🇺🇸 Discussion: Guns, The Second Amendment, NRA - Part II

[Marvolo]

We're probably not going to be able to get real lasting change until the constitution is changed to allow for actual change. Right now with the current GOP I think a snowball has a better chance in hell.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

They probably did at the time and just changed their minds.

We definitely need to look for a history of chronic depression and repeated suicide attempts and violence when issuing gun permits. That being said, I don't think all people should be forbidden from owning guns because they dealt with depression or tried to kill themselves in their past. I don't think a other persons potentially committing suicide and succeeding should have any bearing on whether another person should own a gun. And the government probably isnt capable of handling it all on a case by case basis which means a lot of people would probably lose their ability to own guns because the government would just cast a blanket over a large swath of people and decide they cant own guns because they dealt with depression at one point in their life.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't trust the government to operate with the sort of nuance required to determine whether depressed people should own guns. And considering I've been taking anti depression medicine for 4 years and own guns you can see why I have actual skin in this.

Sadly, it appears that the NRA has succeeded in shifting the tone of the debate from gun regulations to degregading & villainizing the mentally ill. Fortunately, there are enough laws in play to prevent this from happening, but it goes to show how little society thinks of the mentally ill, and it’s no wonder so many people are reluctant to get help.

 

[MaceB]

I’m fine with your proposals in theory, but I don’t think they’re at all realistic in America. They completely overlook the 2nd amendment, 4th amendment, & 6th amendment. As far as getting a bill passed, you would still have to face the same hurdles if you’re going to take someone’s guns away.

For the purposes of conversation, I tend to talk in terms of "should" rather than "could." Arguing what could happen is just such an exhausting endeavor... what amendments will Rand Paul make? Will the President even sign it? What about Mitch McConnell? He's not going to take this to the floor. So yeah.. I understand how unlikely it is.

But I feel like we shouldn't get too caught up in process with these things. The reality is that gun reform will only happen if we have a ground swell of public support. And the best way to do that in my opinion, is to convince folks of the merits, and not to get caught up in the "how." If we get the American people on board, then the rest will fall into place. That's the "how."

Several decades ago, folks would tell you that integration was impossible politically. But Martin Luther King sold the American people on the merits (with a lot of difficulty, tragedy, and years put into it), and it happened. Same thing here.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

For the purposes of conversation, I tend to talk in terms of "should" rather than "could." Arguing what could happen is just such an exhausting endeavor... what amendments will Rand Paul make? Will the President even sign it? What about Mitch McConnell? He's not going to take this to the floor. So yeah.. I understand how unlikely it is.

But I feel like we shouldn't get too caught up in process with these things. The reality is that gun reform will only happen if we have a ground swell of public support. And the best way to do that in my opinion, is to convince folks of the merits, and not to get caught up in the "how." If we get the American people on board, then the rest will fall into place. That's the "how."

Several decades ago, folks would tell you that integration was impossible politically. But Martin Luther King sold the American people on the merits (with a lot of difficulty, tragedy, and years put into it), and it happened. Same thing here.

I could respect that, as a fan of the superhero genre, I’m all for discussing things on a philosophical/normative level.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

We're probably not going to be able to get real lasting change until the constitution is changed to allow for actual change. Right now with the current GOP I think a snowball has a better chance in hell.

Fun fact, saying every American has the right to own firearms with no say-so from the government (as it currently stands) was not ruled on by the SCOTUS until the 70's after the wackos took over the NRA.

You can look at all prior rulings to the 2nd amendment by the SCOTUS interpreting it as such that the well regulated militia portion is included with it and we do not all have the right to just buy guns/ammo so we can stockpile them to our hearts content.

So actual case law on the matter leans heavily for regulation but no other challenge to the the current interpretation has been seen by SCOTUS since the last ruling.

 

[Marvolo]

Fun fact, saying every American has the right to own firearms with no say-so from the government (as it currently stands) was not ruled on by the SCOTUS until the 70's after the wackos took over the NRA.

You can look at all prior rulings to the 2nd amendment by the SCOTUS interpreting it as such that the well regulated militia portion is included with it and we do not all have the right to just buy guns/ammo so we can stockpile them to our hearts content.

So actual case law on the matter leans heavily for regulation but no other challenge to the the current interpretation has been seen by SCOTUS since the last ruling.

When it has to do with the second amendment I don't think the gun owners on the Right give a rat's ass about SCOTUS and its decisions. They seem to accept the Second Ammendment as the first and final word on gun ownership.

 

[Yowza]

Sadly, it appears that the NRA has succeeded in shifting the tone of the debate from gun regulations to degregading & villainizing the mentally ill. Fortunately, there are enough laws in play to prevent this from happening, but it goes to show how little society thinks of the mentally ill, and it’s no wonder so many people are reluctant to get help.

NRA has a lot of negative rhetoric unfortunately being a lobbyist group and has been given too much weight during the gun debate in non-localized news media (cable news; big name publishing platforms) with various colorful characters often saying insensitive/inhumane things if see a threat to their gun ownership.

