We have officially become inured to mass shootings.

[monadnocky]

...The thing is, despite how the two sides end up portrayed as binary, black/white, diametrically opposed perspectives, many (maybe most) people fall somewhere in the middle.

I believe this is indeed the case, and is reflected in the current discussion. But, I think it's natural to lump people into "pro gun" and "gun control" camps right from the get go, and that cognitive bias doesn't leave a lot of room for enacting sound policy. Most of those in this discussion who have identified themselves as gun owners have opined that they are in favor of significantly stricter gun laws, for instance. I think that's reflective of firearms owners in general, although you'd never know it based upon the tendency to pay attention to those who are yelling the loudest, or walking into Wal-Marts with AR-15's strapped to their backs.

It has been mentioned that these discussions can appear to get hung up on details that can appear as humblebrags about gun knowledge. But policy is based on details, and such details need to be discussed. For instance, earlier I queried someone who proposed a ban on all semiautomatic firearms with a few examples of semiautomatics that are not commonly considered to be terribly malicious; he stuck to his guns (ha!) and said yes, these too (I admire his consistency of thought, although I think the implementation of that would be tricky). Although to bring up such examples might appear pedantic, terminology is important. Lack of precision in laws is how we get to insanity that few Americans would support (bump stocks, drum magazines, foregrips, what have you).

If you can see past extreme and entrenched positions, I believe that there is hope here that meaningful legislation can be passed, and soon. I think the NRA's chokehold on Congress is beginning to expire.

[TTX1]

Forgive me, but your post seems like nothing more than blather. Flawed logic. I’ve never had a car accident but I always wear a seatbelt. I’ve never crashed on a road bike, but I always wear a helmet. I don’t expect to have a house fire, but I have smoke alarms to wake me up in case of a house fire. Though it’s unlikely these things will happen, you’d have to be a fool to not prepare for them.

I’m simply not will to sacrifice preparedness & safety at the alter of virtue signaling.

OK, how much power do you need to do the job? Howitzer? Or is it reasonable to dial it back a few clicks? Because that's what many of us are proposing.

There is no discussion to outlaw all firearms. There is a discussion to regulate certain types of firearms.

What is the appropriate tool to address a home invader crackhead? Some high caliber, high capacity AR, or a 9mm pistol, or something else?


You also asked for solutions, as if none have been presented. So here are some, again:

- universal / comprehensive background checks
- waiting periods
- national standards for firearms education
- tax on firearms
- tax on ammo
- strict requirements for personal liability coverage

Please rank and pick the ones you think might be helpful, and feel free to add your own options.

[monadnocky]

...
- national standards for firearms education

This is a really underlooked in this broader discussion. In the recent explosion of firearms purchases (thanks to the absurd Obama-era frenzies), there appear to be a LOT of people who need a lot more training. I've always thought that national standards would be a terrific idea.

I no longer go to the (indoor) range, as the last time I was there (years ago, actually the last time I shot anything save for a pellet gun) I was muzzle swept twice by the woman next to me. The second time, her finger was solidly around the trigger.
Told management, walked out, and never went back.

[Dallas Tex]

OK, how much power do you need to do the job? Howitzer? Or is it reasonable to dial it back a few clicks? Because that's what many of us are proposing.

There is no discussion to outlaw all firearms. There is a discussion to regulate certain types of firearms.

What is the appropriate tool to address a home invader crackhead? Some high caliber, high capacity AR, or a 9mm pistol, or something else?


You also asked for solutions, as if none have been presented. So here are some, again:

- universal / comprehensive background checks
- waiting periods
- national standards for firearms education
- tax on firearms
- tax on ammo
- strict requirements for personal liability coverage

Please rank and pick the ones you think might be helpful, and feel free to add your own options.

First & foremost i’d like to see far more meaningful, deeper background checks. I don’t have the right answer, but perhaps references from family, friends, & coworkers? Have the basic initial check near instant. Reference doesn’t pan out? Something else red flags? Slow the process & dive deeper. Maybe score the application: His mother is alive & applicant lives in mothers house, but she’s not listed as a reference? Big red flag. Things along those lines.

Waiting periods, I’m not a fan. But maybe if coupled with exceptions agreed to by local police. Young lady just filed a restraining order against her violent ex boyfriend. Cops can’t be there 24/7, she wants a gun to protect herself? I’d like to see her fast tracked through any waiting period.

