Guns

[PocketZeven]

I never said I wanted to change anything. Others have. I have not taken a hard stance on that.

Oh sorry. But isnt 18 already the age of majority.

 

[Blood Eagle]

Oh sorry. But isnt 18 already the age of majority.

Yes 18 is the age a US Citizen is seen as an able bodied male (and now female) who must sign up for selective service aka take up arms on behalf of the US Government when legally required.

 

[PocketZeven]

Yes 18 is the age a US Citizen is seen as an able bodied male (and now female) who must sign up for selective service aka take up arms on behalf of the US Government when legally required.

So isnt it already established that 18 is the age of adulthood in law. Or am i misunderstanding?

 

[Blood Eagle]

So isnt it already established that 18 is the age of adulthood in law. Or am i misunderstanding?

18 is officially adulthood. The question is if we change requirements for certain rights to a different age like 21, is 18 really adulthood?

 

[PocketZeven]

18 is officially adulthood. The question is if we change requirements for certain rights to a different age like 21, is 18 really adulthood?

That wholly depends on what requirements you mean for being an adult. But personally I never understood that you need to be 16 to drive and 21 to drink. I never understood the reasoning behind it. But I would advocate those 2 to 18.

 

[Blood Eagle]

That wholly depends on what requirements you mean for being an adult. But personally I never understood that you need to be 16 to drive and 21 to drink. I never understood the reasoning behind it. But I would advocate those 2 to 18.

I would agree that the 16, 18, 21 thing is pretty ridiculous. As far as the 16 to drive thing, driving isn’t a right. So I’ll scrap advocating for a legal driving age requirement. I’ve heard a lot over the past few months in the news about raising the age for this, lowering the age for that and if you read between the lines, it’s to serve ideologies better. Essentially making age 18 an adult meaningless. So I’d like us to decide once and for all as a society, if 18 or 21 is the ultimate and final age to officially be an adult.

 

[PocketZeven]

I would agree that the 16, 18, 21 thing is pretty ridiculous. As far as the 16 to drive thing, driving isn’t a right. So I’ll scrap advocating for a legal driving age requirement. I’ve heard a lot over the past few months in the news about raising the age for this, lowering the age for that and if you read between the lines, it’s to serve ideologies better. Essentially making age 18 an adult meaningless. So I’d like us to decide once and for all as a society, if 18 or 21 is the ultimate and final age to officially be an adult.

With that said, then guns should also have no legal limit. However in my opinion it shouldnt. Owning a gun is a large responsibility and in my opinion should also require lifelong commitment to proper training.

 

[BobK]

With that said, then guns should also have no legal limit. However in my opinion it shouldnt. Owning a gun is a large responsibility and in my opinion should also require lifelong commitment to proper training.

Voting is also a large responsibility, wouldn't you say? And driving, for that matter.

 

[Imari]

As far as the 16 to drive thing, driving isn’t a right.

Operating a weapon is a right, but operating transport isn't? That seems like an interesting distinction. Why do you think so?

 

[Blood Eagle]

Operating a weapon is a right, but operating transport isn't? That seems like an interesting distinction. Why do you think so?

When I say driving isn’t a right it’s because we as a society have decided that. But if you want my own opinion on it, I don’t think you should be required to get a license to operate a vehicle, be required to have insurance or have to pay the state government to operate your personal property through registration fees. But this is the gun thread not the driving thread.

 

[PocketZeven]

Voting is also a large responsibility, wouldn't you say? And driving, for that matter.

Of course voting is a large responsibility. People should educate and inform themselves before voting for any election. This is encouraged when you are in school. For guns? Not so much. Also people need to register in every state to vote. For guns, only a small number of state requires registration of your firearm. To me owning a weapon should come with a responsibility to train your whole life if your goal is to protect your family and loved ones.

 

[Blood Eagle]

Of course voting is a large responsibility. People should educate and inform themselves before voting for any election. This is encouraged when you are in school. For guns? Not so much. Also people need to register in every state to vote. For guns, only a small number of state requires registration of your firearm. To me owning a weapon should come with a responsibility to train your whole life if your goal is to protect your family and loved ones.

Registering to vote is technically an application to vote and if you meet the requirements you get to vote. When purchasing a firearm you fill out a federal form which is essentially an application to purchase a firearm. If you meet the requirements you get to buy a firearm. It’s not that different at all.

 

[PocketZeven]

Registering to vote is technically an application to vote and if you meet the requirements you get to vote. When purchasing a firearm you fill out a federal form which is essentially an application to purchase a firearm. If you meet the requirements you get to buy a firearm. It’s not that different at all.

Why isnt the firearm registered then? How does that infringe someones rights? Votes are registered, your adres, your id etc. , but not a potentially dangerous weapon? What is the reason for that?

