A discussion about gun ownership

[jabeady]

If someone thinks they are unfairly being accused of being a troll, they are welcome--even encouraged--to disabuse others of that notion at their earliest convenience.

The only sure way too do that, it would seem, is to conform.  Weren't you the one citing the Japanese?  They have a saying:  The nail that sticks up is beaten down.

Oh crap!

[freediver]

Mr gryphon: unlike other people, I am not using suicide stats from other countries to rail against the evil guns. To me guns aren't evil, just an incredibly deadly tool. As you pointed out, most if not all of the recent mass shooters bought their guns legally. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. The suite of regulations we have in place right now aren't working. They don't stop mass shootings, they don't stop gun trafficking, they don't stop the tens of thousands of other gun deaths or soundings that don't occur.

But unlike you and many of the other OC enthusiasts, I'm not willing to throw up my hands and say "oh well". I think we can and should do better. It's a matter of personal responsibility; that WE, the actual gun owners, bear the burden of making the change. How are you going to stop corrupt FFLs? By fulling funding the ATF to do their job, strictly enforcing the laws already on the books, and tracking gun registration numbers from owner to owner. Similar to what we do with cars, boats, airplanes, motorcycles, RVs, and various substances. So far we haven't infringed a gun owner one bit.
I'm not telling your mom she has to take a course that I approve. She would be taking a course that WE approved. We approved it because we the gun owners took responsibility for our sport and decided to raise the bar on gun ownership. We took the lead and instituted some SMART regulatory changes that actually impacted the flow of weapons into the wrong hands. We saw that these mass shooters obtained their guns legally and decided to change a set of regulations that obviously wasn't working. Because we took the lead, we were able to make changes that made sense and balanced the rights of gun owners with the need for public safety.

Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. If we don't make some smart changes from within, some less than smart changes will come from without.

I'm up in the middle of the night for work reasons. What's your excuse? Time to switch to decaf, my friend!

[freediver]

Make that last sentence in the first paragraph "tens of thousands of other gun deaths or woundings that occur". Damn auto correct.

[gryphon]

unlike other people, I am not using suicide stats from other countries to rail against the evil guns.

USA suicide stats have been used as evidence of evil gun deaths.  It's part of the anti-gun narrative that you say you are trying to fend off, so it is germane, even if you have never brought it up.

  As you pointed out, most if not all of the recent mass shooters bought their guns legally. THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

How is that a problem?  Seriously.  If someone drinks a bottle of whiskey and kills someone in a DUI collision, which happens all the time, every day (more than mass shootings), what are we as a society going to do about it?  Nothing.  Not a damn thing.  Year after year after year.

The suite of regulations we have in place right now aren't working. They don't stop mass shootings

So I asked you what can we do--short of banning firearms--that would stop Christopher Harper-Mercer, Dylann Roof, Eliot Rodgers, James Holmes, Seung-Hui Cho, Ivan Lopez, Nidal Malik Hasan, Aaron Alexis, Andrew John Engeldinger, Jerad and Amanda Miller, and Jared Loughner from obtaining a gun?  You haven't proposed one single thing that would have stopped those shootings.

they don't stop gun trafficking

News flash--criminals break laws.  Criminals will traffic in guns.  So will the ATF, but that's another story.

But unlike you and many of the other OC enthusiasts, I'm not willing to throw up my hands and say "oh well".

I am not throwing up my hands and saying, "oh well."  I am advocating for more gun rights, not less.  I think America needs Constitutional Carry.  I think non-violent felons should have their gun and voting rights restored.  I think we should abolish GFZs.  I think we should void the NFA.  I think we should reopen all firearms importation.

I think we can and should do better.

We aren't doing anything wrong now, other than not standing strong enough for 2A.

How are you going to stop corrupt FFLs? By fulling funding the ATF to do their job, strictly enforcing the laws already on the books, and tracking gun registration numbers from owner to owner.

