Mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio

[Dotini]

Well, that seems to be a mildly entertaining music video about purposeless young white men, all right. They seemed to be adapting well (beta) in a socialist milieu.

 

[Liquid]

They seemed to be adapting well (beta) in a socialist milieu.

PARKLIFE

etc etc

 

[VFOURMAX1]

Just a quick note here, it would be nice if someone with a history of violence could not buy a gun second-hand with zero checking or diligence of any sort. So a stricter gun law, specifically with regard to second hand sales (and gun shows) would prevent someone like that from having as easy a time obtaining a gun.

As a gun owner myself for over a half a century I personally would have absolutely no problem if all firearms when sold, given away whatever to be legal had to have a background check done the same as when the gun was sold new.

With the exception of the private transaction background check our countries laws are actually pretty good and extensive just not properly enforced.

And in previous parts of this conversation that both of us were involved in on this exact subject I have plainly stated that I am for background checks on firearm sales even as gifts which covers all firearms transfers even among friends and family members where money does not exchange hands.

But to be honest I think that stopping an actual criminal from obtaining a firearm even that law will be about the same as narcotics are closely monitored and we see how well that works to stop the friendly neighborhood undocumented pharmacist that are operating on multiple street corners in just about every city in this country.

I do not have a problem with the legislation for background checks but honestly I still think all laws do is affect the law abiding citizen that chooses to follow them. We have enough laws on the books that cover most situations now. Many shootings the firearms were obtained legally and more laws would not have made a difference. The Philly shooting current laws already forbid that shooter to own or possess a firearm so again it would not have mattered. So really thinking more laws that concern owning or obtaining firearms will have a drastic effect on the firearm involved crime rates is not being realistic.

Narcotics are banned and that is another battle we have been losing for decades and Heroin cannot be obtained legally in this country not even in the medical community but it is widely available in this country. So trying to kid yourself that more legislation, more laws or bans will eliminate the problem look at the drug war and then tell me these laws work!

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I think purposeless brings up an interesting conversation. Whenever I go to a magazine stand, there are a large selection of publications oriented towards people who really, really want something bad to happen so that they can be elevated to a position of control, purpose, and meaning. (To name one, "OFF GRID") I don't think the fundamental/core desire is all that much different than other kind of existential-exploring hobbies - wilderness hiking, bikeventuring, overlanding, solo sailing, etc. All these activities strive to create meaning out of the meaningless. You get your gear, you practice your chosen discipline, and then eventually you go out and test yourself against the elements - it seems like primal human nature really. Is it all that much different for the prepper/culture war-set?

The issue arises in that the culture war never comes - so the preparation, the meaning so craved never presents an opportunity to be tested. So they role-play themselves into the culture war, they make it real. Edit: Jesus....they are LARPING

Do we need to get these kinds a different hobby? I suggest this constructively and honestly. My Cannondale CAAD 12 105 provides a lot of the same type of satisfaction to me that my AKS-74 did. The scale and materials are similar. You gather a tacit, innate sense of purpose from the device - just holding the drops puts you in the same frame of mind as looking down iron sights. You maintain it in similar ways. You feel like you belong to a like-minded community. It's an object that requires and rewards skill in utilizing it. I still maintain that its very possible kids can get addicted to guns in unhelpful ways and that mental health and firearms can be intertwined in dangerous ways.

 

[Danoff]

And in previous parts of this conversation that both of us were involved in on this exact subject I have plainly stated that I am for background checks on firearm sales even as gifts which covers all firearms transfers even among friends and family members where money does not exchange hands.

I recall, and I'm glad we agree. But it does rather refute the photo.

 

[VFOURMAX1]

I recall, and I'm glad we agree. But it does rather refute the photo.

That photo of a previously convicted felon already convicted of past firearm violations just proves a point that new laws are not the answer when dealing with the criminal element.

 

[Danoff]

That photo of a previously convicted felon already convicted of past firearm violations just proves a point that new laws are not the answer when dealing with the criminal element.

"The" answer. In this case, you and I seem to agree that it is at least part of "the" answer, right?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Glad to hear that the severity (or laxity) of gun control laws or the party which most of its residents voted for doesn't make a difference to the safer cities and that your earlier unsourced quote in my last post appears to be unfounded.

Apparently, St Louis has fairly lax gun control so maybe there is something to it.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Slavery ended in 1865 (in the US). The oldest black person alive in the US can't be more than 114. That would put them at having been born in 1905, 40 years after the end of slavery. The only way to make reparations is to bring people back to life.

The last of the indentured sharecroppers (and yes, I know not all sharecroppers were effectively slaves) will probably still be alive. We can't just look at the nominative end of Slavery and say everything was okay after that, surely?

 

[Sander 001]

Apparently, St Louis has fairly lax gun control so maybe there is something to it.

Absolutely. Statistics demonstrate that there is a strong correlation between stricter gun laws and fewer mass shootings.

