Spin Forum Dumping Bin

[AngelsLongBall]

33 minutes ago, Jason said:

1. Fix the background check system. There are obvious flaws in what we have now as jurisdictions suck at reporting to the NICS. Mental illness issues will be tough as there are HIPAA laws when it comes to reporting so there needs to be reform there. 

2. As far as schools, tighten security, by a lot. It's not pretty but protection of our kids supersedes that

3. Strictly enforce gun laws we have. Mandatory minimums for criminals who use a firearm in their crimes and strict sentences for parolees and other violent felons when they get caught in possession of a firearm. I don't care if it is racist.

4. If it can be proven that raising the age requirements for purchasing weapons will reduce incidents, then I am for that. I'm pretty sure it didn't matter in most shootings.

5. Temporary gun violence restraining orders sound like a great thing. 

6. The media should not name or show the identities of mass shooters. The crazy dudes that shoot places up idolize these people are often inspired by them. They always got to one up the previous guy. Who new Natural Born Killers was a documentary. 

7. I'm OK with outlawing straw purchases on any gun.

These are a few I can think of.

 

 

 

Good start. I’d also suggest a license that requires both classroom and field testing renewable every X years. 

[arch stanton]

7 minutes ago, AngelsLongBall said:

Good start. I’d also suggest a license that requires both classroom and field testing renewable every X years. 

This may be something that prevents accidents but I don't see it having any effect on mass shootings. These combine the elements of intense anger or provocation, access to the weapons and ammo, and access to the facility containing the potential targets.

I can support waiting periods of up to 30 days for purchasing firearms and 3 days for ammo

I can support mandatory handover of weapons from anyone involved in a violent conflict for a certain cool down period

I absolutely support making at least a modest effort to tighten security at places where you are requiring hundreds, or even thousands, of testosterone infested knuckleheads (teenage boys) to gather and interact in a closed space as well as limiting access to certain types of weapons to these kids and holding accountable parents who allow them access

And I discourage trying to handle this all at the national level. Every community has its own unique circumstances and should feel compelled to take steps locally to prevent obvious weak spots

[Jason]

19 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

eThis may be something that prevents accidents but I don't see it having any effect on mass shootings. These combine the elements of intense anger or provocation, access to the weapons and ammo, and access to the facility containing the potential targets.

I can support waiting periods of up to 30 days for purchasing firearms and 3 days for ammo

I can support mandatory handover of weapons from anyone involved in a violent conflict for a certain cool down period

I absolutely support making at least a modest effort to tighten security at places where you are requiring hundreds, or even thousands, of testosterone infested knuckleheads (teenage boys) to gather and interact in a closed space as well as limiting access to certain types of weapons to these kids and holding accountable parents who allow them access

And I discourage trying to handle this all at the national level. Every community has its own unique circumstances and should feel compelled to take steps locally to prevent obvious weak spots

That's an awful long time. Maybe for first time buyers but that makes little sense for people that already own firearms. The idea behind waiting periods is to "cool off". No point for cool down period for someone that already owns firearms.  If a non gun owner has to get a restraining order against a domestic abuser and are suddenly in fear for their family's safety, that is a long time to wait.  I agree with the rest of your post though

[AngelsLongBall]

17 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

This may be something that prevents accidents but I don't see it having any effect on mass shootings. These combine the elements of intense anger or provocation, access to the weapons and ammo, and access to the facility containing the potential targets.

I can support waiting periods of up to 30 days for purchasing firearms and 3 days for ammo

I can support mandatory handover of weapons from anyone involved in a violent conflict for a certain cool down period

I absolutely support making at least a modest effort to tighten security at places where you are requiring hundreds, or even thousands, of testosterone infested knuckleheads (teenage boys) to gather and interact in a closed space as well as limiting access to certain types of weapons to these kids and holding accountable parents who allow them access

And I discourage trying to handle this all at the national level. Every community has its own unique circumstances and should feel compelled to take steps locally to prevent obvious weak spots

While mine wasn’t specifically targeted for mass shootings, appreciate the feedback.

 

And if left to locals, gun ownership would soon be outlawed in California. 

[Jason]

37 minutes ago, AngelsLongBall said:

Good start. I’d also suggest a license that requires both classroom and field testing renewable every X years. 

For CCW, yes. Maybe a firearm safety certificate that California has is not a big deal to require. 

[arch stanton]

11 minutes ago, AngelsLongBall said:

While mine wasn’t specifically targeted for mass shootings, appreciate the feedback.

 

And if left to locals, gun ownership would soon be outlawed in California. 

So don't try to outlaw the guns. If that's all they can think to do then they're not actually trying to solve the problem at hand. Many other things can be done at lower levels

[AngelsLongBall]

3 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

So don't try to outlaw the guns. If that's all they can think to do then they're not actually trying to solve the problem at hand. Many other things can be done at lower levels

But, California. 

[arch stanton]

1 minute ago, AngelsLongBall said:

But, California. 

