School Shooting In Minnesota With A Twist

[Frankfooter]

"There aren't that many", let me guess you have no clue what you're talking about.

Again, show me the last time a car owner was criminally charged for having their vehicle stolen. I'm still waiting....

My ownership of firearms doesn't affect anyone else's safety.

Don't like guns? Feel free to not own any.

Car owners are charged if their cars are unsafe, their use is unsafe or if they break the laws.
Gun owners are charged if their guns are unsafe, not stored safely or if they break the laws.

You own something designed to kill other humans its your duty to everyone else to make sure it never gets stolen.
Don't whine about rules made to keep everyone else safe from your fetish.

 

[cunning linguist]

Car owners are charged if their cars are unsafe, their use is unsafe or if they break the laws.
Gun owners are charged if their guns are unsafe, not stored safely or if they break the laws.

You own something designed to kill other humans its your duty to everyone else to make sure it never gets stolen.
Don't whine about rules made to keep everyone else safe from your fetish.

The laws aren't designed to keep people safe, they're designed to leave gun owners holding the bag. Thanks for illustrating my problem with the Canadian model; it presumes guilt.

Just like how carding, presumes guilt.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

But since someone brought up cars why don't we apply the same, flawed logic. When you sell a car, are you responsible for the future owner's (mis)use of it? Did you do a background check? Ask for a driver's abstract? Shit, did you even check if they were currently licensed or insured?

Yes, let us use the car example.
Cars are registered to their owners and ownership transfer goes through a DMV even when you do a private sale.
Guns are not registered or tracked after sale at the dealer.
Hence the need for regulations, background checks etc.,
I would even go one step further and only give gun licenses to people who pass a physical, vision, written, practical, and psych evaluation tests the same way we give driver licenses to people after testing them.

 

[Frankfooter]

The laws aren't designed to keep people safe, they're designed to leave gun owners holding the bag. Thanks for illustrating my problem with the Canadian model; it presumes guilt.

Just like how carding, presumes guilt.

More guns means more gun deaths.
Would you be ok with laws saying collecting hand grenades is legal?
Would you be happy living next to someone with a hand grenade collection?

 

[cunning linguist]

Yes, let us use the car example.
Cars are registered to their owners and ownership transfer goes through a DMV even when you do a private sale.
Guns are not registered or tracked after sale at the dealer.
Hence the need for regulations, background checks etc.,
I would even go one step further and only give gun licenses to people who pass a physical, vision, written, practical, and psych evaluation tests the same way we give driver licenses to people after testing them.

Vehicles don't have to be registered or plated if they're not being used on public roads. Even then, the onus on registration, plating and insurance is on the purchaser.

If a gun owner, in the United States, is expected to be licensed and registered to exercise their constitutional rights, then they should be allowed to do so, in public, across state lines.

Yet somehow, getting a form of ID, in the years between elections is somehow too much to ask.

 

[cunning linguist]

More guns means more gun deaths.
Would you be ok with laws saying collecting hand grenades is legal?
Would you be happy living next to someone with a hand grenade collection?

More gun deaths stem from more criminal gun use, again, separate from responsible gun use.

 

[Frankfooter]

Yet somehow, getting a form of ID, in the years between elections is somehow too much to ask.

People voting in democracy is a necessary act for the health of the country.
People having guns makes the country less safe.

More gun deaths stem from more criminal gun use, again, separate from responsible gun use.

Less guns overall, legal and illegal, in Australia meant less gun deaths.
Most of those turned in were legal semis and automatics.

Fewer guns means fewer people killed by guns.

 

[cunning linguist]

Less guns overall, legal and illegal, in Australia meant less gun deaths.
Most of those turned in were legal semis and automatics.

Fewer guns means fewer people killed by guns.

Australia is an island nation and despite what you've heard in your echo chamber, criminals there are still armed; they're criminals, obeying laws goes against their very nature.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Vehicles don't have to be registered or plated if they're not being used on public roads. Even then, the onus on registration, plating and insurance is on the purchaser.