 

[Blood Eagle]

Why isnt the firearm registered then? How does that infringe someones rights? Votes are registered, your adres, your id etc. , but not a potentially dangerous weapon? What is the reason for that?

There are stats that do require registration like the one I live in. There are also cities within states that require registration as well. The federal form and background check you must do when buying a firearm is also done with your address, ID etc. You are meeting certain requirements like when you are a voter. Can’t be a felon, have to be a certain age etc. Voting requirements are more lax than gun ownership requirements. You will not pass the background check to buy a gun if you have misdemeanor domestic violence convictions and if you’ve ever been adjudicated mentally defective you will also not pass. Either of those is ok as far as I know to be able to vote. I know certain things make sense to you and you stick with the comparisons more than you should, but the bottom line is that both have similar requirements one must meet to be a voter or gun owner. Both can also be taken away from you if you do something that makes you no longer meet the requirement. I can also add that by the letter of the law, firearms are not legal to purchase if one is an addict of an illicit substance. Addicts can vote as there is no rules/laws against it. It would arguably be a massive rights violation to not let an addict vote if they don’t have disqualifying convictions.

 

[PocketZeven]

There are stats that do require registration like the one I live in. There are also cities within states that require registration as well. The federal form and background check you must do when buying a firearm is also done with your address, ID etc. You are meeting certain requirements like when you are a voter. Can’t be a felon, have to be a certain age etc. Voting requirements are more lax than gun ownership requirements. You will not pass the background check to buy a gun if you have misdemeanor domestic violence convictions and if you’ve ever been adjudicated mentally defective you will also not pass. Either of those is ok as far as I know to be able to vote. I know certain things make sense to you and you stick with the comparisons more than you should, but the bottom line is that both have similar requirements one must meet to be a voter or gun owner. Both can also be taken away from you if you do something that makes you no longer meet the requirement. I can also add that by the letter of the law, firearms are not legal to purchase if one is an addict of an illicit substance. Addicts can vote as there is no rules/laws against it. It would arguably be a massive rights violation to not let an addict vote if they don’t have disqualifying convictions.

Thanks. Makes a lot of sense, but why isnt it mandatory to register guns in all states?

 

[Blood Eagle]

Thanks. Makes a lot of sense, but why isnt it mandatory to register guns in all states?

Because there is no federal law or mandate that makes registration mandatory. It’s up to the cities and states to implement that.

 

[PocketZeven]

Because there is no federal law or mandate that makes registration mandatory. It’s up to the cities and states to implement that.

Would you support a federal law that would require registration?

 

[Blood Eagle]

Would you support a federal law that would require registration?

No and I don’t support my state requiring it either. What purpose does mandatory registration serve and do you think it has ever stopped a gun crime in California? We are also not allowed to have magazines that hold more than 10 rounds but it didn’t stop San Bernardino in 2015. You are also not allowed to buy weapons on behalf of someone else. That’s called a s straw purchase. That also happened in San Bernardino in 2015. I honestly don’t know what a mandatory registration would actually do.

 

[Danoff]

Adulthood is not something that happens all at once. The rights of children grow with them. The age at which children can work, emancipate, control their healthcare decisions, drive, vote, serve in the military, drink alcohol, smoke, smoke marijuana, have sex with adults, hold presidential office, be tried as an adult, and serve in congress are all over the map.

Edit: I should also mention - watch a movie containing certain imagery or content.

There is absolutely no reason why all of this has to, or should, occur at one age. Some of them may be linked. I think voting should be linked with military service. Alcohol, marijuana, and smoking all seem linked. Each of these activities should be evaluated individually. I'm not sure voting should be 18, or military service for that matter. I know alcohol shouldn't be 21.

My thesis here is that if you're currently enrolled in high public school (which includes some 18 year olds) you should be barred from purchasing a gun.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Of course voting is a large responsibility. People should educate and inform themselves before voting for any election. This is encouraged when you are in school. For guns? Not so much. Also people need to register in every state to vote. For guns, only a small number of state requires registration of your firearm. To me owning a weapon should come with a responsibility to train your whole life if your goal is to protect your family and loved ones.

No it's not, like many things it's suggested that one should take part because it is their right and they shouldn't "squander it" a lot of good that does if one doesn't know where to find objective or impartial information at a young age to properly vote. Or rather is told how to vote based on various reasons. Same goes for gun ownership as well. Point being people should equally educate themselves about owning a gun as well as voting which I imagine @BobK was trying to get at and you've missed the point unsurprisingly.

As for the "Train your whole life" thing goes, what exactly do you mean by this. Should one train their entire life to justify ownership? How long should one train in said lifetime to be adequate for defending their domain? Why should people have to exactly register to own a weapon? How does that improve things rather than usurp those wanting to own a weapon?