They can act like they care about actually getting something done or just become the path of least resistance for anyone looking to make a huge kill

[Tank]

my brother and i were talking about this issue this afternoon. we don't see eye to eye on all the details but we can talk respectfully about it.

what we both agree on is that there are things that need to be done to start the process. the mentality we've all seen so much of is at both ends of the pendulum - either everyone has guns or no one can have guns. and we both feel that lawmakers are paralyzed in taking actions because of the money they accept and the fear of losing support. it seems like politicians view all of this as requiring that they hit a grand slam on the first attempt, but neither my brother or i feel that they should feel like the perfect solution is the only solution. this is a process that's going to take time and needs lots of compromise and input. it's not reasonable to try and remove all the guns, nor is it reasonable to continue to allow some types of weapons to be available to the public. the process needs to get started with some of the simpler things that are reasonable and will have bipartisan support. Jason's list has several good ideas and i'd like to see the process to implement many of them begin asap. the one i'd add is closing the gun show loophole that allows people to buy without a waiting period or background check or age requirement - there's no logic behind allowing this to continue as is.

i'd also like to see the assault weapons ban reinstituted. it's going to require a refining of the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon, but this is something that needs attention.

[Amazing Larry]

On 2/25/2018 at 9:25 AM, calscuf said:

MAGA the grown ups are having a discussion, go back to your pongs and Garbage Pail Kids cards.

Pongs? Did you mean pogs or are you talking about multiple instances of a classic arcade game?

[Blarg]

18 hours ago, Jason said:

That's an awful long time. Maybe for first time buyers but that makes little sense for people that already own firearms. The idea behind waiting periods is to "cool off". No point for cool down period for someone that already owns firearms.  If a non gun owner has to get a restraining order against a domestic abuser and are suddenly in fear for their family's safety, that is a long time to wait.  I agree with the rest of your post though

Who gives a fuck if it's 30 days between purchase and aquisition? You're going to get your toy. You don't need it in less time. If you did need it in less time you plan your life poorly. That would be reason enough not to let you buy a weapon, you act on impulse. 

Let some shit go and quit coming up with some excuse why any legislation would be bad.

[Jason]

32 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Who gives a fuck if it's 30 days between purchase and aquisition? You're going to get your toy. You don't need it in less time. If you did need it in less time you plan your life poorly. That would be reason enough not to let you buy a weapon, you act on impulse. 

Let some shit go and quit coming up with some excuse why any legislation would be bad.

I didn't say any legislation is bad. I said it may be OK for 1st time buyers. Explain to me how it makes sense otherwise. What about the person who's life may be in danger if they wait that long? Have you never purchased anything on impulse?

[tennischmp]

The blind have 2nd amendment right too

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/08/iowa-grants-gun-permits-to-the-blind/2780303/

[Jason]

5 minutes ago, tennischmp said:

The blind have 2nd amendment right too

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/08/iowa-grants-gun-permits-to-the-blind/2780303/

The 4th rule in gun safety is to always know your target and what is behind it. They will violate this every single time

Also don't screw with the ADA

[Thomas]

7 minutes ago, Jason said:

The 4th rule in gun safety is to always know your target and what is behind it. They will violate this every single time

Also don't screw with the ADA

I would imagine the argument would be for use at a shooting range where obvious inherent safety concerns could in theory be mitigated. It's a curious legal quandary though I doubt it's a particularly common one. The interesting side thought about this is with automated cars in our relatively near future, will blind drivers who are prevented to operate a vehicle currently eventually receive drivers licenses? 

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Thomas said:

I would imagine the argument would be for use at a shooting range where obvious inherent safety concerns could in theory be mitigated. It's a curious legal quandary though I doubt it's a particularly common one. The interesting side thought about this is with automated cars in our relatively near future, will blind drivers who are prevented to operate a vehicle currently eventually receive drivers licenses? 

That theory is not a solid one

[Thomas]

2 minutes ago, Jason said:

That theory is not a solid one

That wouldn't have exactly been plan A on mitigation. Definitely would employ a much more stationary plan. 

[Jason]

17 minutes ago, Thomas said:

That wouldn't have exactly been plan A on mitigation. Definitely would employ a much more stationary plan. 

That range officer is probably looking for a new job

[Blarg]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

I didn't say any legislation is bad. I said it may be OK for 1st time buyers. Explain to me how it makes sense otherwise. What about the person who's life may be in danger if they wait that long? Have you never purchased anything on impulse?

If your life is in danger move away for a month so you can come home all armed to the teeth. Or use the arsenal you bought in the first 30 day wait.

Shit Jason you are now making the kind of stupid arguments that is from people with their feet stuck firmly in the mud of not allowing change. It's time for that change to happen, too many people now that the .001% is a big number of unstable people. You're just going to have to suffer small impositions.

[Jason]

12 minutes ago, Blarg said:

If your life is in danger move away for a month so you can come home all armed to the teeth. Or use the arsenal you bought in the first 30 day wait.

Shit Jason you are now making the kind of stupid arguments that is from people with their feet stuck firmly in the mud of not allowing change. It's time for that change to happen, too many people now that the .001% is a big number of unstable people. You're just going to have to suffer small impositions.

I'm not opposed to waiting periods if that makes people feel better. What evidence is there to show a 30 day waiting period will help? What is it's purpose? I don't believe in change just to do it. I believe in change if it makes a difference. 

[Make Angels Great Again]

Instead of dying on July 1st the victims die on July 30th.

[Tank]

Is the waiting period tied in to the background check?

[Jason]

6 hours ago, Tank said:

Is the waiting period tied in to the background check?

No. The NICS background check only take a few minute to complete. The waiting period was designed as a "cooling off" period for someone who may impulsively buy a gun out of anger to hurt someone with it. 

[Make Angels Great Again]

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-disney-georgia-anti-gay-20160323-story.html

FFS. This doesn't sound like an "anti gay" bill. It sounds like a "pro freedom" bill.

[Adam]

Maybe. You'd have to read the bill though to be sure.