If a gun owner, in the United States, is expected to be licensed and registered to exercise their constitutional rights, then they should be allowed to do so, in public, across state lines.

Yet somehow, getting a form of ID, in the years between elections is somehow too much to ask.

And no one buys a car to keep it on their property so that is besides the point.
Even if there are a few like that the majority are registered and tracked and that is the default rule.
Also, the US is a federal system, so states can make their own rules on guns, because you know there is the small detail that guns are used to kill people.
Many people lack access, financial resources and required documentation to obtain IDs and it disproportionately affects minorities.
Hence the push back on voter ID requirements, while registering and tracking guns to better tackle gun violence is necessary.

 

[cunning linguist]

And no one buys a car to keep it on their property so that is besides the point.
Even if there are a few like that the majority are registered and tracked and that is the default rule.
Also, the US is a federal system, so states can make their own rules on guns, because you know there is the small detail that guns are used to kill people.
Many people lack access, financial resources and required documentation to obtain IDs and it disproportionately affects minorities.
Hence the push back on voter ID requirements, while registering and tracking guns to better tackle gun violence is necessary.

You must not know many farmers and ranchers who drive unregistered vehicles on their property, because a golf cart won't cut it.

Except they're not really "tracked" are they? Vehicle registration has never been used for mass reclassification and confiscation like it has been used for guns, here in Canada. You'll never successfully convince gun owners that information will only be used in good faith when history has shown otherwise.

But again, quid pro quo, if you want to sell this idea of licensing and registration, you need to make it more attractive with something like national reciprocity because like driving, if someone won't be doing it in public, what would be the point of the red tape?

 

[The Oracle]

You must not know many farmers and ranchers who drive unregistered vehicles on their property, because a golf cart won't cut it.

Except they're not really "tracked" are they? Vehicle registration has never been used for mass reclassification and confiscation like it has been used for guns, here in Canada. You'll never successfully convince gun owners that information will only be used in good faith when history has shown otherwise.

But again, quid pro quo, if you want to sell this idea of licensing and registration, you need to make it more attractive with something like national reciprocity because like driving, if someone won't be doing it in public, what would be the point of the red tape?

I notice he hasn't mentioned the guns that are coming through the reservations...Wonder why?

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

You must not know many farmers and ranchers who drive unregistered vehicles on their property, because a golf cart won't cut it.

Except they're not really "tracked" are they? Vehicle registration has never been used for mass reclassification and confiscation like it has been used for guns, here in Canada. You'll never successfully convince gun owners that information will only be used in good faith when history has shown otherwise.

But again, quid pro quo, if you want to sell this idea of licensing and registration, you need to make it more attractive with something like national reciprocity because like driving, if someone won't be doing it in public, what would be the point of the red tape?

It still is true that the majority of vehicles are registered vehicles because the majority of Canadians and Americans are neither farmers nor ranchers. The default is to register a vehicle.
No vehicle registration has never been used for confiscation, the same way it won't be used for guns if guns required registration,
No, guns have never been confiscated in Canada. Mandatory buy backs is not confiscation.
The idea that the government might confiscate if registered is a lie the NRA has pushed.
As far as guns go, all guns should be registered because they are used in killing people. Non-gang related mass shootings are predominantly conducted using legally acquired weapons.
Unregistered vehicles aren't killing people.

 

[cunning linguist]

It still is true that the majority of vehicles are registered vehicles because the majority of Canadians and Americans are neither farmers nor ranchers. The default is to register a vehicle.
No vehicle registration has never been used for confiscation, the same way it won't be used for guns if guns required registration,
No, guns have never been confiscated in Canada. Mandatory buy backs is not confiscation.
The idea that the government might confiscate if registered is a lie the NRA has pushed.
As far as guns go, all guns should be registered because they are used in killing people. Non-gang related mass shootings are predominantly conducted using legally acquired weapons.
Unregistered vehicles aren't killing people.

