Everytown for Gun Safety: We Won’t Debate Because Our Opponents Aren’t Credible

[part deux]

This is an assault rifle

[linux203]

Mr Linux203: My point about the 2nd amendment is two-fold. First, obviously the founding fathers foresaw some sort of Regulation being necessary to keep the whole idea of gun ownership from dissolving into chaos and anarchy. So, when gun owners say that any regulation whatsoever is burdensome, I have to raise the BS flag. As I've said before, we need to balance the rights of gun owners with the need for public safety. And suggesting everyone pack a gun does not achieve that balance any more than outlawing guns does. We need to find solutions that work for all of our citizens, not just the ones who favor firearms.
Second, the Constitution is a living, breathing document. It has and should continue to reflect the will of the people, not the other way around. The 2nd amendment is exactly that, an amendment, a change. When situations required it, we've changed the constitution before. Witness the Amendments on slavery and prohibition, among others. The founding fathers wrote this document over 200 years ago. They could not possibly have foreseen the developments in technology and security that have come our way. So rather than dig in our heels and just say no to any changes in regulation, we, the gun owners, should take the lead and help write regulations that make our society safer. If we try something and it works, great, keep it. If we try something and it doesn't work, then we cancel it, learn from our mistakes, and keep moving forward. Just saying no to any and all changes is not a strategy.

Well regulated describes the militia.  Shall not be infringed describes the right to keep and bear arms.  The uninfringed right to keep and bear arms is required for a well-regulated militia, not the other way around.

I was burdened this week.  I couldn't have my rifle shipped to my house.  Instead, I had to drive to an FFL.  My burden: arriving at the FFL during business hours and $25.  Because the burden may seem insignificant to some, doesn't negate that it is still a burden.  How about the burden of obtaining a pistol purchase permit?

If the will of the people was to modify the Second Amendment, another amendment would be introduced and sent to the states for ratification.  It's political suicide for Congress to do just that.  Why? The will of the people.

You believe your argument has merit, but when applied to the 1st and 3rd amendments it is absurd. (The first three amendments are known as the Safeguards of Liberty.)  Did the framers of the Bill of Rights have possibly foreseen the development of the Internet and the platform of free speech? BTW, the Third Amendment is under attack, but no one seems to care.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -Benjamin Franklin

[freediver]

Mr TucTom: I wish that personal responsibility was overwhelmingly evident in our gun culture. But it simply isn't so. Just look at the number of accidental shooting deaths, the number of guns (especially handguns) that end up in the hands of criminals, the number of accidental discharges, the number of thefts and you quickly realize that we have far too lackadaisical approach to gun ownership. Want to watch something that is both amusing and appalling at the same time? Pull up gun accidents or gun fails on YouTube and then tell me we don't have a problem in our country with stupidity and irresponsible gun owners. So absent this culture of personal responsibility, I guess we'll have to pass a law or two, and enforce the ones on the books. Like universal background checks for handguns and no converting your AR-15 into a fully auto weapon. As I have been saying, when we change our gun culture to one less casual, when we raise the bar by requiring a certain amount of training and competency, a lot of these problems will go away.

[freediver]

Mr Part Deux: Yes, that could be construed as an assault rifle. But given its slow rate of fire, weight, and lack of accuracy compared to modern assault rifles, I think we are getting into semantic hairsplitting. Let's focus on the reality of our modern society; weapons that were invented in the last 50-60 years have much more firepower and lethality and should respected and regulated as such. We are trying to balance the rights of gun owners with the public's right to safety. We should have reasonable assurances that anyone who owns a modern assault rifle is both mentally and physically competent to do so.

