Gun ownership poll

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I forgot I had posted on this thread and I see a lot of discussion has taken place since I posted. I do not think it hurts anyone with good intentions who is trying to obtain possession of one (or another one), for the process or laws around ownership to be more stringent.

Sure someone can obtain a firearm illegally but that process is not as easy or affordable as it is made out to be. And if someone is determined to terrorize unsuspecting innocent people they could certainly get creative and do it in another way that did not require a gun but fact is most of the massacres involve a gun.

I just do not see how making the process somehow more involved, extending the waiting period and/or raising the thresholds for applying for one, hurts anyone who is well intended. It is not a fix by a long shot but even a longer delay in taking possession might buy enough time for a potential shooter to say or post something during that time where it gets reported.

All of these massacres are committed by people who are/were deeply disturbed as we come to find out later on by numerous people who knew the shooter either personally or via social media. Mental illness has been around longer than guns. It is only more recently that these massacres are becoming more commonplace. During that same period of time disregard for law enforcement and violence against officers has also escalated. Our country does not feel like it is getting healthier mentally. There are more brazen and unstable people and like the boiling frog this state has taken place slowly over the last decades. We have really gone off course as a nation, imo.

As far as attempts of the government to essentially repeal lawful gun ownership it is terrifying. But this is the same "government" who instituted lock downs and other measures during Covid for 2 years and counting to protect us from the virus. Not to change topics but there are many people...most people...who Covid was not going to kill and did not kill yet all of us were forbidden to leave our homes. And while the virus was real and a real threat to many with vulnerabilities why was the emphasis of protection not more focused but rather imposed on the masses as a one size fits all? I see the same thing happening here with gun control...government will attempt to protect us all by imposing a law that most of us do not need and few of us will benefit from.

My issue here is largely just that it's a vague proposition with no specifics, and it is thus difficult to be for or against or comment on.

As I've said, while I don't agree and think it unconstitutional, I am not greatly bothered by background checks. I didn't really mind the 10 day waiting period my state has the first time either (I do think it has become a rather silly exercise in stupidity when I am going through my 300th background check to buy a box of ammo or I'm purchasing my 30th gun and have the rare and highest level of permitting my state allows). 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.

Background checks are already the law at every gun store and dealer in the United States though. What, specifically, are we proposing to expand their scope?

What thresholds would be raised?

How would this waiting period work?

Many gun owners would be fine with some version of these general notions, I think.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

My issue here is largely just that it's a vague proposition with no specifics, and it is thus difficult to be for or against or comment on.

As I've said, while I don't agree and think it unconstitutional, I am not greatly bothered by background checks. I didn't really mind the 10 day waiting period my state has the first time either (I do think it has become a rather silly exercise in stupidity when I am going through my 300th background check to buy a box of ammo or I'm purchasing my 30th gun and have the rare and highest level of permitting my state allows). 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.

Background checks are already the law at every gun store and dealer in the United States though. What, specifically, are we proposing to expand their scope?

What thresholds would be raised?

How would this waiting period work?

Many gun owners would be fine with some version of these general notions, I think.

Feels to me like you want to argue/debate and I feel like we are on the same side of this. If I had specifics I would have posted them. How we got where we are today did not happen accidentally or overnight. I am simply thinking out loud on the topic. And sure you could have commented on my thoughts. Maybe that is the problem and why there is no reasonable answer. I think it might be important to understand what has happened leading up to this.

Are you suggesting that nothing should be done? Something needs to be done. I know my stating "something" rubs you the wrong way but we clearly as a society are not getting better at co-existing with one another.

As someone who owns 30 guns, if you had to wait 45 days to get your new Glock would you even give a fuck? And of course an extended wait period would have a positive impact but that on its own will not fix the problem.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Feels to me like you want to argue/debate and I feel like we are on the same side of this. If I had specifics I would have posted them. How we got where we are today did not happen accidentally or overnight. I am simply thinking out loud on the topic. And sure you could have commented on my thoughts. Maybe that is the problem and why there is no reasonable answer. I think it might be important to understand what has happened leading up to this.

Are you suggesting that nothing should be done? Something needs to be done. I know my stating "something" rubs you the wrong way but we clearly as a society are not getting better at co-existing with one another.

As someone who owns 30 guns, if you had to wait 45 days to get your new Glock would you even give a fuck? And of course an extended wait period would have a positive impact but that on its own will not fix the problem.

