a perfect rule, but see the CNN link in my last post. The Obama Administration issued a rule through the ATF that would have no longer allowed gun sales to people under such treatment if that treatment was registered through or funded by the Social Security Administration or something like that - information the government would already have (so not even trying to make a dent in getting that sort of information from other doctors). It would not have made a dent in this massacre, but it was what you just asked for.

 

Using the Congressional Review Act, the Republican Congress and Donald Trump overturned that rule in February of this year. Because of how that Act works, any executive branch is now blocked from issuing a similar rule unless Congress acts to authorize it.

 

So to stress again, if you voted for a Republican, any national level Republican, you voted against that statement. Against even trying.

 

Ok...I'm going off the top of my head here...but that law was aimed more at not allowing people collecting social security (old people) to purchase weapons. I'll have to go back and look (because honestly...I trust CNN links about as much as National Inquirer crap). That really wasn't what I'm referring to anyway. I'm referring to ANYONE under psychological care...not just SSA recipients. Pretty sure that was the issue. Again...I'm going off my faint memory but will look it up.

 

Also...your last comment is one of the things that loses votes for Democrats in my opinion. That whole, "if you voted Republican...you voted to throw Granny off the cliff" kinda crap. It just doesn't work....thought maybe Democrats would have learned that last November. Let's not forget...Barry had complete control of the House and Senate for a few years...and didn't DO. JACK. SQUAT.

[ptatc]

Just remember everyone who is agreeing that there should be some training or registration or literally anything that anyone has said that we should do - if you vote for a single Republican at the state or national level, you are voting against that. You are currently voting for less registration, less training, for legal gun sales to people who are being treated for various mental illnesses.

so you're saying that every single Republican at the state and national level has voted against any measure?

Edited October 5, 2017 by ptatc

[ptatc]

Ok...I'm going off the top of my head here...but that law was aimed more at not allowing people collecting social security (old people) to purchase weapons. I'll have to go back and look (because honestly...I trust CNN links about as much as National Inquirer crap). That really wasn't what I'm referring to anyway. I'm referring to ANYONE under psychological care...not just SSA recipients. Pretty sure that was the issue. Again...I'm going off my faint memory but will look it up.

 

Also...your last comment is one of the things that loses votes for Democrats in my opinion. That whole, "if you voted Republican...you voted to throw Granny off the cliff" kinda crap. It just doesn't work....thought maybe Democrats would have learned that last November. Let's not forget...Barry had complete control of the House and Senate for a few years...and didn't DO. JACK. SQUAT.

I love this line. Hope you don't mind but I'm going to steal it for work tomorrow. Most of the common TVs at the university, lunch room, common areas, are tuned to CNN all day.

[Chicago White Sox]

I'd be happy with a buy-back program where you get $1K for every gun you turn in. Then ban them altogether. The black market would dwindle and we can eliminate one of the greatest causes of death in this country.

 

Yeah it's a pipe dream that would never happen, but I have yet to hear a reason why it shouldn't. People treating guns like it's the equivalent of oxygen or water and we would wither away without them.

Good god, people like you are the reason we can’t make any progress with gun controls in this country.

[BigSqwert]

Good god, people like you are the reason we can’t make any progress with gun controls in this country.

 

Not really. You might be referring to the inept people we elect to represent us.

 

Also, what a god awful world that would be! Could you imagine....no guns? How could we survive?!?! It's certainly worth tens of thousands of Americans dying each year so that little Timmy on the farm can shoot tin cans.

Edited October 5, 2017 by BigSqwert

[ptatc]

Not really. You might be referring to the inept people we elect to represent us.

 

Also, what a god awful world that would be! Could you imagine....no guns? How could we survive?!?! It's certainly worth tens of thousands of Americans dying each year so that little Timmy on the farm can shoot tin cans.

He has a point. It's the people that must take everything to extremes, see everything as us and them that make any agreement or compromise impossible. You can't have gun control when one side wants no restriction and the other wants a ban with no working to the middle. It's the same with healthcare. One side wants total healthcare the other wants a useless minimal version. They portray an us and them and nothing gets done.

 

It would be an awful world without firearms.

[BigSqwert]

It would be an awful world without firearms.

 

This is an insane worldview to have in my opinion.

[Balta1701]

so you're saying that every single Republican at the state and national level has voted against any measure?

Basically laws at the state level have gotten even worse in states Republicans control.

So far this year, thirteen state legislatures have enacted laws to strengthen the right to keep and bear arms, and none have passed new gun control laws. In every year this century, pro-gun laws have outnumbered anti-gun laws, but this year’s score is particularly lopsided.

We are now up to 14 states that allow concealed carry without a license. 10 states now force guns to be allowed on college campuses. Note how above someone said that doctors should be able to tell people whether someone they're treating has a gun? Iowa this year is latest state offering additional privacy protections for firearm owners so that people can't find that information, and they added Stand your Ground as well.

 

[ptatc]

This is an insane worldview to have in my opinion.