[freediver]

Mr Linux 203: Your interpretation of the 2nd amendment is different than mine and that's fine. What I'm talking about is the mindset of "just say no" among gun enthusiasts. They seem to think that their mindset of almost zero regulation and responsibility is just fine. I look at the numbers of firearms deaths and accidents each year, crime figures in the various cities, narco violence in Mexico (from US guns) and the incredibly casual approach to gun ownership and see that something needs to change.
I, too, had to go through the drill of shipping a hunting rifle from Utah back to Michigan. Was it burdensome? Not in the least. I went by the local gun club, filled out some paperwork, paid a modest fee, and my rifle showed up at the Cabela's in Grand Rapids a week later. Easy, peasy. It cost me a few bucks and a little gas money. It was not any different than when I have to ship hazardous materials by UPS ground rather than air. No big deal.
As far as my arguments being absurd, I don't think so. I am stating my opinion on how we could better our gun culture and public safety in this country. I use logic, facts, and a fairly broad level of experience to make my case. If you disagree, that's fine. But absurd is when arguments are made with no basis in reality. Such as the "2.5 million defensive gun uses per year". That has proven to be wrong by a long way, and is therefore absurd.

[TucTom]

Freediver, I can now see no matter what is discussed you will not change your point of view in regards to Guns and gun safety.

You clearly want more laws even though it's already illegal as you have posted previously to steal and to sell guns illegally. More laws or remove all guns?

What is your plan to prevent accidental death? Outlaw it? Or just totally remove all guns and anything else that an accidental death can result from.

You also bring up personal responsibility do you believe we need more laws or do we need to teach people how to be responsible? Too many people believe that laws can replace personal responsibility is this your thought too?

Again I don't think you want to change your thoughts and I believe you are set in your ideals.

[part deux]

Why don't we just make murder and suicide illegal?

We have cars today that easily break 200 mph, and not exotic cars either.  Dodge Chargers out of the factory will hit 204.

Gun crimes have fallen substantially, by 40%, in the last 20 years... in spite of a HUGE INCREASE in ownership rates.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/07/18108298-gun-violence-in-us-has-fallen-dramatically-over-past-20-years-justice-dept-report-finds

Please post CREDIBLE source supporting your position on "assault weapons".  By the way, modern military assault weapons are flat out unavailable to everyday citizens.  If you're talking about a sporting utility rifle, it's not military level

WRT the meaning of the 2nd amendment, I'd suggest rereading the federalist papers and this link from 2nd amendment foundation
https://www.saf.org/?page_id=32#3

might try JPFO also did a most excellent write up
http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/six-about-2nd.htm

I doubt you'll actually read these as it's not supporting you position, but I would encourage reading them multiple times

[gryphon]

universal background checks for handguns and no converting your AR-15 into a fully auto weapon.

Both of these are already laws.  You think we need to make the same law twice?  "I know it's against the law to convert my AR-15 to full-auto, but they just passed a second law stating that it's against the law to convert my AR-15 to full-auto, so they must mean business!"

LOL

[freediver]

Mr Tuctom: I try to keep an open mind on all matters. I will change my outlook if I am presented with a fact-based argument on a particular topic. In the case of gun safety and regulation, I look at the numbers of deaths and injuries as well as the crime figures and see that we need to make some changes. Changes in both the law and the attitude with which we approach firearms. Since gun owners in general have shown themselves to be irresponsible, yes, I do think we need a few new laws like universal background checks and mandatory firearms training. I'm not suggesting we legislate everything. I'm suggesting that with a few simple additions, we can raise the bar of gun ownership as well as choke off the supply of guns to criminals.

[freediver]

Mr part deux: your point about cars is spot on. We have cars (and motorcycles) that can easily exceed safe speeds of 150-200 miles per hour. Recognizing the inherent danger in letting just anyone do that, we have instituted a few regulations along the way. Such as: mandatory driver's training and driver's licensing, additional training and licensing for larger, more complex vehicles and motorcycles, speed limits, limits on alcohol and drug use while operating, controlled venues such as race tracks where you can go as fast as you want. In the interest of public safety I'm suggesting the same thing: licensing and training requirements, universal background checks, limits on the types of weapons out there. Minor changes, all, but they should start to curb the gun deaths and injuries and crime in our country.

