• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

How many more school shootings before the NRA allows common sense?

This is a good point. I guess I distinguish between "fake" news that are pure fabrications --the Obama is a Muslim, Hillary murdered people, kind of nonsense where a whole argument is made up, typically in bad faith -- and exaggerations or misuse of data that doesn't really change the underlying, correct argument. Like in the example on this thread, there have been 18 "gun incidents" or whatever you want to call them on school campuses this year, but really only 5 "mass shootings" where people were injured or killed during school hours. I don't believe that difference is particularly meaningful, nor do I think the argument is being made in bad faith. The underlying point, that there are too many gun incidents on school campuses, is the same either way. Sure, I'd rather people didn't exaggerate or use the wrong numbers. But that's not what I think of when I think of "fake news."

Exaggerations may not change the underlying, correct argument, but it surely allows that argument to be attacked based on things other than its merit (see this whole thread).

And as we've seen, its so easy to go from that exaggerated argument (18 school shootings) to the absurd (18 school mass shootings).
 
Thought I have on buybacks - probably not an original, but I really like this idea. Model it after how airlines handle overbooked flights:

Step 1 - Ask for voluntary turn-ins - probably won't get a lot with no incentive, but probably some - perhaps offer a tax incentive vs. $$$ to increase numbers
Step 2 - Start low - below market value $$$ offers - maybe still include tax incentive as well
Step 3 - Market value $$$ offers
Step 4 - Above market value $$$ offers (i.e. AA offering $1000 to take the next flight to CLT from NYC because no one will move)
Step 5 - Require turn-ins or seize semi-auto rifles/handguns without proper registration, training, etc. - (if no one takes the offer, the airline is making someone get off anyways)

Obviously, this is just a rough idea, but you get the picture. Unsure how market value would be determined, but I'm sure there's a relatively easy way.
 
only problem with that method is that market value would skyrocket. but would make the incentive greater
 
We all agree we should Avoid using bad stats so the opposing point of view can’t attack the lowest hanging fruit of the argument.

Now let’s get back to the issue of gun violence
 
"You wanting actual facts is derailing the thread, accept the lies and just contribute like we want you too or don't post at all"

Fantastic display of reading comprehension. I can really tell you are following along.
 
Thought I have on buybacks - probably not an original, but I really like this idea. Model it after how airlines handle overbooked flights:

Step 1 - Ask for voluntary turn-ins - probably won't get a lot with no incentive, but probably some - perhaps offer a tax incentive vs. $$$ to increase numbers
Step 2 - Start low - below market value $$$ offers - maybe still include tax incentive as well
Step 3 - Market value $$$ offers
Step 4 - Above market value $$$ offers (i.e. AA offering $1000 to take the next flight to CLT from NYC because no one will move)
Step 5 - Require turn-ins or seize semi-auto rifles/handguns without proper registration, training, etc. - (if no one takes the offer, the airline is making someone get off anyways)

Obviously, this is just a rough idea, but you get the picture. Unsure how market value would be determined, but I'm sure there's a relatively easy way.

seems like a plan to take my guns.
 
i just can't understand why gun owners (and the NRA, frankly) continue to let the deck stack against themselves. in every other industry, they usually try to appease regulators before getting a nuke dropped on them by Uncle Sam.
 
That’s why outside of gun buy back I like insurance. If you are a normal person without a history of violence that likes to hunt and owns rifles your gun insurance is pennies. If you are a domestic abuser with a stockpile of weapons and belong to some white supremacy militia that marches in the streets wearing camo your insurance is astronomical for each gun.
 
That’s why outside of gun buy back I like insurance. If you are a normal person without a history of violence that likes to hunt and owns rifles your gun insurance is pennies. If you are a domestic abuser with a stockpile of weapons and belong to some white supremacy militia that marches in the streets wearing camo your insurance is astronomical for each gun.

yeah, owning a stockpile of weapons should carry a massive burden of liability
 
i just can't understand why gun owners (and the NRA, frankly) continue to let the deck stack against themselves. in every other industry, they usually try to appease regulators before getting a nuke dropped on them by Uncle Sam.

Probably because they know they're safe with the politicians they fund, who cater to a base that eats up propaganda regarding guns *like it's grandmama's home-made biscuits n' gravy*

*sarcasm font, just in case
 
yeah, owning a stockpile of weapons should carry a massive burden of liability

I like the insurance idea a lot. If we can't limit the number or type of guns people can have period, what about forcing them to keep the excess and/or exotic stuff locked at a gun range? My preference is to get rid of most guns, but if that's not realistic/feasible, I would have no problem with people playing with almost any weapon they wanted in a controlled environment that could be safely protected.
 