I think if gun regulation were expanded beyond where it is right now, mental health treatment and assessment needs to improve from where it is now; in fact the entire system needs an overhaul (drug companies too profit oriented working with FDA to band-aid people with drugs fit for in-patient care as opposed to life enhancement opportunity). You don't want mental health treatment to not be pursued due to people afraid they'll be entered into an NISC database nor have people in support of gun reform doing it for selfish reasons of obtaining it for themselves while limiting an ever increasing % of the population. Good point to think about as become irate about articles such as this one: https://nypost.com/2018/04/14/homeowner-allegedly-shot-lost-black-teen-asking-for-directions/

The 2 presidential assassination attempts of JFK and Ronald Reagan brought some reform so far. Things will have to evolve some more no doubt. Life is limited and I think for some the responsibility of gun ownership (not the rhetoric of when they're "allowed" to use it) is a weighty responsibility not a smug reward. It shows to one's friends and family that as an adult your simply saying you're ok and mainly just enjoying a hobby as opposed to actively expressing a willingness to shoot someone. (At least that's how I think it should be)

 

[MurkeNyou]

The scary thing I have found with gun nut family, is they don't see themselves as the nut in a stand-off with police, they see themselves as freedom fighters. They cannot make that connect that they will be fighting cops. And for all the Blue Line bumperstickers and flag hats, they seem to be arming against police, as police arm against them. Ever tell Uncle Bob that the local PD doesn't have that APC to fight gangbangers, but folks like him who need extended magazines on everything and has a .50 cal rifle "just 'cause?" . I try to warn other family about them, everyone thinks this is how it always has been. Uh, no. People are gun stupid and kinda insurrectiony.

 

[Mike5575]

Uh... What actions have Republicans taken over the years to strengthen the mental health system in the U.S. would be my counter argument? Or... Has their loyalty to cutting taxes (and thereby services of many stripes within healthcare ) contributed to in some way to lack of access and resources to both individuals and local authorities?

What I find typical is strawman arguments by alarmists with no sense of how their fellow citizens actually think or believe.

Conservatives oppose nationalized healthcare because they believe it's not effective and gives too much power to the federal government. Just look at the case with Alfie Evans.

How many times have I heard "You don't need an AR-15 to defend yourself?" Or how about "No, you sir don't need anything more than a 10 round magazine in your gun." One of the central tenants of conservatism is a bottom up approach to government, not a top down approach. Giving the government too much to do makes the government large and inefficient. What is the purpose of laws if the government if they cannot or will not enforce laws already on the books? For these reasons, I find your last paragraph to be a bit ironic. Those who say you don't need this weapon or that weapon to defend yourself are often individuals who have never owned a gun and cares not what gun owners think.

Also, I'd like to point out that I did mention gun control restraining orders in the previous thread. Unlike other laws, these restraining orders would actually empower the average citizen to take action. How it works is some relative reports to a judge that someone they know is kind of crazy and has a gun. The individual would in question would then be able to defend himself in a court of law, and if the individual is deemed unfit, he can have his weapons temporarily confiscated.

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2018/03/19/gun-violence-restraining-orders-save-lives/

I'm also not entirely against people being screened prior to purchasing a handgun.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Conservatives oppose nationalized healthcare because they believe it's not effective and gives too much power to the federal government. Just look at the case with Alfie Evans.

How many times have I heard "You don't need an AR-15 to defend yourself?" Or how about "No, you sir don't need anything more than a 10 round magazine in your gun." One of the central tenants of conservatism is a bottom up approach to government, not a top down approach. Giving the government too much to do makes the government large and inefficient. What is the purpose of laws if the government if they cannot or will not enforce laws already on the books? For these reasons, I find your last paragraph to be a bit ironic. Those who say you don't need this weapon or that weapon to defend yourself are often individuals who have never owned a gun and cares not what gun owners think.

Also, I'd like to point out that I did mention gun control restraining orders in the previous thread. Unlike other laws, these restraining orders would actually empower the average citizen to take action. How it works is some relative reports to a judge that someone they know is kind of crazy and has a gun. The individual would in question would then be able to defend himself in a court of law, and if the individual is deemed unfit, he can have his weapons temporarily confiscated.

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2018/03/19/gun-violence-restraining-orders-save-lives/

I'm also not entirely against people being screened prior to purchasing a handgun.

So... Before Obamacare passed your contention is on the state and federal level Republicans were just strengthening the healthcare system and access for the mentally ill? You'll have to back that up. Which goes to my point, regardless of you bringing in conservative opposition to nationalized health care.

You gotta literally put your money where your mouth is. If it is ONLY about mental health please point me to the apparent massive amount of support the GOP has pushed for the mental health system in the USA.

 

[Mike5575]

So... Before Obamacare passed your contention is on the state and federal level Republicans were just strengthening the healthcare system and access for the mentally ill? You'll have to back that up. Which goes to my point, regardless of you bringing in conservative opposition to nationalized health care.

You gotta literally put your money where your mouth is. If it is ONLY about mental health please point me to the apparent massive amount of support the GOP has pushed for the mental health system in the USA.

