Gun ownership poll

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Sounds like you don't endorse any gun reform.

I do not generally endorse continuing to cede constitutional rights and criminalizing normal gun owners or subsets of normal gun owners. Holding the other half of the country liable for a single psycho is a bastardization of law. I’ve said this since page 1. You might want to read the last few sentences though. I might endorse background check changes if anyone can actually tell me what they want to change, specifically (it’s hard to endorse a meaningless proposition that doesn’t specify what would change). If data suggests a waiting period helps, I’d endorse it for a first firearm purchase too.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

I do not generally endorse continuing to cede constitutional rights and criminalizing normal gun owners or subsets of normal gun owners. Holding the other half of the country liable for a single psycho is a bastardization of law. I’ve said this since page 1. You might want to read the last few sentences though. I might endorse background check changes if anyone can actually tell me what they want to change, specifically (it’s hard to endorse a meaningless proposition that doesn’t specify what would change). If data suggests a waiting period helps, I’d endorse it for a first firearm purchase too.

Okay, at least you are considering some sort of reform. But considering that you seem to think data is some form authoritarianism, it doesn't sound like you will seriously listen to data.

You seem to have instead embraced what a lot folks have done--blame mental health. The problem with that stance of course, is that the same folks that blame mental health never want to fund it. There will always be crazy people, and we have made it extremely easy for them to get extremely dangerous guns. No amount of funding of mental health in the world is going to change that.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Okay, at least you are considering some sort of reform. But considering that you seem to think data is some form authoritarianism, it doesn't sound like you will seriously listen to data.

"some form authoritarianism". Mhm. I used a list of massacre events to see if they happened more or less after the event. You used an op-ed from a nutball who needs psychiatrist help with their power fantasies after handling a gun. I believe data is "form authoritarianism", whatever that even means. Mhm. Again, can you even attempt to debate in good faith as decent people who just disagree on an issue?

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You seem to have instead embraced what a lot folks have done--blame mental health. The problem with that stance of course, is that the same folks that blame mental health never want to fund it. There will always be crazy people, and we have made it extremely easy for them to get extremely dangerous guns. No amount of funding of mental health in the world is going to change that.

Yes. I don't see what else we would rationally blame, unless we believe a firearm is sentient and controls itself. When someone hangs themself, we don't blame the rope. When Rwanda's slaughtered a million people we didn't blame machetes. I cannot fathom why we would blame a tool instead.

No law is going to magically solve mental health. And no law will magically solve murders. There will always be crazy people, and we will never be able to control them all. It is a leftist view I have that I think we should spend more dollars on helping them. There will always be guns and bad guys don't give a darn what's legal and not. I notice you've made no proposition yourself at all while being unhappy about mine.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Read the room...I am not upset in the least. I have not really made any proposals other than longer waiting periods which could only help but as I suggested I think any meaningful discussion on what should be done needs to include a discussion of understanding how we got here.

Your many posts have been poking holes in others' suggestions or defending the 2nd amendment which is why I asked what you propose being done. I did not see where you proposed anything. Sorry if I missed it. I felt it was a fair question to ask you since you seem more than qualified to answer.

Without being too specific politically because of the site rules, that has been alluded to in posts more than once in this thread, included 1 or 2 of mine.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

I do not generally endorse continuing to cede constitutional rights and criminalizing normal gun owners or subsets of normal gun owners. Holding the other half of the country liable for a single psycho is a bastardization of law.

100% agreed.

Originally Posted by G1911

I might endorse background check changes if anyone can actually tell me what they want to change, specifically (it’s hard to endorse a meaningless proposition that doesn’t specify what would change).

So once again, please tell us what you specifically propose as acceptable changes? Instead your posts simply avoid from making suggestions and instead attack what others have proposed.

Originally Posted by G1911

If data suggests a waiting period helps, I’d endorse it for a first firearm purchase too.

I thought you stated that data you have data which suggests waiting times do not help except for crimes of passion?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

100% agreed.



So once again, please tell us what you specifically propose as acceptable changes? Instead your posts simply avoid from making suggestions and instead attack what others have proposed.



I thought you stated that data you have data which suggests waiting times do not help except for crimes of passion?

See 180, 385, 388, 403, and several others in this thread.

I said, and I quote, "I have not been able to find any evidence that a waiting period works to reduce violence, but it is something that might reasonably be expected to maybe have an impact - reducing a moment of hotheaded anger and letting tempers cool. It doesn't seem to have produced results in states that have it, but I see the logic behind it." See post 369.

[BCauley]

Go through the same background checks and training that a military recruit goes through.