I like the insurance idea a lot. If we can't limit the number or type of guns people can have period, what about forcing them to keep the excess and/or exotic stuff locked at a gun range? My preference is to get rid of most guns, but if that's not realistic/feasible, I would have no problem with people playing with almost any weapon they wanted in a controlled environment that could be safely protected.

That sounds like a well-regulated militia to me.
 
Probably because they know they're safe with the politicians they fund, who cater to a base that eats up propaganda regarding guns *like it's grandmama's home-made biscuits n' gravy*

*sarcasm font, just in case

ETA: plus, you always have to worry about the total government takeover that's inevitable.
 
If not for the NRA, the following would be done deals:

Back ground check on every transfer of ownership of any gun/rifle- this includes gun shows and private sales
Ban Bump stocks
Ban magazines/clips of over 12 (or 15)
Register all guns
Military must immediately update databases with crimes committed in the military

Not quite as easy but still supported by over 50% of the public:

Ban military style weapons like AR-15s
Limit monthly sales of production guns (with exceptions for licensed security companies and for collections of antiques {100+years old}
Liability Insurance on every gun/rifle
Strict liability laws on guns/rifles like we have on cars/homes
Make manufacturers liable for not blocking convertibility to fully automatic
If you don't do a trackable background check and a crime is committed with your former gun, you get charged as an acessory
 
I present the following excerpt from the end of an hours-long "conversation" as to why I do not have much hope for change:



ME: [Pro-gun lady], you keep bringing up the illegal sale of weapons as though that somehow justifies why it's not worth doing anything with regard to the legal sale of firearms because "oh, well, they'll just go get them illegally."

That's like saying people who are going to drive drunk will do it anyway, no matter what rules are in place. Might as well tell bartenders to stop refusing to serve people they've determined are over the limit, since even if they don't serve them that person will go get drunk elsewhere and drive anyway. It is a poor argument to say, "oh well, it will happen anyway" as justification to do NOTHING differently in the hopes you have some small positive effect.

I certainly don't expect everything to be magically better overnight, but as I said earlier - it's the cumulative effect of small changes that make the difference.
Please understand how I am trying to present this: we are only talking about the legal sale of firearms, and whether or not we can honestly say we're doing everything we can to prevent those guns from falling into the wrong hands. Plain and simple, we are not.

Have you read anything about the boy who committed these murders on Wednesday? Explain to me how "better parenting" (he was adopted, his adoptive father died a decade ago, his adoptive mother, with whom he was close, died this past November), "better discipline" (he was emotionally challenged and what I've read alludes to him being diagnosed autistic), "better peers who speak up" (he was bullied at school and generally regarded as a weird kid) were going to help this situation. If you see a child misbehaving, having an outburst, or being sneaky, are you advocating we all alert local authorities to have that kid put on a watch list? He posted pictures of weapons and dead animals on social media... but if he's legally allowed to own those weapons (like you!), no biggie, right? And dead animals, well, I come from a family of hunters and have seen my share of pictures of dead animals. A local FBI office was alerted to his September youtube comment and investigated that, but just because a comment is posted under a name doesn't mean it's so easy to point a finger at a person with that name. Heaven forbid anyone ever starts posting disparaging comments under your name. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Or should they show up to your house and haul you away because something was posted under your name?

Certainly, it feels like something could have been done here. The accumulation of all these things makes it easy to point to ... something? or just feel like something should have happened before now? But what. I am asking you. Since you are unwilling to talk about a possible solution involving gun control, I am asking you for your serious, well-formed answer of what exactly we should have done for this boy before now that would have prevented this from happening.


PRO-GUN LADY: Ive served multiple tours over seas as well and there are a lot more active duty and veterans that agree with me than with you. You seem to think banning one kind of gun is going to something. Tell me what the difference is between a rifle and a handgun, and why you really think a waiting period will help. If some one is determined on harming someone they are going to do it whether your idiotic suggestions go into place or not. I do not like you, and you make me want to be savage, but since you think your smart you can just keep pretending to live in your pretend world outside of reality. I’m hiding notifications because you refuse to concede that nothing you suggested would work in terms of people doing bad things. Like I said, you want highly restricted gun control move to Chicago.


ME: I NEVER SUGGESTED BANNING ANY GUN. As far as semi-automatics go, there is no difference between the firing mechanism of a walther p22 and an AR-15. I know this. I've owned both. I already explained that a waiting period prevents people from making rash decisions. It stops someone who is angry when the leave work from going to buy a gun and coming back to work the very next day and doing something silly. Planning ahead for that waiting process is no different than the planning you have to do to get a passport so you can travel overseas. If you are so scared about someone attacking you during that waiting period, carry a baton.

You are hiding from real conversation by calling people and their suggestions idiots, crazy, naïve.

"Nothing I suggested would work in terms of people doing bad things."

