America on the cusp?

[LRM]

We're in semi agreement on guns M'lady.
Personally, I see no valid reason for any American to own any assault weapon (something designed originally to kill humans). That on its own is a slippery slope. The .30-06 is probably one of the most popular sport rifles available today and was originally an assault weapon.
I see no valid reason anyone outside of the military and maybe the police why anyone need a large clip (greater than 5 rounds?).
Every nation has citizens that just go nuts. InMyOpinion, if these people had to stop and reload it would offer an opportunity for someone unarmed to remove the weapon.
Want to go to the shooting range and fire a thousand rounds? By all means you have my blessing. I might even go along to reload those 5 shot clips.

Try to pass mandatory registration of gun owners in the United States and I'll hide mine!!! I'll also work tirelessly to defeat any such legislation. If and when King Richard's (Nixon) replacement assumes power, I don't want to make it easy for his regime to round up all weapons.
Lou
Large numbers of our military IMO, will be fighting alongside the freedom fighters. I guarantee this military man would have!

[muttdoggy]

Let me tell what I think of 2 solutions that are the most popular.. taking guns away or giving all of us a gun. You can take all the guns away but we know how to make more so that's not gonna work. You would have to ban plastic, wood, metal, gunpowder, and any powdery substance that can explode to prevent the home-made manufacturing of guns. So there's really no point in taking away guns because if we don't go and make our own, there's always knives, bats, poison, and marriage that can be used to kill somebody. Remember the old saying.. "where there's a will, there's a way"? That's very very true in America! Now for the other side of the coin, giving everyone a gun is a stupid mistake. There's people with very serious mental illnesses, hard-core alcoholics, drug abusers, and criminals who have absolutely no business holding a weapon of any sort and the trouble is.. how do you know? Be honest with yourselves and think objectively. Not all criminals are caught and and not all are in the system as they should be. How do you know someone is hiding a psychotic personality behind the smile? Is the red nose from an allergy or from a life of alcoholism? And if you ask, how do you know you're being told the truth? There's honestly no perfect way to vet the ownership of guns and there will never be a perfect system. Period. What we need to do is strike a balance and to attack what we can see are some of underlying causes of most of the problems.
I've known of a small town in Idaho where there's practically a gun for every person and the crime rate is ridiculously low. Most of the crime there is someone getting a ticket for driving drunk. In fact, the last attempted murder there took place in the late 1930s and it was a a series of 2 shoot-outs because of one family's retaliation for a self defense or murder case back in 1907? involving an elderly male who lived in that town. However, the murder or self-defense took place in a town further to the north so technically, there's never been a murder in this town. Only a couple of shootouts. There's literally more enough guns in that little town to arm every man, woman, and child there. But there are no gangs and very few drug users and when we find them, we get them in treatment or chase them out.
Contrast that with Chicago where there's at least a murder a day and it's also swimming with guns. What's the difference? 2 words.. gangs and drugs. In that order. That city is chock full of gang-bangers and druggies. I mean full beyond bursting. We'd need to focus on eradicating the issue of gangs having an out-sized presence and the primary reason they fight is to protect their drug territory. So if you get with the program of focusing on comprehensive assistance for drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illnesses including therapy, medication, etc. You WILL see a decrease in crime going that route. That alone would make the gangs weaker and become desperate because you'd seriously hurt their primary source of income - drugs. Add in some gang-busting measures on the weakening gangs and you'd really see a HUGE decrease in gun violence. That's a great 1-2 punch to reduce gun violence but we CAN do a little bit more.
Tightening the gun control measures by doing better background checks, keeping assault weapons illegal, and limiting the clip does make sense in the thought that it would increase the penalty for those caught breaking the law and potentially lock them up for life. Let's say a gang member grabs a illegal assault weapon loaded with an illegal clip and commits a crime in possession of the weapon. Now the criminal is now facing 3 charges instead of one. That stacks a lot of extra time onto a sentence. So some gun control measures to limit possession of assault weapons and more 5 round ammo clips does make sense in that regard. A typical hunter or a target shooter wouldn't mind a quick change of magazines and shooting on full auto messes up your aim and perforates your dinner. There's no sense in wasting meat or shredding targets. I'd want to point out that my aim is better than yours.. Then with tightening the gun shows and internet sales loopholes, you would make it illegal to sell without verifying that your buyer has passed a background check.
Then making the check just a little more rigid with excluding those with drug or gang convictions from owning a gun would seriously reduce the amount of guns in the hands of criminals and gangs. The primary method that gangs use get guns is to tell a drug user "bring me a gun and i'll give you a little meth/crank/speed/etc". It's not illegal for a person convicted of a minor drug possession to buy a gun over and over and over again. Secondly, creating a secure and private system to allow a psychologist or a person to send a letter stating that he/she should not own a gun due to a mental instability or suicidal thoughts would reduce the amount of suicide by gun. That alone would drastically increase the survival of those thinking of suicide. And it would also increase their odds of being treated and becoming themselves again.
The trouble with what I personally consider sensible measures to attack the problem is getting the government behind it. To me it seems like a pipe dream to get the government to do this and it's already known that these methods work. What's stopping them? Why can't the politicians get behind this? Why is it more important to scream about "second amendment rights" when it's really sensible laws. combating gang violence, treating mental illnesses and drug and alcohol abuse that will make all the difference in the world?
What do you think?