National Minimum Standards on firearm education? Definitely.

Tax on firearms? Meh, may price self protection out of reach for victims of domestic abuse.

Tax on ammo? Meh. Not a fan. May encourage less range time, less practice, and less education at range training classes

Liability coverage? As long as it’s not prohibitively expensive it may be good. It’s likely an insurance company would even insist on periodic refresher courses. That’s win/win.

I think what gets gun proponents less enthusiastic is most proposed laws do absolutely nothing to get guns out of the hands of criminals who by far do the most killing with guns.

I’ve addressed all of your questions. Would you address one of mine?

Would you support a law that carries mandatory life sentence, no parole for anyone in ipossession of a firearm while committing a crime? For example, guy is shoplifting from 7-11 gets caught and has a gun in his pocket. Straight to jail. Guy steals a car has a gun in his pocket? Gone , jail for life. Removed from society. Guy is in possession of a stolen gun? Gone.

[TTX1]

I’ve addressed all of your questions. Would you address one of mine?

Would you support a law that carries mandatory life sentence, no parole for anyone in ipossession of a firearm while committing a crime? For example, guy is shoplifting from 7-11 gets caught and has a gun in his pocket. Straight to jail. Guy steals a car has a gun in his pocket? Gone , jail for life. Removed from society. Guy is in possession of a stolen gun? Gone.

Thanks for the response.

Polls constantly indicate that a majority of Americans agree with us and support background checks, but any attempt to legislate has been blocked for years. This is a problem.

In regard to your question, at first glance it's easy to support tough sentencing, but I do see some practical challenges (inconsistency at the state level), as well as higher priorities (stiff penalties for crimes where a gun is fired vs. crimes where an otherwise legally owned gun is merely present).

I am more interested in regulating AR type weapons than stuffing prisons with car thieves, where the primary crime is theft, not assault, violence, or manslaughter. I'm sympathetic to the idea of stiff penalties for criminals, particularly for repeat criminals, but I don't think that the increasingly privatized prison industrial complex is a sustainable vector for our nation, either.

[moondog-sparky]

Want to know what’s far more rare than that?

Being the victim of a mass shooting.

You’re trying to apply ‘it is statistically rare don’t worry about it’ argument to owning a gun for protection. But you want to apply the exact opposite logic to enact gun control to prevent an even more rare mass shooting event.

/\/\/\/\/\
this...

you can't have your argument cut both ways. this kind of rebuttal logic comes up in nearly every anti-gun discussion.

[colker]

Would you support a law that carries mandatory life sentence, no parole for anyone in ipossession of a firearm while committing a crime? For example, guy is shoplifting from 7-11 gets caught and has a gun in his pocket. Straight to jail. Guy steals a car has a gun in his pocket? Gone , jail for life. Removed from society. Guy is in possession of a stolen gun? Gone.

The only problem i see w/ this law is that is too drastic for an imperfect world. Usually it´s theological tyranies that have these laws and not western democracies for a reason: tolerance w/ imperfection. You would need crystal clear honest cops who never ever plant a gun on a poor thief and force him to plead guilty for something else.

[Dallas Tex]

I find it interesting that gun control proponents are usually much more interested in mass shootings than the day to day crime that piles up a much larger body count. I also find it interesting that on the gun control side there is more emphasis on ‘protecting’ from the weapons rather than the folks that use them.

Any form of gun control I’d support would have to contain an equal amount of emphasis on supplying law enforcement with the tools it needs to protect the public from the folks that do the most damage.

An unwillingness to remove folks from society that commit criminal acts with a gun seems counterintuitive to me.

[e-RICHIE]

An unwillingness to remove folks from society that commit criminal acts with a gun seems counterintuitive to me.

I would support this.
Put them in a walled-in room with the Epsteins of the world.

[Corso]

If you can see past extreme and entrenched positions, I believe that there is hope here that meaningful legislation can be passed, and soon. I think the NRA's chokehold on Congress is beginning to expire.

If the NRA has or had a chokehold on Congress, it's the FAULT of the elected officials - period.

It's the 90% of legal non-nra - gun owners the politicians are swayed by, the ones who vote them in or out of their jobs.

Monadnocky, I also hope that better gun control laws will be created and passed.

I also hope our country can focus on the disturbed people who pull the trigger, not just the tool.