You point to Chicago as to why you believe this.
I point to the REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD as to why I disagree. Will more control solve all of our problems? No. But we can sure as hell do better than we're doing right now.
 
I present the following excerpt from the end of an hours-long "conversation" as to why I do not have much hope for change:



ME: [Pro-gun lady], you keep bringing up the illegal sale of weapons as though that somehow justifies why it's not worth doing anything with regard to the legal sale of firearms because "oh, well, they'll just go get them illegally."

That's like saying people who are going to drive drunk will do it anyway, no matter what rules are in place. Might as well tell bartenders to stop refusing to serve people they've determined are over the limit, since even if they don't serve them that person will go get drunk elsewhere and drive anyway. It is a poor argument to say, "oh well, it will happen anyway" as justification to do NOTHING differently in the hopes you have some small positive effect.

I certainly don't expect everything to be magically better overnight, but as I said earlier - it's the cumulative effect of small changes that make the difference.
Please understand how I am trying to present this: we are only talking about the legal sale of firearms, and whether or not we can honestly say we're doing everything we can to prevent those guns from falling into the wrong hands. Plain and simple, we are not.

Have you read anything about the boy who committed these murders on Wednesday? Explain to me how "better parenting" (he was adopted, his adoptive father died a decade ago, his adoptive mother, with whom he was close, died this past November), "better discipline" (he was emotionally challenged and what I've read alludes to him being diagnosed autistic), "better peers who speak up" (he was bullied at school and generally regarded as a weird kid) were going to help this situation. If you see a child misbehaving, having an outburst, or being sneaky, are you advocating we all alert local authorities to have that kid put on a watch list? He posted pictures of weapons and dead animals on social media... but if he's legally allowed to own those weapons (like you!), no biggie, right? And dead animals, well, I come from a family of hunters and have seen my share of pictures of dead animals. A local FBI office was alerted to his September youtube comment and investigated that, but just because a comment is posted under a name doesn't mean it's so easy to point a finger at a person with that name. Heaven forbid anyone ever starts posting disparaging comments under your name. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Or should they show up to your house and haul you away because something was posted under your name?

Certainly, it feels like something could have been done here. The accumulation of all these things makes it easy to point to ... something? or just feel like something should have happened before now? But what. I am asking you. Since you are unwilling to talk about a possible solution involving gun control, I am asking you for your serious, well-formed answer of what exactly we should have done for this boy before now that would have prevented this from happening.


PRO-GUN LADY: Ive served multiple tours over seas as well and there are a lot more active duty and veterans that agree with me than with you. You seem to think banning one kind of gun is going to something. Tell me what the difference is between a rifle and a handgun, and why you really think a waiting period will help. If some one is determined on harming someone they are going to do it whether your idiotic suggestions go into place or not. I do not like you, and you make me want to be savage, but since you think your smart you can just keep pretending to live in your pretend world outside of reality. I’m hiding notifications because you refuse to concede that nothing you suggested would work in terms of people doing bad things. Like I said, you want highly restricted gun control move to Chicago.


ME: I NEVER SUGGESTED BANNING ANY GUN. As far as semi-automatics go, there is no difference between the firing mechanism of a walther p22 and an AR-15. I know this. I've owned both. I already explained that a waiting period prevents people from making rash decisions. It stops someone who is angry when the leave work from going to buy a gun and coming back to work the very next day and doing something silly. Planning ahead for that waiting process is no different than the planning you have to do to get a passport so you can travel overseas. If you are so scared about someone attacking you during that waiting period, carry a baton.

You are hiding from real conversation by calling people and their suggestions idiots, crazy, naïve.

"Nothing I suggested would work in terms of people doing bad things."

You point to Chicago as to why you believe this.
I point to the REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD as to why I disagree. Will more control solve all of our problems? No. But we can sure as hell do better than we're doing right now.

I don't understand the Chicago argument. 1. cherrypicking at its finest (and probably aren't the most strict gun laws in America - likely goes to California) and 2. Why do they say these things like it's some difficult task to get a gun outside the state and carry it across the state border? I've never been stopped crossing a state border in my life and I've driven across over 3/4 of state borders in our country.
 
yeah i similarly foolishly engaged with an ex-marine 'libertarian' in a similar fashion. It's only a matter of time until the Great Confiscation, guys
 
I don't understand the Chicago argument. 1. cherrypicking at its finest (and probably aren't the most strict gun laws in America - likely goes to California) and 2. Why do they say these things like it's some difficult task to get a gun outside the state and carry it across the state border? I've never been stopped crossing a state border in my life and I've driven across over 3/4 of state borders in our country.

earlier in the conversation she said, "If you can't say that stricter gun control leads to more murders, you are not educated enough to have this conversation." (using Chicago to back that up)

...I knocked that one down pretty quickly.
 
Back
Top