As I've said in the past and will repeat since it's been some time, I think if people want to own a weapon the best way to get them to buy but also understand the magnitude and responsibility is have them go through a CCW or weapons defense course. However, do so with each purchase or every other purchase depending upon the length between said purchases or weapon differences. I'd say have this be a universal recognition but that would destroy State rights on the matter.

 

[Danoff]

Columbine anniversary came and went, and schools re-opened after the Sol Pais threat. But there were indeed folks out to recreate columbine near its anniversary, and they shot up a school near Columbine to the tune of 8 students, one dead.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/07/us/colorado-school-shooting.html

Apparently two of the students rushed the attackers. This is a school that combines K-12, which kinda seems like a bad idea to me. You know what else seems like a bad idea? Letting students bring anything in to school. I stand behind banning backpacks, and that includes guitar cases, which is what was used to bring these guns in.

Oh, and it was handguns this time.

 

[Daz555]

Oh, and it was handguns this time.

Handguns are so hard to control due to their size. They are nasty little devices.

UK had its first, and to date only, school shooting in 1996 (Dunblane - 16 kids and 1 teacher murdered). Handguns were banned 18 months later with overwhelming public support. Interestingly gun control in the UK is behind public opinion as the public want even tighter controls than the UK has already. The US is the same in many regards the public overwhelmingly want tighter gun controls but their representatives in government are not listening.

One for fact fans. The British & Scottish tennis player Andy Murray (3 grand slams and 2 Olympic golds) was at Dunblane that day. The massacre happened in the school gym and Murray was in the corridor with his class on their way to the gym when the shooting started.

I do wonder if the US will ever do anything. 10 school shootings in 2019 already and it's only the start of May. There were 37 in 2018. I read somewhere that since Parkland there has been a school shooting in the US every 12 days on average. It's very depressing and the only thing remotely positive coming out of this horrific situation is millions of young Americans getting engaged with politics.

 

[PocketZeven]

No it's not, like many things it's suggested that one should take part because it is their right and they shouldn't "squander it" a lot of good that does if one doesn't know where to find objective or impartial information at a young age to properly vote. Or rather is told how to vote based on various reasons. Same goes for gun ownership as well. Point being people should equally educate themselves about owning a gun as well as voting which I imagine @BobK was trying to get at and you've missed the point unsurprisingly.

As for the "Train your whole life" thing goes, what exactly do you mean by this. Should one train their entire life to justify ownership? How long should one train in said lifetime to be adequate for defending their domain? Why should people have to exactly register to own a weapon? How does that improve things rather than usurp those wanting to own a weapon?

As I've said in the past and will repeat since it's been some time, I think if people want to own a weapon the best way to get them to buy but also understand the magnitude and responsibility is have them go through a CCW or weapons defense course. However, do so with each purchase or every other purchase depending upon the length between said purchases or weapon differences. I'd say have this be a universal recognition but that would destroy State rights on the matter.

I actually pointed out that both require responsibility. However does education on gunresponsibility receive as much attention? How did I miss the point? And how was it unsurpisingly?

Of course voting is a large responsibility. People should educate and inform themselves before voting for any election. This is encouraged when you are in school. For guns? Not so much. Also people need to register in every state to vote. For guns, only a small number of state requires registration of your firearm. To me owning a weapon should come with a responsibility to train your whole life if your goal is to protect your family and loved ones.

I meant for example a yearly gunrange visit and checking your storage solution for safety. For as long as you own a gun.
Registering guns can help solve crimes and let people be more responsible with ownership, because misuse can more easily be tracked.

I agree completely about the magnitude and responsibility. But what action are there to make sure that everyone who purchases guns realise that effectively before and after purchase?

 

[Tornado]

So was that why he's a great tennis player?

 

[Danoff]

Handguns are so hard to control due to their size. They are nasty little devices.

They're wonderful little devices, and I'm very happy to have mine.

I do wonder if the US will ever do anything.

I'd like for us to stop the pretense that the only answer is a legal ban on weapons (which is not going to happen, 2nd amendment), and start to actually take the problem seriously and propose real solutions that actually might make a difference. Like a school rule banning backpacks.

 

[Blood Eagle]

Like a school rule banning backpacks.

I just had a discussion with someone about this. It's a decent compromise IMO. Schools should be high security type areas. I mean guarded at all areas of entry, searches for contraband etc. It's a bit slippery and there are a lot of people who would see something like that as a violation of students rights, turning schools into prison type facilities etc. But if a public school is property of the city government, it's not really a violation of anyone's rights because these types of contraband (guns, drugs etc) are already not allowed on school grounds. I think some people are more comfortable with violating other people's rights, like gun owners, and punishing regular people who have never committed any crimes so that things like this don't happen. In turn violating and affecting their own rights. When I was in high school it was pretty routine for police to have K9s sweep lockers looking for drugs when the students were in class. When I visit my local government building I have to remove everything from my pockets and put them through an X-Ray machine and walk through metal detectors. I don't think schools should be much different if we really want to do something meaningful to prevent these sort of things without totally violating anyone's rights.