I think replying to people who reply to oneself is normal forum behavior… you quoted and replied to me specifically to continue an earlier discussion. Asking what specifically you are proposing is logical. I have no idea if we are on the “same side”.

I made specific propositions earlier in this thread. I’m unclear why you are offended I asked for what you are proposing, and in the next breath you ask me the exact same thing. Is asking this acceptable or not?

As for whether I’d “give a fuck” about a waiting period, I already answered that in the post you are unhappy about.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

I think replying to people who reply to oneself is normal forum behavior… you quoted and replied to me specifically to continue an earlier discussion. Asking what specifically you are proposing is logical. I have no idea if we are on the “same side”.

I made specific propositions earlier in this thread. I’m unclear why you are offended I asked for what you are proposing, and in the next breath you ask me the exact same thing. Is asking this acceptable or not?

As for whether I’d “give a fuck” about a waiting period, I already answered that in the post you are unhappy about.

If you cannot tell that we are on the same side then there is not much more to discuss since you simply want to poke holes in what anyone posts. Carry on.

And I must have missed the post if you actually proposed something.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

If you cannot tell that we are on the same side then there is not much more to discuss since you simply want to poke holes in what anyone posts. Carry on.

And I must have missed the post if you actually proposed something.

Asking what you are proposing is not poking a hole. I doubt we are on the 'same side' as you are upset I asked you the same question that you asked me. Carry on.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

Asking what you are proposing is not poking a hole. I doubt we are on the 'same side' as you are upset I asked you the same question that you asked me. Carry on.

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.

[G1911]

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.

You seemed upset when you objected to me asking what you are proposing, before asking what I am proposing and then started dropping F bombs in 372.

See posts 180, 385, 388, and several others through this thread. Copying in one of the old ones:

Originally Posted by G1911

1A) I support liberal reforms to the healthcare system to make care cheaper and affordable or free; including mental care and psychiatrists, so that those who cannot or will not pay the cost or have family to pay the cost may get the help they need, for the good of everyone. I would look into improving access and resources ( something like half the counties in the US have 0 psychiatrists or psychologists, you can’t make people move around but you can incentivize one setting up practice in a previously underserved area). In cases of mental illness, I would look into adjusting HIPAA to allow some compassionate disclosure between a doctor and the family of a mental-problem person. Time and again we see that they are known to have issues, but the family doesn’t really understand just how bad it is.

I’m sure there’s more, but there’s 3 specific lanes I would investigate and see if the data on matches the reasoning.

[irv]

Originally Posted by lorewalker

i forgot i had posted on this thread and i see a lot of discussion has taken place since i posted. I do not think it hurts anyone with good intentions who is trying to obtain possession of one (or another one), for the process or laws around ownership to be more stringent.

Sure someone can obtain a firearm illegally but that process is not as easy or affordable as it is made out to be. And if someone is determined to terrorize unsuspecting innocent people they could certainly get creative and do it in another way that did not require a gun but fact is most of the massacres involve a gun.

I just do not see how making the process somehow more involved, extending the waiting period and/or raising the thresholds for applying for one, hurts anyone who is well intended. It is not a fix by a long shot but even a longer delay in taking possession might buy enough time for a potential shooter to say or post something during that time where it gets reported.

All of these massacres are committed by people who are/were deeply disturbed as we come to find out later on by numerous people who knew the shooter either personally or via social media. Mental illness has been around longer than guns. It is only more recently that these massacres are becoming more commonplace. During that same period of time disregard for law enforcement and violence against officers has also escalated. Our country does not feel like it is getting healthier mentally. There are more brazen and unstable people and like the boiling frog this state has taken place slowly over the last decades. We have really gone off course as a nation, imo.

as far as attempts of the government to essentially repeal lawful gun ownership it is terrifying. But this is the same "government" who instituted lock downs and other measures during covid for 2 years and counting to protect us from the virus. Not to change topics but there are many people...most people...who covid was not going to kill and did not kill yet all of us were forbidden to leave our homes. And while the virus was real and a real threat to many with vulnerabilities why was the emphasis of protection not more focused but rather imposed on the masses as a one size fits all? I see the same thing happening here with gun control...government will attempt to protect us all by imposing a law that most of us do not need and few of us will benefit from.

"the urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. H.l. Mecken