And you are entitled to that opinion. I just happen to disagree. Just an example. My teenage son and i disagree and see eye to eye on very little right, I know common at this age. however, one thing we can always do together hunt and skeet shoot. I realize many people don't understand it, especially from an urban setting. It's a great hobby and sport.

[Balta1701]

He has a point. It's the people that must take everything to extremes, see everything as us and them that make any agreement or compromise impossible. You can't have gun control when one side wants no restriction and the other wants a ban with no working to the middle. It's the same with healthcare. One side wants total healthcare the other wants a useless minimal version. They portray an us and them and nothing gets done.

 

It would be an awful world without firearms.

Creepy.

[ptatc]

Basically laws at the state level have gotten even worse in states Republicans control.

We are now up to 14 states that allow concealed carry without a license. 10 states now force guns to be allowed on college campuses. Note how above someone said that doctors should be able to tell people whether someone they're treating has a gun? Iowa this year is latest state offering additional privacy protections for firearm owners so that people can't find that information, and they added Stand your Ground as well.

Republican control but do ALL Republicans vote that way. The generalizations of stereotyping everyone exactly the same are disturbing.

 

I just don't understand the philosophy of stereotyping everyone in a group.

[ptatc]

Creepy.

but oh so correct.

[Wanne]

So far no one has answered my question. Why do we need gun shows? Why can guns be sold privately, even if it's not that common?

 

I'm asking because I don't know the answer.

 

Can I ask you a question Tony...have you ever been to a gun show? I go quite often...and every single vendor there requires the same background check (AFT Form) you have to fill out at a gun store. I'm not sure what kind of gun shows don't do this...but if they're not requiring background checks...they should be shut down...that I completely agree with. But you can't just waltz up to any gun show and buy a gun "privately"...whatever that even means.

 

I mentioned earlier...the sites like armslist.com should be shut down IMO. You can't track anything via private sales on these sites.

 

But overall...Gun Shows aren't an issue. 99% of the people I'd guess that attend these shows are law abiding gun owners. The reputable ones anyway. There might be some shady ones out there...but I agree those should be shut down.

 

[Wanne]

I love this line. Hope you don't mind but I'm going to steal it for work tomorrow. Most of the common TVs at the university, lunch room, common areas, are tuned to CNN all day.

 

they're all terrible anymore ptatc...they each cater to their own narrative. It's sad having to sort thru so many things/sources to try and find the truth anymore isn't it...

[Kyyle23]

I just wish we could operate in between being able to stockpile 40 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo without anyone noticing, and “take away all the guns”.

 

For 8 years everyone said Obama was coming to take all your guns and that was just false. I don’t think it is unfair to have some sort of system to insure that people know when someone is loading up on a bunch of guns and ammo like this guy did. Registry, cards, regulation, etc. something more than what is currently the status quo needs to be done.

[Balta1701]

but oh so correct.

Take a look at the thread. 59 people were just brutally murdered. You have a bond with your son involving this and according to you that is your reason for not being able to imagine a world without them. Turn around and look at how that statement looks to my eyes. I read what you said and also saw an underlying "I can't imagine a world where these 59 people weren't murdered". I can equally get to "sure those 59 people were murdered but this helps my relationship with my son and that's more important to me, so I won't even attempt to picture a world where those 59 people aren't dead."

 

So yeah, I think that's a little creepy. Those 59 people won't be having any bond with their families again.

[Balta1701]

Republican control but do ALL Republicans vote that way. The generalizations of stereotyping everyone exactly the same are disturbing.

 

I just don't understand the philosophy of stereotyping everyone in a group.

If the Republican representative is voting for a speaker who brings legislation removing permitting requirements to the floor of their legislative chamber...even if they vote against the legislation, the speaker and the party are choosing what to bring to the floor.

 

You may have voted for your representative so that you can get your taxes cut. Your representative may even vote against the upcoming bill to allow concealed carry across state lines or whatever the next one is. But they're also supporting the people setting the agenda. You may have wanted lower taxes, but Paul Ryan wants more people who are having their mental illness treatments paid for through the Social Security administration to buy guns, and if you voted for someone who supported Paul Ryan - congratulations, you also supported that.

[Jenksismyhero]

My question is this..why are guns able to be traded and sold "privately"? That to me seems like a gigantic loophole that I can't wrap my head around. I'm very anti-firearm, but I understand the realistic limitations of a ban. But aside from buying them at a registered firearm distributor, why are people allowed to buy guns "privately"?

 

I'm genuinely asking.

 

Because you cut out the middle man? Why do people sell their cars privately? Because the seller can usually get more than at a dealer and the buyer can pay less. Same with guns.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

If the Republican representative is voting for a speaker who brings legislation removing permitting requirements to the floor of their legislative chamber...even if they vote against the legislation, the speaker and the party are choosing what to bring to the floor.

 

You may have voted for your representative so that you can get your taxes cut. Your representative may even vote against the upcoming bill to allow concealed carry across state lines or whatever the next one is. But they're also supporting the people setting the agenda. You may have wanted lower taxes, but Paul Ryan wants more people who are having their mental illness treatments paid for through the Social Security administration to buy guns, and if you voted for someone who supported Paul Ryan - congratulations, you also supported that.

