[davwve]

Originally Posted by wolf39us

Wtf lol

I'm not even sure how to address what you've said. What you're proposing is ludicrous

Simply because you do not agree does not make the concept ludicrous. Majority of my co-workers fulfilled mandatory military service with some continuing longer term army service and they do not believe it was ludicrous.

But, the main point of the post is to state the need to identify the main cause(s) as to why our society and nation has grown so violence prone. There are other countries in which its citizens have legal access to firearms but their firearm related homicide rates are far below the US. Why is that?

Will an outright state and federal ban on firearms defer future homicides? Or will an individual's desire to inflict pain be fulfilled via alternative methods?

I do believe that CT instituted an exorbitant knee jerk reaction legislation, but I do support a national standard for purchase and possession of firearms. Also, the legislation which was already in place for years needs to be properly enforced with stiffer penalties imposed for crimes involving firearms.

[Armyvet1]

I agree. We have to force the criminal element into being too scared to use a firearm. If you use one with the inten to harm or kill then you should permanently be removed from society. It sounds harsh but it would get the job done.

I support firearms ownership but would be for stiffer penalties for gun related crimes. A person who's an outdoorsman, goes hunting, goes to the range, they're not criminals. Like I said before we are targeting guns and guns aren't the problem people are the problem.

[wolf39us]

Originally Posted by Armyvet1

I agree. We have to force the criminal element into being too scared to use a firearm. If you use one with the inten to harm or kill then you should permanently be removed from society. It sounds harsh but it would get the job done.

I support firearms ownership but would be for stiffer penalties for gun related crimes. A person who's an outdoorsman, goes hunting, goes to the range, they're not criminals. Like I said before we are targeting guns and guns aren't the problem people are the problem.

And I have a feeling there would be an endless debate on civil rights regarding punishment.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by FutureTown

An amendment can easily be revoked or modified.

Not easy. That was intentional.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by wolf39us

These weapons however are too easy to obtain even with current regulation. Restrictions need to be sensibly placed and I would not be opposed to tightening them up!

Have you ever gone through the process of buying a firearm?

[mikelizard860]

Originally Posted by Armyvet1

I agree. We have to force the criminal element into being too scared to use a firearm. If you use one with the inten to harm or kill then you should permanently be removed from society. It sounds harsh but it would get the job done.

No it wouldn't. Hardcore violent felons that would use a gun don't think about consequences the way normal citizens do. Canada/sweden/denmark all have MUCH less severe criminal penalties than the US, yet have way less violent crime than we do.

Think about how STUPID committing a robbery of convenience store is? It's completely moronic. So is being a drug dealer. You end up dead or in jail. By definition criminals don't think about consequences. They're idiots.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

I just went through the gun permit process and if you have all your ducks in a row it is really nothing. Some fingerprints, a picture and a background check. To me the hardest part was figuring out what I needed and what paperwork was required. I called the DESPP and they did an awesome job explaining to me what I needed, where I needed to go and how it will work out.

Bottom line yes there are added steps but in no way did I feel like it infringed on my right to own firearms (rifle).

As long as all you want is in the set of politically correct rifles.

[wolf39us]

Originally Posted by davwve

Simply because you do not agree does not make the concept ludicrous. Majority of my co-workers fulfilled mandatory military service with some continuing longer term army service and they do not believe it was ludicrous.

But, the main point of the post is to state the need to identify the main cause(s) as to why our society and nation has grown so violence prone. There are other countries in which its citizens have legal access to firearms but their firearm related homicide rates are far below the US. Why is that?

Will an outright state and federal ban on firearms defer future homicides? Or will an individual's desire to inflict pain be fulfilled via alternative methods?

I do believe that CT instituted an exorbitant knee jerk reaction legislation, but I do support a national standard for purchase and possession of firearms. Also, the legislation which was already in place for years needs to be properly enforced with stiffer penalties imposed for crimes involving firearms.

Not only did you propose mandatory military service, you proposed it for MALES as if females are somehow unable to meet those requirements. I mean, they do make up 50% of the population (approx).

Solution to criminals... train everyone how to use guns more efficiently right? Except that only trains people how to use guns more efficiently to get what they want and as long as they BELIEVE it is the right thing to do then they will use the skills allotted to them. Fixing gun violence by adding more guns... brilliant idea indeed, the NRA would love to have you on their team!

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by davwve

But, the main point of the post is to state the need to identify the main cause(s) as to why our society and nation has grown so violence prone. There are other countries in which its citizens have legal access to firearms but their firearm related homicide rates are far below the US. Why is that?

This would be difficult to do because while most Americans believe as you do, the reality is violent crime is down not up and our society has grown less, not more, violence prone.

[davwve]

Originally Posted by wolf39us

Not only did you propose mandatory military service, you proposed it for MALES as if females are somehow unable to meet those requirements. I mean, they do make up 50% of the population (approx).

Solution to criminals... train everyone how to use guns more efficiently right? Except that only trains people how to use guns more efficiently to get what they want and as long as they BELIEVE it is the right thing to do then they will use the skills allotted to them. Fixing gun violence by adding more guns... brilliant idea indeed, the NRA would love to have you on their team!

While I'm glad that the idea evoked conversation I believe we are swaying off topic. Final though on some of the assumptions made. A person is not a criminal until they commit a crime. No where did I cite to increase firearm ownership or women are unqualified. I've spent considerable time in countries such as Switzerland and Denmark which both have mandatory service and relatively low firearm crime statistics. While there are many other macro and mirco factors contributing to this it is certainly interesting hearing their reviews on firearm "ownership" and responsibilities.

Are you a CT or FL resident? The laws to purchase a firearm are extremely different in these states. AR15's normally get thrust into the spotlight and it tends to get lost that the new CT legislation encompasses a broader amount of rifles and pistols due to physical features.

My personal opinion is that the CT laws prior to Newtown should have been used for a broader national standard (and institute national carry reciprocity). This would include mandatory safety training and background check to obtain a license for purchase and carry. I'm a bit torn but ok with all transactions either being required via FFL or at least requiring a DPS confirmation number. I would advocate for more funding and efforts for training, education, awareness and mental health.