[TTX1]

An unwillingness to remove folks from society that commit criminal acts with a gun seems counterintuitive to me.

You moved the goal post.

Not to argue or belabor the point, but you drifted from "anyone in possession of a firearm while committing a crime" to "commit criminal acts with a gun". One of your first examples was "gun in pocket". It was not clear that the gun was used to commit the crime, I read the examples you provided as concealed carry scenarios where the criminal did not use the gun while committing the crime, but was merely in possession - your words.

We already have laws to distinguish between crimes committed with a gun, without a gun, and for a wide range of scenarios involving assault, injury to others, manslaughter, etc. Stiffer penalties for crimes committed *WITH* a firearm? That's easy - yes, I support.

However I don't think that type of policy will do much to reduce gun-related violence (e.g., yesterday in Miami where the crime was gun violence), or to reduce mass murder scenarios (e.g., last week in El Paso).

The only way to stop the crazies is to flex a bit on liberties - background checks, plus sensible limits on purchasing and ownership. No checks and no limits is pure folly.

We all go through security theater at the airport. Not just the crazies. Should be the same for guns - we need to accept some broad sweeps to catch a few nutcases. We can't continue to tell the families in Newtown, etc., that it isn't worth it, or that fringe scenarios aren't worth our time and attention. Airplane terrorism is exceedingly rare, and yet look at what we all do at the airport... because it's worth the effort.

[moondog-sparky]

The person who needs no gun at all - enlightened.

there is no doubt that the NRA, the Right, and even lawful gun owners in general have not been proactive enough in terms of proposing meaningful gun control that would work for them - reaching across the aisle, if you will.

but, with all due respect to richard, i'd suggest that this very statement demonstrates the huge divide between the 2 sides. this single word, "enlightened", and all it implies in terms of superiority, condescension, and even contempt (all of which have been echoed and implied over the course of this thread) does nothing to try and engage lawful gun owners in open dialogue. combine that with the continued characterization of the majority of gun owners as insecure, tacti-cool mall ninjas who are meat-headed knuckledraggers, along with the anti-gun folks general lack of knowledge regarding the various firearm platforms, and surely you can see it is not ONLY the right that keeps this issue at a stalemate.

we have tens of millions of lawful gun owners in our country. we are not going to be stoned to death or moved to another corner of the globe to address this issue, right? i welcome a rational approach to tightening our laws, but it would sure be nice to not to be viewed as a neanderthal knuckle-dragger every time this comes up. or some crazy "freedom loon", either. when did valuing freedom and being a patriot become synonymous with right-wing and "white terrorist"??

[e-RICHIE]

Wow. That's a motherlode of projecting.

there is no doubt that the NRA, the Right, and even lawful gun owners in general have not been proactive enough in terms of proposing meaningful gun control that would work for them - reaching across the aisle, if you will.

but, with all due respect to richard, i'd suggest that this very statement demonstrates the huge divide between the 2 sides. this single word, "enlightened", and all it implies in terms of superiority, condescension, and even contempt (all of which have been echoed and implied over the course of this thread) does nothing to try and engage lawful gun owners in open dialogue. combine that with the continued characterization of the majority of gun owners as insecure, tacti-cool mall ninjas who are meat-headed knuckledraggers, along with the anti-gun folks general lack of knowledge regarding the various firearm platforms, and surely you can see it is not ONLY the right that keeps this issue at a stalemate.

we have tens of millions of lawful gun owners in our country. we are not going to be stoned to death or moved to another corner of the globe to address this issue, right? i welcome a rational approach to tightening our laws, but it would sure be nice to not to be viewed as a neanderthal knuckle-dragger every time this comes up. or some crazy "freedom loon", either. when did valuing freedom and being a patriot become synonymous with right-wing and "white terrorist"??

[Dallas Tex]

You moved the goal post.
.

Let me clarify an example: Guy car jacks someone at a red light. Though he didn’t use it or show it, he has a stolen gun in his pocket. No one fought back, so he didn’t have to take it out of his pocket. IMHO, once caught this guy needs to be removed from society permanently. No parole, no good behavior, permanently. No goal of rehabilitation, just the goal of protecting society.

How serious are you about protecting innocents from gun violence?

