EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Reasonable gun control measures
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=24019
Page 1 of 15

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Reasonable gun control measures

When I was younger I took a hunter safety course and before I got my concealed carry permit I was required to take a class and show my ability to shoot. When I applied for my drivers license I had to pass a written test and show my ability to handle a car safely. If we carry this to the concept of gun purchase we could make a small difference in keeping people from doing something like we saw in Sandy Hook school. I have no problem with a similar program of license for gun ownership as in the concealed carry permit program. A background check, which is done for purchase now, but the check included medical records which indicate whether there are any known problems or concerns other than with the law. A safety program and a final test that included shooting would help ensure those who own guns can safely use them.

Of course, it does not preclude those who steal guns or acquire them through illegal means from getting them. It does not preclude the relative of a legal gun owner from gaining access to the guns either. Nothing will prevent the access to a gun because one can build thier own from scratch if one desires and has a bit of mechanical knowledge, but it will give a measure of reasonable checks to protect everyone, including those who buy guns and do not use them safely.

Author:  Johhny Electriglide [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

I suppose they could check for a schizo record, but how about those effectively treated for other things, like PTSD and depression? Why threaten their rights?
I agree that owning a firearm should have a prerequisite of training, but that is often done by a responsible relative, who should be able to sign them off.
The Connecticut shooter was using illegal firearms for that state, with the 5th toughest gun laws in the country. So why punish 80 million law abiding Americans with extra expense and restrictions?
I believe gun control should be hitting an authorized target, whether at the range or an intruder trying to hurt you. The Constitution states firmly that the right shall not be infringed.
A 20 year old outlaw should not cause infringement anymore than an armed bank robber should. If teachers at the school were not restricted from carrying, they could have stopped some of the carnage of the 20 year old outlaw. More must be found out about him before calling for infringement on 80 million Americans 2nd Amendment Right.
If the guy was overly angry at his mother, why wasn't he reported as a possible threat? How did he get the illegal firearm? Is he like the Colorado theater shooter who had people know of his condition but through PC did not report it enough, and use confidentiality to hide their culpability?
Was he somehow brainwashed by billionaire anti-gunners? Kind of like the intent of "Fast and Furious", also with its PC cover-up.

I just heard the latest on the shooting. the man who did the shooting had a significant altercation with FOUR school personnel the week before. He killed 3 of them the day of the shooting and would have got the 4th but he had the day off. WHY didn't they report him????

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Johhny Electriglide wrote:
I suppose they could check for a schizo record, but how about those effectively treated for other things, like PTSD and depression? Why threaten their rights?


That would be due to the fact their rights in such a case impact the rights of others. The potential threat to others would have to be determined and appropriate decisions made.

Quote:
I agree that owning a firearm should have a prerequisite of training, but that is often done by a responsible relative, who should be able to sign them off.


Assuming the responsible relative is actually responsible? No, they can provide the training just not the test. That is the same situation as the hunting classes I took. I knew the safety procedures but I still had to take the class and the test to be sure. I already knew how to drive when I took my test for my learners permit the day I was old enough to do so and then took my drivers test the following day. I never took drivers ed in school because I had my license before I could have taken the class due to the way the semester and my birthday shook out.

Quote:
The Connecticut shooter was using illegal firearms for that state, with the 5th toughest gun laws in the country.


Not according to the reports I have read.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

A law enforcement official says some guns owned by the mother of the gunman in the Connecticut elementary school rampage match the models of the guns used in the shooting.
The official cautions that investigators haven’t conclusively linked the guns used in the rampage to the ones the woman owned.

The official says state police records show the woman had legally purchased five firearms and all were registered in Connecticut. Authorities are still trying to account for all the guns.

Quote:
So why punish 80 million law abiding Americans with extra expense and restrictions?


Maybe because the other 200 million law abiding Americans do not want to have a loved one shot by another person. I have more guns than many, I have had my letters to the editor passed on to the NRA for repeating, but there comes a time for a reasonable effort to resrtict the legal access to guns by those who would do such a thing as kill children in their school or anywhere for that matter.