LOL!  You don't know what you are talking about.  You think the ATF is underfunded?  What a joke.  The ATF receives over $1.2 billion (that we know of) each year.  That is "on the books" spending.  The ATF often knows about bad FFLs.  There aren't that many, but the ones they know about they continue to let traffic (just like other agencies allow illegal activities to go on) so they can build up a better case against them and get more people involved so they can make a "big bust" and bring more glory on themselves.  Not only do they get the FFL but they get a lot of buyers.  In the meantime, hundreds of guns are going out on the street while the ATF watches.  This is well documented by former ATF agents.  I won't even bother going into the agency corruption. 

The ATF has plenty of time and resources to devote to petty stuff like throwing an entire office--nay, one section of the entire US agency--behind prosecuting a police officer for a straw purchase for using his First Responder discount to save his dad a few bucks buying a Glock.  They fought that all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States.  Even though his dad was not a prohibited person who the law was supposed to prevent obtaining a gun.  Yet when a REAL straw buyer came on the scene, one who shared responsibility for the Columbine murders, they never even bothered prosecuting that person responsible for the REAL straw purchase that enabled the shooters to murder all those people.

I won't even mention some of the more obvious things.

I'm not telling your mom she has to take a course that I approve. She would be taking a course that WE approved.

So one can't defend his or her own life unless he or she takes an approved class?  If she doesn't take the class she should be murdered because she has no effective means of self-defense?

We approved it because we the gun owners took responsibility for our sport

There's your problem.  It's not a sport.  You can regulate a sport.  You can't regulate someone's inherent right to self-defense.

Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I don't want to do the same thing, I want to expand gun ownership.  That will effect a positive change on crime.

I'm up in the middle of the night for work reasons. What's your excuse?

Normally I'd be in bed or the same as you, up for work.  But in this case I'm coming off from about a month of vacation, mostly traveling.  And my calendar this week is very light.

[LD]

Mr. Freediver...
You and I disagree on so many points it would take volumes to discuss them all so lets just start with one.

Please go into detail on how

, and tracking gun registration numbers from owner to owner. Similar to what we do with cars, boats, airplanes, motorcycles, RVs, and various substances.

will prevent mass shootings.
And while you are at it, as long as you reference vehicle laws on several occasions as an example of how guns should be regulated, explain the high death toll related to cars with all these safeguards in place.

[Divegeek]

If full on National firearm registration will solve so many crimes and prevent deaths, why did Canada recently scrap their national registration database? That's right, it didn't solve a single crime and was so immensely over budget that they came to the realization that it wasn't worth it.

[freediver]

Mr LD and mr dive geek: the tracking of gun registration numbers, similar to tracking titles to automobiles, planes, motorcycles, boats, isn't meant to DIRECTLY impact firearms deaths. What it would do is allow law enforcement to track firearms so as to combat arms traffickers, large and small, so as to attack the "guns to crminals" problem we've all talked about. It's one of several things we need to do to choke off the supply of guns to bad guys. Most of that would be directed at corrupt FFLs, which is where the bulk of the trafficking problem lies. As a secondary effect it would attach a gun more securely to an owner, perhaps upping the level of individual responsibility.

[Ultra]

Democracy means mob rules.  It's two wolves and a sheep voting what's for dinner. 

We live in a republic, not a democracy. Your appeal to God democracy just shows the shallowness of your "thought" processes.

Move on to moveon.   It's where you belong.

[LD]

Mr LD and mr dive geek: the tracking of gun registration numbers, similar to tracking titles to automobiles, planes, motorcycles, boats, isn't meant to DIRECTLY impact firearms deaths. What it would do is allow law enforcement to track firearms so as to combat arms traffickers, large and small, so as to attack the "guns to crminals" problem we've all talked about. It's one of several things we need to do to choke off the supply of guns to bad guys. Most of that would be directed at corrupt FFLs, which is where the bulk of the trafficking problem lies. As a secondary effect it would attach a gun more securely to an owner, perhaps upping the level of individual responsibility.

Mr. Freediver:
Tracking the guns back from the people that violated the law by buying guns when they were in a prohibited class doesn't attack the problem.

The problem is people that you don't think should have guns because they MIGHT commit a crime with them bought a gun.
Arrest those people because they bought the gun. That is a crime and they should be punished for it.

The fact that I don't think people should be charged with a crime because they own something that might be used in a crime at some point in the future is beside the point.