[moondog-sparky]

Wow. That's a motherlode of projecting.

how so? and i ask that in the most open way i know how. truly not trying to be contentious, but does not the way you use "enlightened" imply that gun owners are somehow...not? that we have not evolved and become civilized? to me at least, the implication is that we are relics from another era and that we are clinging to a mindset you see as unnecessary in our modern times. i truly am trying to understand how you don't see that your quote above, at least in part, does not indicate this...and that it does not continue to act as a barrier to open dialogue on the issue.

please dispel this implication, if that is not the case.

[Matthew Strongin]

Let me clarify an example: Guy car jacks someone at a red light. Though he didn’t use it or show it, he has a stolen gun in his pocket. No one fought back, so he didn’t have to take it out of his pocket. IMHO, once caught this guy needs to be removed from society permanently. No parole, no good behavior, permanently. No goal of rehabilitation, just the goal of protecting society.

How serious are you about protecting innocents from gun violence?

In that scenario he has committed two crimes, one for the carjacking and one for being in possession of a stolen gun and he should certainly be punished for both.

To benchmark your proposal, what level of punishment (parole, sentence reduction, etc.) would you want to see for other crimes? Rape, assault, embezzlement, frauld, etc.?

[sk_tle]

But ask yourself an honest question. It’s 4am two guys are trying to beat down your door. You call the cops. I’ll use my urban neighborhood as the example, the cops are about 20 minutes away, maybe more. As the person tasked with protecting your family, would you honestly rather have Kung-Fu training, a knife, or a gun ?

Probably a baseball bat.

But the =only good and smart option in that case is to escort your family to another door or window and flee while waiting for the police. Things are just that : things. You have an insurance policy. Trying to play the hero is the best way to put your family in danger.

[Justin@BlackOakVelo]

Any form of gun control I’d support would have to contain an equal amount of emphasis on supplying law enforcement with the tools it needs to protect the public from the folks that do the most damage.

As long as you mean major strategic reform of police forces and training, I agree. Along with the tools and training to deal with everyday folks, particularly with minorities. Driving while "not white" is a pretty common crime around these parts.

No parole, no good behavior, permanently. No goal of rehabilitation, just the goal of protecting society.

I truly feel that rehabilitation is the answer. There are certainly some crimes that don't deserve it in my opinion but theft and crimes of similar in the moment need, likely deserve a second chance. Drug charges, theft.

People make mistakes and are usually in a really bad place when these sort of crimes are committed. I know folks who have served real time and have turned their life around, ex-convicts need a chance and a support system to put there life together after they do their time, the lack of support in this area is the main reason for the continued offenses in our system.

Example. Friend of mine, served 2.5 yrs in a state prison. Was released with $35 and his belongings. Told he needed to be 120 miles away in 24-48 hours to register with the State as a felon. You think $35 is going to get someone 120 miles along with room and board for 48 hours. There needs to be transition periods and support to get folks back into society. Prison is not anything like the outside world. It is a major shock to the system to get out.

Sorry for the rant, some of this stuff is pretty close to home.

[Dallas Tex]

In that scenario he has committed two crimes, one for the carjacking and one for being in possession of a stolen gun and he should certainly be punished for both.

To benchmark your proposal, what level of punishment (parole, sentence reduction, etc.) would you want to see for other crimes? Rape, assault, embezzlement, frauld, etc.?

Rape: life in prison, no parole. A rape victim should never have to worry about seeing her rapist on the subway on her way to work.

Assault: two guys in a bar fight? Not much. Two guys randomly attacking a guy? With the guy being a non-willing participant (not arguing over a girl, etc. just a random assault). I view this as attempted murder. And i view attempted murder as the same as murder. Put’em away.

Embezzlement/Fraud: use bernie madoff or Enron as an example. Knowingly stole from good folks and destroyed their life plans / retirement?? Lock’em up for good.

There is a certain level of societal trust that makes a society work. When I’m crossing a street, even if I’m wrong, a car will try to not run me over. When I’m walking to the grocery store no one will attack me to steal my wallet.

The more accepting we become of bad behavior, the more bad behavior we encourage. I’m a firm believer of what we allow, we teach.

Anyway, the more accepting we become of all crime, the more the fabric of our society breaks down.

[jclay]

A shotgun. But if I was worried about such things I'd have really strong doors, serious exterior lighting and a loud as shit alarm. I would not want to be firing individual wall penetrating rounds for two very obvious reasons. And it's worth noting that unfortunate things will sometimes occur. Opening the can of worms that our promiscuousness with AR type stuff is endangers more folks than it helps.