Michiagan Coalition for Responsible Gun Control

[bigt8261]

I'm thinking of volunteering for this.

Grand Rapids Mayor George Hartwell is forming a new coalition to promote stricter gun control in the State of Michigan. See here: http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/01/grand_rapids_mayor_george_hear_17.html. Before you bash me for wanting more gun control, please read what my goals and intentions are.

My plan is to present to the Mayor, at the next city commission meeting, a serious proposal on items I think that we can work together on, and how I can help his group to achieve these items. The items I intend to list and describe, are items that I refer to as "low hanging fruit". Basically those items which may be acceptable to both sides and will hopefully not cause a big fight. As I will also be giving copies to the media, these items need to be serious and genuine.

I expect one of two things will happen. First, the Mayor will laugh in my face, thus showing him to be a rigid ideologue who is only interested in working with people that think like him. Second, he can accept my offer and allow me into the group. In this case I will be prepared to follow through with anything that I present. If this happens, I will attempt to work with the group to focus on these "low hanging" items as hopefully these will be items we can support. I should note that I fully expect the first possibility to happen, but this will not prevent me from offering up something serious in good faith.

I would really appreciate feedback on this. Tell me what you like, what you don't like, and what ideas you have. I'm separating everything into two groups. The stuff both sides may agree on and the stuff we would like to see.

Stuff for both sides:
-Stricter punishment for those who use firearms in the commission of a felony. Once I get past the whole a crime is a crime no matter how you do it thing, I think keeping those that give firearms a bad name in prison longer can be a good thing.
-Properly define brandishing to one provided by AG Jennifer Granholm in AG opinion # 7101.

Stuff for us
-Elimination of GFZ's and PFZ's. If not all, then some.
-Allow school employees to obtain training and carry in school. It's impossible to guarantee bad people will not gain access. Schools need a plan to respond to those who are able to get past the outer defenses.

I am a very strong supporter of gun rights and I think it would be best for this new coalition to focus on how to stop crime as opposed to how to limit rights. How do we go about doing that? Thanks for any help.

[Dbilger]

I like the idea of stricter punishment for those who use firearms in the commission of a felony. I think maybe that should include some other laws as to the brandishing law also. Along with a better understanding of brandishing. As to the laws of gfz and pfz I believe the best case that I can think of, not sure how to get the other side to understand, it is that just tells the criminals where they will have the least resistance in the commission of any crime. That I think me being a gun owner understand as a no brainier.

[gryphon]

I see no content in that link. 

[bigt8261]

Fixed the link. The . at the end was accidentally added to the url.

I added properly define brandishing to the list. I'm trying to do this in GR, why not at the State level too. Thanks to Dbilger for the idea.

[METL]

I think it's important to show that they aren't for reducing violence or saving lives.   They just want to stick it to political opposites as well as impose their will on others.



Also watch this and laugh.





Then read this:


http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm

[bigt8261]

I've already watched the interview and read the article, or at lest most of it. I took notes from both.

I agree that they just want to stick it to the other side, which is why I would like to make it as easy as I possibly can for them to go down a path where that is not the goal. Should they choose to ignore me, it will only further shine light on their real goals. Should they decide to work with me, then maybe we can actually get something accomplished.

I really need feedback here. There have been a lot of views, but only a few replies. What are your ideas? What do you think both sides might agree upon? Do you think this is just a bad idea in general? Is there something that I could be doing better?

[ken243]

As with SB59 we saw there is no way to compromise with such people. No amount of logic, statistics or common sense can be used. We have no idea just how well current laws will work because they are not properly enforced. Until the FBI, BATE step up and do their jobs we just don't know what if any changes are needed. The only thing that we know works is increasing the number of guns in the hands of good people. With that said we also need to allow said people to carry their arms without numerous restrictions and harassment.

[gryphon]

As with SB59 we saw there is no way to compromise with such people.

Instead of letting the antis set the agenda, we set it to advance gun rights. Any compromise still puts us ahead.  And if they won't compromise, then they are the ones that are intransigent.

If we let them set the agenda, gun rights will be curtailed, no matter what the compromise.

[bigt8261]

Instead of letting the antis set the agenda, we set it to advance gun rights. Any compromise still puts us ahead.  And if they won't compromise, then they are the ones that are intransigent.

If we let them set the agenda, gun rights will be curtailed, no matter what the compromise.

Along the lines of what I was thinking.

I'm thinking of adding "Enforce existing laws" to the list, but I don't know of any specific laws that are not currently enforced but should be. Does anyone have any examples? Preferably at the state or local level, but I'll accept federal too.

[METL]

I don't have much to add Tom, but I think you're on the right track to beat them at their own game.   They want to have "rational" discussions so you need to be the most rational person in the room.... then when they don't want to take your suggestions, expose THEM as being irrational....     and if they ignore you, like you said, you can shine light on the fact that they are being less than honest about their intentions as you had presented them with ways to further reduce violence but were wholly ignored.

[ken243]

Along the lines of what I was thinking.

I'm thinking of adding "Enforce existing laws" to the list, but I don't know of any specific laws that are not currently enforced but should be. Does anyone have any examples? Preferably at the state or local level, but I'll accept federal too.

I have something to add to that. As a healthcare provider, I have seen many psychiatric patients being pushed through the system without proper reporting or documentation. That is to say, when I bring a person to a hospital for an involuntary psychiatric commitment they are not properly held, treated and reported to the state and federal levels. Such proper reporting would have prevented many mass shooting in the US like the the one in Arizona, Colorado, etc. People with psychiatric issues are simply not properly reported one the state and federal level.

The state and local levels is simply charging and punishing criminals that use firearms in the commission of a crime. This ties hand in hand with emergency services. Cities like Flint and Detroit have astronomical crime rates due demographic make up in addition to lack of emergency services.  Politicians need to learn their decisions have a domino effect. This has been seen time and time again. I do not understand how they have not caught on. If they cut emergency services like the fire department, insurance rates go up in the area so cost of living goes up. Same with police services, insurance rates go up, crime goes up and because of the cost of living and crime no one wants to live in that area. Of course except those that are contributing to the problem or do not have the means to move, mostly. So then tax revenue drops and cut need to be made to the budget. This problem compounds until the city is bankrupt. Common sense goes a long way. Hope this helps. Personally I think you will have more luck talking this logic with your dog but who knows you may get a prize for being the 1,000th person trying to talk some sense into them. Good luck.

[.40 Cal]

I always thought responsible gun control involved the following:

Proper Grip
Proper sight alignment
and trigger pull.

But that's just me. 

[bigt8261]

.

I always thought responsible gun control involved the following:

Proper Grip
Proper sight alignment
and trigger pull.

But that's just me. 

Generally I agree, which is why I'm hoping that I will be able to help the Mayor's coalition focus on preventing crime and not legal gun ownership. I don't think gumming the system up by prosecuting otherwise legal gun owners helps anyone.

[bigt8261]

I will be presenting tonight, so this is your last chance to voice your opinions. Thank you to those that have already done so.

[fsr402]

3 minutes please...