[LRM]

@ muttdoggy;
I think the conclusions you draw are valid.

I grew up in a small town in Ohio. My father didn't hunt. All of my playmates were female until age 10±, and I don't recall their fathers hunting either. I don't know what or why I was drawn to guns and hunting but I was. I looked until I found a male figure that taught me gun safety beyond "don't point that at anyone", and allowed me to shoot. I think all children of my age were taught basic gun safety and there was no underlying fear. That probably wasn't true in large cities even during the fifties. That may add to the problem.

The biggest problem with any gun law is enforcement. Even today we don't enforce the laws already on the books. That has been the NRAs stance forever... "Don't pass more laws, enforce the ones already enacted".
Automatic weapons (machine guns) privately owned, require additional steps to legally own. I think/hope anyone that owns one takes special steps to secure them. Ever fired a weapon in fully automatic? I have! In fully automatic an M-16 goes through a 15 shot clip in seconds and it' is impossible to maintain an accurate aim in that condition. The best you can do is point it down range and spray bullets everywhere. I see little difference in semi-automatic and my pump guns. Every time you squeeze the trigger they fire once. To fire again you must release and pull the trigger again. My pump or a bolt action means the shooter must remove then replace the spent shell before it can be fired again.

I think the underlying problem today is money... or more accurately, the lack of it! That's why we don't properly care for the mentally challenged, provide free health care, or have enough people in positions to enforce the laws currently om the books. Our elected officials (that's Congress... nothing to do with the President!!!) have pared down government employees to the point that except the most egregious acts there is no enforcement. Financial institutions are again headed down the same path that damned near caused a depression not so long ago.
Have a land line? On the "Do not call" list? I do/am... numerous times every day, "Credit Services" kicks open my door and enters my home uninvited... I've turned them in hundreds of times. What's the last time you heard about the FTC taking action on one of these? There isn't anyone left to enforce the law!!! You can look at almost any government agency and that's become the rule, rather than the exception. If I won't get caught and make lots of money doing something illegal, why not? Even business believes that.
Lou

[muttdoggy]

@ muttdoggy;
I think the conclusions you draw are valid.

I grew up in a small town in Ohio. My father didn't hunt. All of my playmates were female until age 10±, and I don't recall their fathers hunting either. I don't know what or why I was drawn to guns and hunting but I was. I looked until I found a male figure that taught me gun safety beyond "don't point that at anyone", and allowed me to shoot. I think all children of my age were taught basic gun safety and there was no underlying fear. That probably wasn't true in large cities even during the fifties. That may add to the problem.

The biggest problem with any gun law is enforcement. Even today we don't enforce the laws already on the books. That has been the NRAs stance forever... "Don't pass more laws, enforce the ones already enacted".
Automatic weapons (machine guns) privately owned, require additional steps to legally own. I think/hope anyone that owns one takes special steps to secure them. Ever fired a weapon in fully automatic? I have! In fully automatic an M-16 goes through a 15 shot clip in seconds and it' is impossible to maintain an accurate aim in that condition. The best you can do is point it down range and spray bullets everywhere. I see little difference in semi-automatic and my pump guns. Every time you squeeze the trigger they fire once. To fire again you must release and pull the trigger again. My pump or a bolt action means the shooter must remove then replace the spent shell before it can be fired again.

I think the underlying problem today is money... or more accurately, the lack of it! That's why we don't properly care for the mentally challenged, provide free health care, or have enough people in positions to enforce the laws currently om the books. Our elected officials (that's Congress... nothing to do with the President!!!) have pared down government employees to the point that except the most egregious acts there is no enforcement. Financial institutions are again headed down the same path that damned near caused a depression not so long ago.
Have a land line? On the "Do not call" list? I do/am... numerous times every day, "Credit Services" kicks open my door and enters my home uninvited... I've turned them in hundreds of times. What's the last time you heard about the FTC taking action on one of these? There isn't anyone left to enforce the law!!! You can look at almost any government agency and that's become the rule, rather than the exception. If I won't get caught and make lots of money doing something illegal, why not? Even business believes that.
Lou

I agree with that. The money's going in the wrong direction. Fixing that issue gonna be a long fight, though.