All you accomplish by making more & more laws is creating more & more criminals.
Agreed, if you can pass enough laws that EVERYONE is guilty of something that will prohibit them from owning a gun, in your mind we won't have anymore "gun crime".
Problem is the same people that don't pay attention to the law that says we shouldn't shoot other people won't pay attention to the law that says they can't own a gun.

[part deux]

Mr LD and mr dive geek: the tracking of gun registration numbers, similar to tracking titles to automobiles, planes, motorcycles, boats,

How is the tracking of motor vehicle registration numbers fixing the number of annual deaths due to motor vehicles?

[TucTom]

Freediver would you please answer a question that was asked of you? This thread reminds me of another where you kept yapping but never actually answered specific points/questions.

So you tell me, what law would you pass to stop all of these mass murders?

The Umpqua CC shooter Christopher Harper-Mercer legally purchased his guns from FFLs and had background checks performed.

The Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof legally purchased his gun from an FFL and had a background check performed.

The Isla Vista shooter Eliot Rodgers legally purchased his guns from FFLs and had background checks performed.

The Colorado theater shooter James Holmes legally purchased his guns from FFLs and had background checks performed.

The Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho legally purchased his guns from FFLs and had background checks performed.

The Ft. Hood shooter Ivan Lopez legally purchased his guns from an FFL and had background checks performed.

The other Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan legally purchased his gun from an FFL and had a background check performed.

The Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis legally purchased his gun from an FFL and had background checks–state and federal–performed. He also had a security clearance.

The Minneapolis shooter Andrew John Engeldinger legally purchased his guns from an FFL and had background checks performed.

The Las Vegas shooters Jerad and Amanda Miller legally purchased their guns from an FFL and had background checks performed.

The Tucson shooter Jared Loughner legally purchased his gun from an FFL and had a background check performed.

The Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza used legally purchased guns, he just murdered the owner first and then stole them.

There's more cases just like these where the shooter legally bought his guns from an FFL and had a background check performed.

How are you going to stop an FFL from selling guns illegally?  99.99% of them don't, but there are a few that will and work with groups such as the Hell's Angels MC and others.  Some are gunsmiths and modify weapons for full-auto.  How are you going to stop them?

Stop telling me my mom has to take a training course approved by you to own a gun.  What are you proposing that would prevent people like Christopher Harper-Mercer, Dylann Roof, Eliot Rodgers, James Holmes, Seung-Hui Cho, Ivan Lopez, Nidal Malik Hasan, Aaron Alexis, Andrew John Engeldinger, Jerad and Amanda Miller, and Jared Loughner from obtaining a gun?

[freediver]

Mr ultra: your post is complete and utter paranoid BS. The basic premise of democracy is one person, one vote. If those people were voting "your way", you'd probably be ecstatic. Since they may not, you label the process as somehow spoiled. That's the equivalent of "I'm taking my ball and going home". This is exactly the selfish attitude I've been talking about. You want your way, to the exclusion of your fellow citizens if they don't agree with you. You're right, that's not democracy. That's fascism. You and many other gun owners seem to feel comfortable with that belief system; that everything is okay if we do it your way. Sorry, I'll pass. That wasn't part of the Constitution I swore to defend and protect.

As far as shallowness, you neither know me nor my history, experience, motivations. That is another example of name calling. It's a juvenile defense of someone who really has nothing substantial to say. If you have something fact-based to add to the conversation, I would love to hear it. If not, it's probably best to step back and let the adults carry on the debate.

Best of luck to you.

[Divegeek]

Mr LD and mr dive geek: the tracking of gun registration numbers, similar to tracking titles to automobiles, planes, motorcycles, boats, isn't meant to DIRECTLY impact firearms deaths. What it would do is allow law enforcement to track firearms so as to combat arms traffickers, large and small, so as to attack the "guns to crminals" problem we've all talked about. It's one of several things we need to do to choke off the supply of guns to bad guys. Most of that would be directed at corrupt FFLs, which is where the bulk of the trafficking problem lies. As a secondary effect it would attach a gun more securely to an owner, perhaps upping the level of individual responsibility.