Registered vehicles kill people all the time, with higher frequency than guns. Registries don't keep people safe; their purpose is tracking and taxation.

Yes, registration has been used to reclassify firearms, restrict ownership and use of firearms in Canada. This isn't an "NRA lie" it's a historical fact. It's happened before, it will happen again and in fact, it was one of the promises the former Prime Minister foolishly made. Dress it up all you want, a buy back is confiscation with a small financial pittance and without the long gun registry, it will be even more pointless to enforce.

But again, since the criminals; the ones who actually commit gun violence, won't be "selling" their guns "back" to the government, it's all just political grandstanding by an ineffective government anyways.

 

[cunning linguist]

I notice he hasn't mentioned the guns that are coming through the reservations...Wonder why?

Because he probably believes the lie that criminals and Canadians can just buy a gun from a gun store in Indiana, no questions asked.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Registered vehicles kill people all the time, with higher frequency than guns. Registries don't keep people safe; their purpose is tracking and taxation.

Yes, registration has been used to reclassify firearms, restrict ownership and use of firearms in Canada. This isn't an "NRA lie" it's a historical fact. It's happened before, it will happen again and in fact, it was one of the promises the former Prime Minister foolishly made. Dress it up all you want, a buy back is confiscation with a small financial pittance and without the long gun registry, it will be even more pointless to enforce.

But again, since the criminals; the ones who actually commit gun violence, won't be "selling" their guns "back" to the government, it's all just political grandstanding by an ineffective government anyways.

No vehicles don't.
That's just false equivalence.
A vehicle is not a weapon or intended to be one and being involved in an accident is very different from a weapon intended to kill people being used to kill people.
The government is correct to reclassify and restrict ownership of certain types of firearms, in the interest of public safety, whether or not they are registered. Even the US has restrictions without registration requirements.
And registered weapons are not confiscated ever. Buy backs is not confiscation.
In any case a gun owner who is paranoic about the government is certainly not a gun owner I would trust.
We certainly don't want people accumulating weapons to fight "government tyranny".
If one is not engaged in any criminal activity or does not have any right wing extremist attitudes or beliefs, then one shouldn't feel uncomfortable registering their weapons.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Why should I come up with any ideas?

Because if you're gonna criticize, you should be able to come up with solutions

Essentially who acquires weapons (I'd imagine you want to keep mentally ill, or people with the wrong temperament from acquiring weapons)

And how exactly do you gauge that?? The US government doesnt keep a list of mentally ill people.
But lets say the did, here's a list of all MH disorders:

Mental disorders

Facts sheet on mental disorders: key facts, depression, dementia, health and support and WHO response

www.who.int

These are estimates based on the amount of prescriptions sold by pharma companies annually

1. Anxiety. Thats 19% of the US population https://www.google.ca/search?as_q=p...&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&as_filetype=&tbs=

2. Depression. Thats another 8.3% https://www.google.ca/search?q=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+depression&lr=&sca_esv=e85bf51f2ebe9d69&as_qdr=all&sxsrf=AE3TifMOxIGBCCDCC0t5DxtZOA5p7bVi1Q:1756815903160&ei=H-K2aJPICb2Z0PEP3PSMgAk&oq=percent+of+americans+who+suffer+from+depr&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiKXBlcmNlbnQgb2YgYW1lcmljYW5zIHdobyBzdWZmZXIgZnJvbSBkZXByKgIIADIGEAAYFhgeMgYQABgWGB4yBhAAGBYYHjIGEAAYFhgeMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBTIIEAAYogQYiQUyCBAAGIAEGKIEMggQABiiBBiJBTIFEAAY7wUyCBAAGKIEGIkFSJ4YUKYFWNQLcAF4AZABAJgBcaAB6AOqAQMzLjK4AQHIAQD4AQGYAgWgAp8DwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICCBAAGBYYChgemAMAiAYBkAYHkgcDMy4yoAepLrIHAzIuMrgHmgPCBwMyLTXIBxE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