Quote:
I believe gun control should be hitting an authorized target, whether at the range or an intruder trying to hurt you. The Constitution states firmly that the right shall not be infringed.


It also says we shall not be deprived of life without due process, which clearly was not the case in Sandy Hook Elementary. The relative strength of the rights in conflict is where the decision will fall according to precedent.

Quote:
A 20 year old outlaw should not cause infringement anymore than an armed bank robber should. If teachers at the school were not restricted from carrying, they could have stopped some of the carnage of the 20 year old outlaw.


Maybe and maybe not. The ability to hit a target in such a stressful situation is very difficult especially for a person who is not trained to do so. Some schools have police officers on hand all day, which may have helped, but cannot be counted on for clear prevention. I admit controls may not have prevented this case either, but if some reasonable effort is not made to control access the puch to remove access will grow in strength.

Quote:
I just heard the latest on the shooting. the man who did the shooting had a significant altercation with FOUR school personnel the week before. He killed 3 of them the day of the shooting and would have got the 4th but he had the day off. WHY didn't they report him????


How would that have prevented anything? Unless a law was broken an altercation is not grounds for arrest or the removal of his mother's guns.

Author:  Iowanic [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 9:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Wayne; you beat me to starting a thread just like this. I was going to wait a couple weeks, till the knee-jerk media calmed down but now's as good a time for this discussion...

Seems to me treating firearms like car-ownership is a start....

Whadda think about Obama's comments? My persal guess is he'll renew the ban on assualt rifles(What ever they are) and then push for a ban on all gun-shows: since purchases there are claimed to be untraceable. Also; I suspect he'll take first steps to make all firearm purchases must be registered with at least local lawenforcement.
The age of father's passing firearms down to their kids or neihbors purchasing from one another may be something of the past.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Iowanic wrote:
Wayne; you beat me to starting a thread just like this. I was going to wait a couple weeks, till the knee-jerk media calmed down but now's as good a time for this discussion...

Seems to me treating firearms like car-ownership is a start....

Whadda think about Obama's comments? My persal guess is he'll renew the ban on assualt rifles(What ever they are) and then push for a ban on all gun-shows: since purchases there are claimed to be untraceable. Also; I suspect he'll take first steps to make all firearm purchases must be registered with at least local lawenforcement.
The age of father's passing firearms down to their kids or neihbors purchasing from one another may be something of the past.


There are plans for a ban on assault weapons to be introduced into both houses of Congress when they return. I cannot imagine it not being signed if it passes and that would be something I would not want to bet the farm against.

I do not believe the gun shows are that much of a problem now, but it is a visible effort so who knows. Most people I know will not talk to the individuals selling guns at the shows. Most, if not all, are ATF or other agency sting operations. The purchases from the major vendors are supposed to be just like any other gun purchase. They call in the background check, unless you have a CCW, and fill out all of the required paperwork.

Technically, here all firearms are required to be registered with the police departments, but I know of very few who actually do that. Our county is one of the worst for getting a permit to purchase a pistol in the state. It does not have an impact on the illegal gun trade or even some of the supposedly legal gun trade either. I am torn in many ways on this because I understand the rights and responsibility of gun ownership, the red tape of the systems, and the impacts of guns on portions of society. There is no way to reach an acceptable compromise with some of the aspects so priorities must be determined.

I resisted getting my CCW for a long time because I did not feel the need to carry all of the time and there are significant restrictions on where one can carry legally. I decided to get it mainly in order to bypass the county pistol permit red tape, but over time started to carry on a regular basis. I found there are two types of permit holders in the process. There are those who are waiting for the opportunity to use their weapon in some fashion and there are those like myself, who are concerned there may be a situation where they are forced to use their weapon. The concern over misuse is greater than the wish to use, which to me is a good thing. I do not want to have my permit cancelled or face legal charges, so I am even more careful to avoid incidents where things can get out of hand than I was when I was unarmed.