 

[Danoff]

I just had a discussion with someone about this. It's a decent compromise IMO. Schools should be high security type areas. I mean guarded at all areas of entry, searches for contraband etc. It's a bit slippery and there are a lot of people who would see something like that as a violation of students rights, turning schools into prison type facilities etc. But if a public school is property of the city government, it's not really a violation of anyone's rights because these types of contraband (guns, drugs etc) are already not allowed on school grounds. I think some people are more comfortable with violating other people's rights, like gun owners, and punishing regular people who have never committed any crimes so that things like this don't happen. In turn violating and affecting their own rights. When I was in high school it was pretty routine for police to have K9s sweep lockers looking for drugs when the students were in class. When I visit my local government building I have to remove everything from my pockets and put them through an X-Ray machine and walk through metal detectors. I don't think schools should be much different if we really want to do something meaningful to prevent these sort of things without totally violating anyone's rights.

I'm going to bring it up with my district. It's a lofty goal. My school district doesn't have tablets and and computers for all the kids, or digitized textbooks. I imagine some schools require parents to buy and supply gym equipment, musical instruments, etc. and bring those things into and out of the school. School lunch would be another point of contention.

All of these have workable solutions. Some of them cost money. It depends on how fancy you want to get. Digitized textbooks just makes sense. All it would require is an internet connection at home and at school. But let's suppose you're a school district who doesn't have the ability to get your hands on something like that, and doesn't have the resources to make it available (this is nonsense if it's a real priority, but whatever). Ok fine. Buy 2 of each textbook for each kid. Send 1 home with them on the first day of school, and require it back at the end of the year. Done. Moving on.

Gym/Band equipment. Let's say you're a school that doesn't have the means to buy all of the gym/band equipment for all of the kids. This is also kinda nonsense if it's a priority, but let's just assume it. Let's also assume that you need the kids to practice at home and at school regularly, and even let's assume that you can't demand that parents buy 2. Fine, you need a dropoff for musical equipment, and it the dropoff can be a secure location where the cases can be inspected before allowed into the school. The kid doesn't have to wait, they can drop it off and head to class (make sure band or gym isn't the first class). Alternatively, move your gym and band practice to a quarantined section of the school. Then you can allow dropoff of the equipment while containing any incidents, even if you don't inspect it.

I don't think it's unreasonable to just require that everyone buys school lunch. No food comes in. But if that's not really a workable solution, once again you need a dropoff solution. It's a little tricky in this instance because you have someone in the cafeteria handling your food. But of course whoever that is presumably handles the food for the rest of the school that gets hot lunch.

Also, no more allowing juniors and seniors to come and go from campus during lunch.

 

[Shaun]

Like a school rule banning backpacks.

Why?
I can only assume because this is the gun thread to try and stop guns being brought into school.

Better ban baggy clothes also then.

 

[Dotini]

...a school rule banning backpacks.

Not so bad an idea. Back in my day I went through 17 levels of schooling, never used a back pack, and neither did anyone else. Usually I walked to school with my Big Chief tablet, #2 pencil and a book or two under my arm.

 

[PocketZeven]

They're wonderful little devices, and I'm very happy to have mine.



I'd like for us to stop the pretense that the only answer is a legal ban on weapons (which is not going to happen, 2nd amendment), and start to actually take the problem seriously and propose real solutions that actually might make a difference. Like a school rule banning backpacks.

In my country banning backpacks would be a ludicrous idea. How would they take home homework or bring lunch? (Do all schools in US provide food etc.) Have all these school shootings have in common that they smuggled the weapons in with a backpack? If one really has bad intentions there alternative ways to smuggle in a gun then with a backpack. A child can just walk out from school grounds to get one from outside school grounds and star shooting during a lunch break or recess.

A better solution would be to better fund education, healthcare and improve regulation on guns and not cutting their budget. Which will only worsen the problem. Even if banning guns is off the table, one should consider to the best you can to prevent individuals with mental health problems to obtain them. Registering guns on a national level, having a licensing system, more extensive background checks, medical approval requirements etc.

I live in a world where schools don’t have security guards, don’t have metal detectors, locked doors and children never ever need to be searched. (Seems like a prison to me)

Wouldn’t it be much better to create such an environment then applying security measures that restrict children’s freedoms just to protect them from potential shootings?