3. Bipolar Disorder. Thats 2.8% https://www.google.ca/search?q=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+Bipolar+Disorder&lr=&sca_esv=e85bf51f2ebe9d69&as_qdr=all&sxsrf=AE3TifOe9Z-T9HAuxffj5WVJo20YGXJeNA:1756815952613&ei=UOK2aL6dJaKNm9cPttnemQo&ved=0ahUKEwi-haq2ibqPAxWixuYEHbasN6MQ4dUDCBE&uact=5&oq=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+Bipolar+Disorder&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiOHBlcmNlbnRhZ2Ugb2YgYW1lcmljYW5zIHdobyBzdWZmZXIgZnJvbSBCaXBvbGFyIERpc29yZGVyMgYQABgWGB4yBhAAGBYYHjIGEAAYFhgeMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBTILEAAYgAQYhgMYigUyCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBTIIEAAYgAQYogQyCBAAGIAEGKIEMggQABiiBBiJBUiVKVDnGVjnGXABeAGQAQCYAWigAWiqAQMwLjG4AQPIAQD4AQL4AQGYAgKgAnHCAgoQABiwAxjWBBhHmAMAiAYBkAYHkgcDMS4xoAfnCrIHAzAuMbgHbMIHAzItMsgHBw&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

4. Schizophrenia. Thats about 1% https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics

5. Disruptive behaviour and dissocial disorders. Rounded off, thats at 10% https://www.google.ca/search?q=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+Disruptive+behaviour+and+dissocial+disorders&lr=&sca_esv=e85bf51f2ebe9d69&as_qdr=all&sxsrf=AE3TifPS1ynnxcQYaCF5XOOuqMJXXhS7MA:1756816254806&ei=fuO2aJKGMaDGp84P97P20Aw&ved=0ahUKEwiSvbbGirqPAxUg48kDHfeZHcoQ4dUDCBE&uact=5&oq=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+Disruptive+behaviour+and+dissocial+disorders&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiVHBlcmNlbnRhZ2Ugb2YgYW1lcmljYW5zIHdobyBzdWZmZXIgZnJvbSBEaXNydXB0aXZlIGJlaGF2aW91ciBhbmQgZGlzc29jaWFsIGRpc29yZGVyc0iPFFCRDFiRDHABeAGQAQCYAVegAVeqAQExuAEDyAEA-AEC-AEBmAIBoAIEwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR5gDAIgGAZAGBZIHATGgBy2yBwC4BwDCBwMyLTHIBwM&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

6. PTSD. Thats 6% https://www.google.ca/search?q=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+ptsd&lr=&sca_esv=e85bf51f2ebe9d69&as_qdr=all&sxsrf=AE3TifPd2pMWdfvQSKkJPpH_Z8cvpLA7AA:1756816259017&ei=g-O2aNFjhf-nzg_8k9bhCg&ved=0ahUKEwiRsbfIirqPAxWF_8kDHfyJNawQ4dUDCBE&uact=5&oq=percentage+of+americans+who+suffer+from+ptsd&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiLHBlcmNlbnRhZ2Ugb2YgYW1lcmljYW5zIHdobyBzdWZmZXIgZnJvbSBwdHNkMggQABgWGAoYHjIGEAAYFhgeMgYQABgWGB4yCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMgsQABiABBiGAxiKBTILEAAYgAQYhgMYigUyCxAAGIAEGIYDGIoFMggQABiABBiiBDIIEAAYgAQYogQyBRAAGO8FSJ0NUN8FWP4LcAF4AZABAJgBbaABkQOqAQMyLjK4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgWgAqMDwgIKEAAYsAMY1gQYR8ICCBAAGKIEGIkFmAMAiAYBkAYIkgcDMi4zoAfOI7IHAzEuM7gHnwPCBwMyLTXIBxE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp


Add it all up and you come to about 47% of the population, which is almost half the country.
How exactly are you going to deny half of America guns when its in their constitution they have to right to bear arms??
And even if you did deny them, you'd still have to identify each and every person, which is almost impossible because the government doesnt keep track of them all.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Because if you're gonna criticize, you should be able to come up with solutions

No not really.
It is enough to recognize that there is an issue with guns and further action is needed.
But I have some ideas below.