 

[VFOURMAX1]

Slavery ended in 1865 (in the US). The oldest black person alive in the US can't be more than 114. That would put them at having been born in 1905, 40 years after the end of slavery. The only way to make reparations is to bring people back to life.

"The" answer. In this case, you and I seem to agree that it is at least part of "the" answer, right?

Actually two things we pretty much agree on, the end of the world must be near for that to happen. lol!

 

[PocketZeven]

Trump is backtracking on gunreform. Who would have guessed? I guess nothing will get change untill he gets voted out.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/20/trump-gun-control-background-checks-shootings

 

[Dennisch]

I guess nothing will get change untill he gets voted out.

As soon as he wins the 2020 elections you will hear the faint voices of gun control reform again.

The USA (and this has been explained so many times here that it starting to get ridiculous by now) has gun laws, and quite a lot of them. They are just not being enforced as they should be. Some things could be a bit more strict, but it would be wise to first start with enforcing the rules that are already there, before anyone adds anything new. Because if old laws are being pooped on, what do people think will happen with new laws?

 

[PocketZeven]

As soon as he wins the 2020 elections you will hear the faint voices of gun control reform again.

The USA (and this has been explained so many times here that it starting to get ridiculous by now) has gun laws, and quite a lot of them. They are just not being enforced as they should be. Some things could be a bit more strict, but it would be wise to first start with enforcing the rules that are already there, before anyone adds anything new. Because if old laws are being pooped on, what do people think will happen with new laws?

As I have pointed out gun laws vary so much between states it renders them ineffective even if they are enforced strictly. Federal gun reform would be much more effective. I am not proposing new laws. There are states that do have common sense gun regulation. Registration of guns is only in a few states.

Imagine if Dutch people could buy guns in Limburg with just an ID at gun shows with minimal background check (criminal record) and without the gun being registered to your name?!? Just because gun laws are determined by the separate provinces and not nationally?

 

[Danoff]

I am not proposing new laws.

I am, I'd like to see federal background checks for 2nd hand gun sales. And I think it would work because law abiding citizens would be required to carry it out to prevent them from selling to someone who shouldn't have a gun.

 

[PocketZeven]

I am, I'd like to see federal background checks for 2nd hand gun sales. And I think it would work because law abiding citizens would be required to carry it out to prevent them from selling to someone who shouldn't have a gun.

Your proposition should also need a federal/national register of ownership. Or are you excluding private sales and referring to just 2nd hand sales in stores?

 

[Danoff]

Your proposition should also need a federal/national register of ownership. Or are you excluding private sales and referring to just 2nd hand sales in stores?

I'm talking about private sales or gun shows. 2nd hand sales through gun dealers I think (not entirely sure on this) require background checks.

 

[PocketZeven]

I'm talking about private sales or gun shows. 2nd hand sales through gun dealers I think (not entirely sure on this) require background checks.

How would one carry out this backgroundcheck during a private sale?

 

[Danoff]

How would one carry out this backgroundcheck during a private sale?

Are you suggesting that it can't be done? I'm curious why you're interested in the details here. My preferred method is via firearms licensing, which have pre-existing background checks on file. It could be as simple as requesting to view the status from an online database, the database asking for and receiving permission from the purchaser to share in formation, and the database subsequently providing a photo and the current status of the purchaser back to the seller, with a request for the serial number upon completion of the sale.

 

[PocketZeven]

Are you suggesting that it can't be done? I'm curious why you're interested in the details here. My preferred method is via firearms licensing, which have pre-existing background checks on file. It could be as simple as requesting to view the status from an online database, the database asking for and receiving permission from the purchaser to share in formation, and the database subsequently providing a photo and the current status of the purchaser back to the seller, with a request for the serial number upon completion of the sale.

No I am not. I am genuinly curious how it would work in practice. I am sorry if it looked like I was suggesting something else.

So you agree with a full on register/database of all private owned guns?

 

[Danoff]

No I am not. I am genuinly curious how it would work in practice. I am sorry if it looked like I was suggesting something else.

So you agree with a full on register/database of all private owned guns?

I agree at least with a license for gun purchasers, and I can see an argument for registration of at least some guns.

 

[VFOURMAX1]

No I am not. I am genuinly curious how it would work in practice. I am sorry if it looked like I was suggesting something else.

No reason that such checks could not be carried out using the current licensed firearm dealers charging a small fee to the paperwork and background check.

It already occurs if you buy a firearm from out of state either new or used. I have bought numerous firearms from out of state and paid a local dealer to handle the paperwork and legally required background check part of the transaction.

Check the current laws about shipping, selling or buying a firearm from out of state and many of your questions will be answered and the rules are already in place. Just need to expand and include private in state firearm sales under the same laws and the issue is done and no actual new laws needed, just an expansion on the already existing laws.