 

Ryan would rather just stop treating those people for their mental illnesses, bing bing bong problem solved

[bmags]

I just wish we could operate in between being able to stockpile 40 guns and thousands of rounds of ammo without anyone noticing, and “take away all the guns”.

 

For 8 years everyone said Obama was coming to take all your guns and that was just false. I don’t think it is unfair to have some sort of system to insure that people know when someone is loading up on a bunch of guns and ammo like this guy did. Registry, cards, regulation, etc. something more than what is currently the status quo needs to be done.

 

Look how many times Ive posted "can't we at least be allowed to study this?" and it gets no traction. CDC can't even provide statistics on how gun ownership may endanger children in the home. To say there's no middle ground, and people either want to ban guns or permit everything. Well most posts in this thread say otherwise, people have provided lots of middle ground solutions, and frankly they weren't even middle ground. Still very very tilted to gun ownership but trying to limit the amount of firepower we see in these massive displays.

 

I think I was the only person in this forum to say I'd abolish the 2nd amendment, and even then it wasn't about banning all guns, it was about allowing stricter federal regulations and limitations while still allowing guns for sport.

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Couple things really quick here:

 

1) Isn't a FOID only a requirement to purchase a gun in Illinois? Also, to the extend that a FOID card is a national thing (I honestly don't know), who is actually monitoring and enforcing sales that don't comply?

 

Purchase and possess. If you have a gun in your home you need a FOID card. I'm not sure if all states require them, but most do. I'm fine making that federal though. And in terms of sales, in Illinois there's a hotline you can call and give a FOID number and they'll verify if it's accurate. That's also how gun shops verify that you are legally able to buy a gun.

 

2) You have to at least pass a driver's test to legally operate a vehicle. There's some minimum threshold of competency that's required.

 

I don't think the two are exactly the same. You don't take a driver's test to prove you can operate a car, you take it to prove you know the rules of the road. But regardless, i'm 100% behind mandatory training/certification for obtaining a FOID card, which is the legal requirement to using/possessing a gun.

 

3) I think more restrictions on you selling guns is a good thing. I shouldn't be able to order a gun over the internet without jumping through hoops. Registration addresses that. That's honestly the point of sale that I think is the MOST concerning.

 

I'm sure Alpha or someone who's more into guns than me can speak to this, but a lot of this is already in existence from my understanding. Yeah, you're not registering the gun and the buyer and seller information on a national database, but there are still laws that need to be followed. I'm not super opposed to your suggestion here, but again I ask at the end of the day what does it solve? We're having this conversation not because of random crime using firearms but because of mass shooting tragedies, the vast majority of which involved people buying guns legally. The fact that we can, after the fact, trace the purchase of guns this guy used just goes to show a lot of this registration.tracing stuff is already happening. It doesn't stop anything though, so you're just forcing the 99% of gun owners to jump through a hoop.

And here's my biggest issue with the gun debate. I've advocating for registering firearms, and for ensuring a minimum level of competence to own a firearm - basically treating them like vehicles. At what point is a regulation not an "unfair burden on the vast majority of law abiding gun owners/purchasers?" Jenks, what regulations on guns ARE you ok with?

 

Like I said, i'm fine with training/certification requirements because that's just a sensible thing to do. I'm fine with limiting high capacity magazines. You can have fun shooting auto/semi auto weapons somewhere. You don't need to be shooting 100's of rounds at a time doing it though. I'm fine creating some kind of gun limit - there's no reason someone needs to own 20 types of the same gun unless you've got some good credentials (e.g., you're a certified seller or a collector or something that can be proven). I'm fine increasing the penalties, both civil and criminal, for people who make straw purchases and/or people/gun shops that don't do any sort of adequate background checks. I'm absolutely behind banning any felon, undocumented immigrant and/or anyone receiving mental health treatment from obtaining guns. I'm fine with the various waiting periods on gun purchases. I'm open to limiting sales at gun shows, though I don't really think that's fair to the gun companies or legitimate gun owners. So maybe more about tightening up how purchases can be made. That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

 

ETA: Don't know how I missed this the first time through. With a registration and titling system, it's easier to report a firearm stolen. If your gun is used in the commission of a crime, and you didn't report it stolen, and you didn't transfer title, then there could be some sort of potential penalty (civil or criminal) to the person whose gun was used. I obviously haven't thought that all the way through, but there's actually a paper trail to follow - it's like why banks have cash reporting requirements - if somebody deposits cash above $x, the banks have to report it. Makes it way easier to chase money laundering and RICO investigations.

 

I believe in Illinois all gun sales require a bill of sale and you're supposed to keep that record for 10 years. Not 100% on that though. I'm fine making that a requirement if it's not. You should be able to prove when you sold a gun, what type of gun, and the seller.

Edited October 5, 2017 by JenksIsMyHero