And how exactly do you gauge that?? The US government doesnt keep a list of mentally ill people.
Add it all up and you come to about 47% of the population, which is almost half the country.
How exactly are you going to deny half of America guns when its in their constitution they have to right to bear arms??
And even if you did deny them, you'd still have to identify each and every person, which is almost impossible because the government doesnt keep track of them all.

You give them a psych eval test as part of their licensing application.
Only 30% of Americans own a gun, but 92% have cars.
Don't we test each and every person - both a physical (vision test), written test and a practical test before issuing a driver's license?
Similarly, do a psych eval, written test and practical test before issuing a gun license. The numbers are much lower for gun owners anyway.
I would recommend a comprehensive testing and tracking process that involves criminal and background checks, mental health and fitness, physical fitness (vision or hearing), knowledge and competence - written and practical test, character and lifestyle vetting - reference checks and interviews and ongoing checks for renewals and any other red flag provisions, along with registration requirements for all weapons.
Many countries already do these so it is not new.
Just because it is one's right to own a weapon doesn't mean they are fit to own one.
Am sure you wouldn't want a Jeffrey Dahmer or some extremist to have a weapon.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

No not really.
It is enough to recognize that there is an issue with guns and further action is needed.
But I have some ideas below.

You give them a psych eval test as part of their licensing application.
Only 30% of Americans own a gun, but 92% have cars.
Don't we test each and every person - both a physical (vision test), written test and a practical test before issuing a driver's license?
Similarly, do a psych eval, written test and practical test before issuing a gun license. The numbers are much lower for gun owners anyway.
I would recommend a comprehensive testing and tracking process that involves criminal and background checks, mental health and fitness, physical fitness (vision or hearing), knowledge and competence - written and practical test, character and lifestyle vetting - reference checks and interviews and ongoing checks for renewals and any other red flag provisions, along with registration requirements for all weapons.
Many countries already do these so it is not new.
Just because it is one's right to own a weapon doesn't mean they are fit to own one.
Am sure you wouldn't want a Jeffrey Dahmer or some extremist to have a weapon.

Are you familiar with HIPAA??

Google Search

www.google.ca

 

[Frankfooter]

Australia is an island nation and despite what you've heard in your echo chamber, criminals there are still armed; they're criminals, obeying laws goes against their very nature.

Gun deaths went down with gun control.
If your argument is you want safety then gun ownership is part of the problem, not the solution.

Why model a place with some of the highest gun deaths in the world as a solution to gun deaths?

 

[Frankfooter]

Registered vehicles kill people all the time, with higher frequency than guns. Registries don't keep people safe; their purpose is tracking and taxation.

Yes, registration has been used to reclassify firearms, restrict ownership and use of firearms in Canada. This isn't an "NRA lie" it's a historical fact. It's happened before, it will happen again and in fact, it was one of the promises the former Prime Minister foolishly made. Dress it up all you want, a buy back is confiscation with a small financial pittance and without the long gun registry, it will be even more pointless to enforce.

But again, since the criminals; the ones who actually commit gun violence, won't be "selling" their guns "back" to the government, it's all just political grandstanding by an ineffective government anyways.

Cars have a useful function for society, guns don't. So we accept car use and try to minimize deaths by seat belt laws, insurance rules, traffic laws and taking away licenses for those are drunk or dangerous drivers. That mitigates the risk.

Other than hunting rifles, guns serve no useful function in society.

You might as well be arguing that we should let people have hand grenades for self defence.