Please. I never said it is ONLY about mental health. Only 5% of gun homicides are caused by someone with a definable mental illness. You are deflecting.

 

[MaceB]

Well mental health is really the only alternative to gun reform that conservatives push for. When progressives say that we need to regulate gun sales, conservatives always say, "guns don't kill people, people kill people... we need to improve our mental health care in this country to stop these gun nuts." According to them, guns are 100% protected by the 2nd amendment, so our only real recourse is to find these people before they go off the deep end. That's really the only alternative that Republicans offer, policy wise.

But then, when actual bills are on the table, Republicans never seem to put their money where their mouth is to rehabilitate our mental health systems. In fact, one of the very few bills that went through recently was a bill that made it easier for the mentally ill to get guns. So, it feels like a disingenuous argument on their part. It's not like Democrats would be against more funding for mental health. Heck, they'd be for expanding Medicare entirely, so that everyone could get properly screened.

Republicans have kind of cornered themselves. They won't dare propose gun regulation, but the truth is that they aren't for improving Medicare or medicaid nor are they for subsidizing our care facilities to improve their mental health outreach... so, we're basically left with nothing of nothing. In effect, the whole mental health issue feels like a convenient scapegoat for Republicans more than an honest effort on their part.

 

[Lighthouse]

Oliver North? NRA is just trolling now.

 

[Sithborg]

Nothing says patriotism more than treason.

 

[Lighthouse]

You just know they specifically picked this guy to "lulz trigger the libz". What a pathetic organization.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

The Stricter a State's Gun Laws, the Fewer Children Die From Guns, Study Finds

State laws that mandate universal background checks for buying guns and ammunition may save young lives, suggests new research presented this week at the annual meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies. The study found that states with stricter gun laws had lower rates of gun-related deaths among children compared to states without such laws.

Researchers, primarily at the Children’s National Health System in Washington DC, first examined gun injury data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They specifically looked at reported firearm deaths of people under the age of 21 that took place in 2015. Then they matched each state’s child mortality rate to a rating of their gun control laws and policies, based on a scorecard established by the Brady Campaign, a non-profit organization that advocates for gun violence prevention.

There were a total of 4,528 reported child deaths from gun in 2015. The state-by-state firearm mortality rate ranged from 0 deaths per 100,000 children to 18 deaths per 100,000 children.

The researchers found that the median mortality rate for the 12 states with universal background laws for all gun sales—including Washington, Colorado, and Connecticut—was 3.8 deaths per 100,000 children. But for states that didn’t require background checks, the median mortality rate was 5.7 per 100,000 children. The same relationship was true when looking at background checks for ammo: The median mortality of the five states with these laws was 2.3 deaths per 100,000 children, while it was 5.6 deaths per 100,000 children in states with no background checks.

The study’s findings are preliminary, since they’ve yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, and they don’t directly show that gun laws prevent children’s deaths. But the authors says their study is one of the first to look at how gun laws can specifically influence child deaths. Other research has similarly shown that stricter state gun laws can reduce the rate of gun-related suicides and homicides.

“Injuries due to firearms are the nation’s third-leading cause of pediatric death,” said lead author Monika Goyal, director of research in the Division of Emergency Medicine and Trauma Services at Children’s National Health System, in a statement. “Firearm legislation at the state level varies significantly. Our findings underscore the need for further investigation of which types of state-level firearm legislation most strongly correlates with reduction in pediatric injuries and deaths.”

Accidental shootings, suicides, and homicides committed by people the victims know account for the majority of gun-related deaths among children. Goyal added that mass shootings are only a small reason of why these deaths happen.

“While these tragedies often are covered heavily by the news media, they represent a subset of overall pediatric injuries and deaths due to firearms,” Goyal said. “Pediatric firearm-related injuries are a critical public health issue across the US.”

https://gizmodo.com/the-stricter-a-states-gun-laws-the-fewer-children-die-1825824663

 

[CaptainWagner]

The Stricter a State's Gun Laws, the Fewer Children Die From Guns, Study Finds



https://gizmodo.com/the-stricter-a-states-gun-laws-the-fewer-children-die-1825824663

I'm shocked! SHOCKED! Who'd have ever guessed?

 

[Reaver027]

Here we go again. This time it appears to have been a shotgun.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/18/us/texas-school-shooting/index.html

 

[squeekness]

Ugly. So stupid and ugly.

 

[samsnee]

Wow I guess Texas doesn’t have enough guns to have prevented this.

 

[Schlosser85]

Witnesses say the fire alarm went off before the shooting started, so the shooter probably pulled it himself.


At least eight dead, twelve in the hospital.

 

[squeekness]

I'm so sorry I even put the news on. It never gets any better.

 

[Tao43]

This took place a couple of miles from where I used to live. Unreal how common this is getting...

 

[squeekness]

This never happened when I was in school.

 

[TheCardPlayer]

I'm so tired of this. And this is just another mass shooting to throw on the pile. And in a few weeks it'll be another.

And somehow it's never time to talk about gun law reforms.