Author:  SiberD [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 6:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

How about addressing school security? If you're going to keep schools as "gun free zones" you'd better make the schools "whacko free zones" also. Video monitoring of school entrances and only authorized personnel are granted entrance. Of course the entrances and exits would be unlocked from the inside. Make the so called school "lock downs" actual....lock downs? Complete with classroom locks that have to opened with a key from the outside but via a simple manual latch from inside. Windows and doors that have shatterproof glass.

Then maybe we should address all the violence children are immersed in day after day via the TV, movies, and especially video games. And all these kids that are on drugs for ADD, and all the SSRI's, like prozac, zoloft, cymbalta and paxil, for depression? My god, these drugs are given out like candy not by professional psychiatrists but by general practioners.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 7:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

I think the prison school approach is long over due. We need to build schools more like bunkers and add bullet resistent glass to prevent snipers. The buses could be fitted with the same glass with kevlar armor and maybe even add armed guards to ride them. Then we could work on the shopping malls to make them more defensible too.

Author:  SiberD [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Wayne Stollings wrote:
I think the prison school approach is long over due. We need to build schools more like bunkers and add bullet resistent glass to prevent snipers. The buses could be fitted with the same glass with kevlar armor and maybe even add armed guards to ride them. Then we could work on the shopping malls to make them more defensible too.


Wayne, what I described would have worked to prevent what happened last week and at reasonable costs. Kevlar armor and armed guards, not so much. Your idea is........

Author:  Milton Banana [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 8:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

If they reinstitute the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994 they only rifles that covered was foreign made imported rifles. The rifle used in this horrific shooting was American made and completely legal. Plus two handguns.

I think what will come out of this is another magazine limiting law. The Aurora Theatre shooter had a rifle with a 100 round magazine. Thing of it is anyone around the AR platform would never use one of these magazines because they terrible magazines that have huge jamming problems.

Just a question. When these modern mass shootings happen what stops them? Answer. When someone shows up and points a gun at the shooter. The shooter usually takes his own life, or the person with the gun takes his life. So, if your top priority is to save lives what do you need to do?

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

SiberD wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I think the prison school approach is long over due. We need to build schools more like bunkers and add bullet resistent glass to prevent snipers. The buses could be fitted with the same glass with kevlar armor and maybe even add armed guards to ride them. Then we could work on the shopping malls to make them more defensible too.


Wayne, what I described would have worked to prevent what happened last week and at reasonable costs. Kevlar armor and armed guards, not so much. Your idea is........



There was a security door, which would not have held up to the gunman had he used the weapons on it, that was part of the systme that required photo identification to be presented to the office staff. Once the glass was shattered the door could be opened by reaching through. An armed guard was already outgunned from the onset and in order to respond to the entrance would have to expose themselves to fire by a superior selection of firepower. Your idea would have had a minimal effect on the incident, just as the normal security procedures impact was minimal.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Milton Banana wrote:
If they reinstitute the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994 they only rifles that covered was foreign made imported rifles. The rifle used in this horrific shooting was American made and completely legal. Plus two handguns.

I think what will come out of this is another magazine limiting law. The Aurora Theatre shooter had a rifle with a 100 round magazine. Thing of it is anyone around the AR platform would never use one of these magazines because they terrible magazines that have huge jamming problems.

Just a question. When these modern mass shootings happen what stops them? Answer. When someone shows up and points a gun at the shooter. The shooter usually takes his own life, or the person with the gun takes his life. So, if your top priority is to save lives what do you need to do?


I suspect both an assault gun ban and a magazine ban will be sought and with a higher probability of passing. The existing inventory will, of course, be exempted thereby only creating a profit windfall for those with the inventory.

The Aurora shooter did not kill himself and the Sandy Hook shooter was not seen by the authorities responding until after he was dead, so this thought process fails the test of relevancy.