The background checks on new firearms are actually a Federal requirement and required in EVERY STATE under Federal law. No reason privately sold used firearm sales could not be included under a similar law. Used firearm sales from a licensed firearm dealer already fall under the current background check laws as ANY firearm sold, traded or changing hands through a licensed dealer required the same sales paperwork completed as a new firearm requires.

 

[Danoff]

No reason that such checks could not be carried out using the current licensed firearm dealers charging a small fee to the paperwork and background check.

It already occurs if you buy a firearm from out of state either new or used. I have bought numerous firearms from out of state and paid a local dealer to handle the paperwork and legally required background check part of the transaction.

Check the current laws about shipping, selling or buying a firearm from out of state and many of your questions will be answered and the rules are already in place. Just need to expand and include private in state firearm sales under the same laws and the issue is done and no actual new laws needed, just an expansion on the already existing laws.

The background checks on new firearms are actually a Federal requirement and required in EVERY STATE under Federal law. No reason privately sold used firearm sales could not be included under a similar law. Used firearm sales from a licensed firearm dealer already fall under the current background check laws as ANY firearm sold, traded or changing hands through a licensed dealer required the same sales paperwork completed as a new firearm requires.

It could be implemented this way. This is perhaps the easiest way to do it from an infrastructure perspective. But I would prefer a system in which a direct private party transaction could be carried out without having to visit (and presumably pay) a middle man. I also think that an on-file background check scales much more nicely for smooth transactions and handles multiple transactions more efficiently. Also having the seller carry out the check confers the responsibility right where it should be, instead of making the whole thing seem like an annoying regulatory hoop to jump through. It helps you realize what you're doing and why you're doing it.

Anyway, either would be an improvement.

 

[PocketZeven]

It could be implemented this way. This is perhaps the easiest way to do it from an infrastructure perspective. But I would prefer a system in which a direct private party transaction could be carried out without having to visit (and presumably pay) a middle man. I also think that an on-file background check scales much more nicely for smooth transactions and handles multiple transactions more efficiently. Also having the seller carry out the check confers the responsibility right where it should be, instead of making the whole thing seem like an annoying regulatory hoop to jump through. It helps you realize what you're doing and why you're doing it.

Anyway, either would be an improvement.

I think this is where blockchain technology could actually play a role. A ledger(or register) that cuts out the middleman (DMV or one that manages the register/ledger). But then again how would one prevent private sales where people just dont want the hassle of doing a backgroundcheck?

 

[VFOURMAX1]

It could be implemented this way. This is perhaps the easiest way to do it from an infrastructure perspective. But I would prefer a system in which a direct private party transaction could be carried out without having to visit (and presumably pay) a middle man.

I just feel that having the physical paperwork with the buyer filling it out and is basically swearing under oath and answering questions on the Federal Firearms forms that they can legally purchase said firearm is just another layer to aid in future prosecution if it turns out the information was not true and just had not reached the background data base.

The transfer fees are not that high and just something to be figured into the cost of the transaction or purchase. No sense making implimation more difficult by requiring yet another system to be brought in and gotten online tied in with a national data base when such system is already there and in use.

 

[Danoff]

No sense making implimation more difficult by requiring yet another system to be brought in and gotten online tied in with a national data base when such system is already there and in use.

I think there is, but this is totally not important to debate.

 

[PocketZeven]

I just feel that having the physical paperwork with the buyer filling it out and is basically swearing under oath and answering questions on the Federal Firearms forms that they can legally purchase said firearm is just another layer to aid in future prosecution if it turns out the information was not true and just had not reached the background data base.

The transfer fees are not that high and just something to be figured into the cost of the transaction or purchase. No sense making implimation more difficult by requiring yet another system to be brought in and gotten online tied in with a national data base when such system is already there and in use.

Swearing under oath? Does that really work in practice? It does add a layer of fraud if there is no middleman to actually check the legitimacy. Or are you referring to finding an actual judge to complete the transaction?

 

[VFOURMAX1]

Swearing under oath

Do not remember the exact wording off the top of my head but by placing your signature on the Federal firearms form that you yourself are required to fill out and complete you are swearing that all the information submitted on the form to be true and correct under the penalty of law.

 

[PocketZeven]

Do not remember the exact wording off the top of my head but by placing your signature on the Federal firearms form that you yourself are required to fill out and complete you are swearing that all the information submitted on the form to be true and correct under the penalty of law.

Not really sure this would prevent fraud by people who intend to do mass shootings. In most cases their mentally unstable and on a suicide mission.

 

[VFOURMAX1]

Not really sure this would prevent fraud by people who intend to do mass shootings. In most cases their mentally unstable and on a suicide mission.

You just stated EXACTLY why all these new laws will have a limited effect on the problem.
Their mental state and /or feeling of supporting a cause they feel is correct. The philly shootings also shows again criminals do not care about the laws. So the whole crying out for more regulations for the most part is not worth the efforts, but those that see that side of the issue and speak out are labeled as white supremacist or racist for their position even though their logic bears more of the realistic truth.