[freediver]

Mr gryphon: you're right, I chose poorly in those examples. I'll pick better examples next time. Feel better?

[gryphon]

Freediver, driving a motor vehicle isn't a right.  But you knew that.  Maybe we should license voting, speech, and the practice of religion.

[part deux]

but they should start to curb the gun deaths and injuries and crime in our country.

Why percentage reduction in gun violence would you be satisfied with?

5%?
10%
20%

How about 40%?  If we could curb gun violence 40% in 20 years, would that be acceptable? 

Per FBI stats, that's what has currently happened.

As pointed out above, automobiles and drivers licenses are not listed in the Bill of Right.

[freediver]

Mr Gryphon: I'm not suggesting that driving a motor vehicle is a "right". I'm suggesting that we can learn a lesson from the licensing of drivers. One of the issues we have with the gun culture in our country is that there are very few entry barriers to owning and carrying a firearm. If you are of legal age, not a felon, and have money (or credit), you can walk into a firearms dealer and buy a wide variety of guns. There is no demonstration of competency, of knowledge of your rights and obligations, or of safety knowledge. You can just pick "the big one on the left", pay your money, and be out the door. Then you are free to do all kinds of stupid and harmful things with your new "toy". I'm suggesting that, in the interest of public safety, we require potential gun owners to go through the same kind of training that we require of car drivers, hunters, pilots, nurses, etc. You show up, do a couple of weekends of training, to include range time to demonstrate both safety and competency, and get your firearms license. When you walk into a firearms dealer, you present the license showing that you are a competent gun owner. Then shop to your heart's content.
Case in point: A couple of years ago I was in a Subway grabbing some lunch. The gentleman in line in front of me was carrying a handgun holstered on his hip. Now, I don't know if this guy is an off-duty police officer or former Navy Seal (doubtful, from his attire and lack of physical fitness) or just a local crackpot who'll get pissed off if I take the bag of chips he wanted. I don't know that, if some altercation starts, he is competent to handle a firearm in a tactical situation. As a citizen, I have a right to some measure of public safety.

[freediver]

Mr Part Deux: I would be happy with any measurable reduction in gun violence. I'm not just talking about crime statistics. I'm also talking about suicides, accidental shootings, domestic violence issues, threats, and all the other things that the FBI does not track. Take a look at CDC numbers as well and the picture is a lot different. Take a look at a recent harvard study that shows that more guns equals more violence and accidental shootings. Then let's talk about the flow of guns into illegal hands. Let's talk about the flow of guns into the hands of those less than mentally "competent". Let's talk about the flow of guns from the US into other countries such as Mexico and some of the Caribbean states where, because of the drug trade, local citizens fear for their lives. If we're going to talk guns and gun culture, those things are all part of it. 

[part deux]

Mr Part Deux: I would be happy with any measurable reduction in gun violence. I'm not just talking about crime statistics. I'm also talking about suicides, accidental shootings, domestic violence issues, threats, and all the other things that the FBI does not track. Take a look at CDC numbers as well and the picture is a lot different. Take a look at a recent harvard study that shows that more guns equals more violence and accidental shootings. Then let's talk about the flow of guns into illegal hands. Let's talk about the flow of guns into the hands of those less than mentally "competent". Let's talk about the flow of guns from the US into other countries such as Mexico and some of the Caribbean states where, because of the drug trade, local citizens fear for their lives. If we're going to talk guns and gun culture, those things are all part of it.

Now you're just trolling.

Even the CDC report couldn't connect number of guns to crime

Suicide?  Take that one completely off the table.  I have personally know 3 people that have committed suicide, one with a firearm, one with perscription drugs, and one with a car... almost taking another life with hers.  Three attempted suicides by two different people.  one attempt, jumping in front of a train, one with prescription drugs, one with a knife.

When our own Federal Govt supplies guns to bad people in other countries, and you're going to blame legal owners?