Also, the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 outlawed the manufacture and importation of weapons classified as assault weapons. There were about half a dozen features that were specified as defining an assault weapon and no new weapon could leagally contain more than three of the features. A couple of dozen weapons were specifically forbidden as well.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

The overarching fact is that some people are evil. You can't completely stop evil, but you can slow it down. These evil people target schools for a reason. They are certain they will not be met with an immediate armed response. Another mass shooting at a chruch in Colorado Springs was ended by a female CCW holder. She saved lives that day. No extra laws imposed on the law abiding population will have any impact on future shootings. No extra laws imposed on the law abiding population will save any lives in the future. The only proven method of saving lives in these situations is an immediate armed response.

There is only one way I would consider giving up my firearms. When evil can no longer get one, and when the police and military no longer need them.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

If anecdotal examples make the case:

One shooter and nine innocent people shot by police .......

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/n ... -shooting/

On a busy Friday morning in Manhattan, nine pedestrians suffered bullet or fragment wounds after police unleashed a hail of gunfire at a man wielding a .45 caliber pistol who had just killed a former co-worker.

The officers unloaded 16 rounds in the shadow of the Empire State Building at a disgruntled former apparel designer, killing him after he engaged in a gunbattle with police, authorities said.

Three passersby sustained direct gunshot wounds, while the remaining six were hit by fragments, according to New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. All injuries were caused by police, he said Saturday.

Author:  SiberD [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Wayne Stollings wrote:
SiberD wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I think the prison school approach is long over due. We need to build schools more like bunkers and add bullet resistent glass to prevent snipers. The buses could be fitted with the same glass with kevlar armor and maybe even add armed guards to ride them. Then we could work on the shopping malls to make them more defensible too.


Wayne, what I described would have worked to prevent what happened last week and at reasonable costs. Kevlar armor and armed guards, not so much. Your idea is........



There was a security door, which would not have held up to the gunman had he used the weapons on it, that was part of the systme that required photo identification to be presented to the office staff. Once the glass was shattered the door could be opened by reaching through. An armed guard was already outgunned from the onset and in order to respond to the entrance would have to expose themselves to fire by a superior selection of firepower. Your idea would have had a minimal effect on the incident, just as the normal security procedures impact was minimal.


And you call that a security system? Yeah, a security door...with a plate glass window in it or next to it that can be easily broken. Why have a security door then? Photo identification presented to the office staff. That should be done from the entrance via cameras and microphones, not in the office after the whacko is in the building. And as soon as a door or window is breached the whole school should be in lock down mode including the door locks on the classrooms I described. And I agree, an armed guard with a six shot wheel gun, or even a higher capacity semi-auto is indeed outgunned. Why wouldn't you arm them with at least an AR15 and high capacity semi-auto side arm?

Author:  animal-friendly [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Reasonable gun control measures

Wayne Stollings wrote:
When I was younger I took a hunter safety course and before I got my concealed carry permit I was required to take a class and show my ability to shoot. When I applied for my drivers license I had to pass a written test and show my ability to handle a car safely. If we carry this to the concept of gun purchase we could make a small difference in keeping people from doing something like we saw in Sandy Hook school. I have no problem with a similar program of license for gun ownership as in the concealed carry permit program. A background check, which is done for purchase now, but the check included medical records which indicate whether there are any known problems or concerns other than with the law. A safety program and a final test that included shooting would help ensure those who own guns can safely use them.

Of course, it does not preclude those who steal guns or acquire them through illegal means from getting them. It does not preclude the relative of a legal gun owner from gaining access to the guns either. Nothing will prevent the access to a gun because one can build thier own from scratch if one desires and has a bit of mechanical knowledge, but it will give a measure of reasonable checks to protect everyone, including those who buy guns and do not use them safely.



Yes. it's true that nothing will preclude those who want a gun from getting one, but if one has to build one .... well that in itself is a deterrent. Stealing one is as well. Unfortunately, the shooter had a mom who was a collector and gun enthusiast and "hobbyist" with quite a collection. It was no problem for him to acquire the tool he needed.

Page 1 of 15 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/