Did you you miss the part where I said it didn't solve a single crime? That means they weren't able to track a single gun found at a crime scene back to the guilty party using the registration database. The Michigan pistol registry has only been used to solve one (1) crime in the close to 100 years it has been around, according to the MSP. It's a waste of money.

[freediver]

Mr dive geek: first of all, since we're both dive nerds, I'd like to ask you what kind of diving you do. I did scuba for a few years but eased over to freediving a few years back. Less equipment, quieter, better spear fishing opportunities. Fish tacos, anyone?
       I have listened to or read multiple accounts from police officers, Chiefs, undercover cops, etc where they said they wish they could track weapons better so they could identify the methods, the people, the conduits by which weapons pass from good hands to bad hands. So, if the established method doesn't work as you pointed out, how do we make it work? How do we improve the program so that it keeps guns out of the hands of bad or crazy people and puts corrupt FFLs behind bars? Saying F**** it solves nothing. Guns continue to flow the wrong way while we do nothing. Sorry, I've never been a F**** it kind of guy. If you make a situation better, you do it. Tracking the flow of guns through serial numbers is one way to do it. We have to start somewhere.

[freediver]

Mr part deux: it doesn't immediately impact the number of gun deaths. It helps attack another problem, which is gun trafficking, the passage of guns from good hands to bad ones. Remember, this is a multi-faceted problem. It requires a multi-faceted solution. We, as gun owners, are the best ones to come up with those solutions. If WE don't, someone less friendly might come up with solutions we don't like. Saying no continually just cedes the solutions to people who don't understand and don't like firearms.

[freediver]

Mr Tuctom: over the past couple of months I've noticed you seem to have an almost eerie fascination with me answering every post. I'm reminded of a definition of stalking: stalking is when two people go on a romantic walk that only one of them knows about. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I am a happily married heterosexual man and I'm not interested in your fascination or your advances. I am a firm supporter in equal rights and same sex marriage and I wish you the best in your romantic pursuits.
     Let me put it another way; I make a post and six or seven people respond. I don't have time to research or respond to every single post. I do the best I can but at times I just have to pick a couple and move the conversation forward. If you want to parse every single bit of dialogue back to the beginning of time, you'd best take it up with my wife. She's better at that than I am.
     As you and others have pointed out, the current gun regulation environment did not stop these mass murderes from obtaining a weapon. Since none of us presumably likes mass murders, that begs the question: how do we make it better? If you'd actually been reading these posts you'd know I've made many suggestions in this thread and in others. If you don't like my ideas, that's fine. Come up with some solutions of your own.

[freediver]

Mr gryphon: I'll reply to an earlier post where you stated that the solution to many of these issues was to deregulate further and add more guns to the mix. Since we're all interested in data and examples, I'm asking you to show me one example in history where adding more weapons made a society safer and more stable. An actual example, with data to support. No speculative answers, please.

[Ultra]

Mr. Freediver,

It would appear that you know nothing of the people who wrote the document that governs our government.  Why am I not surprised??

~ “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. ”
~Thomas Jefferson


For openers, nothing I posted was anything other than fact. That you fail to recognize facts isn't a surprise to anyone here. The basic premise of democracy is 50%+1 rules.  That is mob rule.  Anyone familiar with political science knows this as fact. 

I've read most of your posts here.  That means I know you much, much better than you know me. You refuse to answer questions, argue from emotion rather than facts, antagonize everyone who disagrees with you and seem to really enjoy provoking people via the Internet.  Pot meets kettle.  With all of this in mind, I know enough to know that engaging in further "conversation" with you is like compromising with gun control nuts.  It's all one sided nonsense.

If I'm gonna call you a name, you won't have to read between the lines to figure it out.  It'll be as clear as day.

Troll. 

[part deux]

Mr part deux: it doesn't immediately impact the number of gun deaths. It helps attack another problem, which is gun trafficking, the passage of guns from good hands to bad ones.

How does that stop gun trafficking?

That's as stupid as saying, I bought a fire extinguisher, now my house won't catch on fire.

Besides, who is the biggest known gun trafficker... besides the BATF?

[thamm]

How many of the 11,208 firearm homicides were committed with stolen firearms?