Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know if this has already been suggested, but . . .is this obsession with guns SOLELY an 'American' phenomenon? Is it Americans themselves who are under some mass inherited red-neck delusion that their future survival is dependent on their ability to protect themselves at all costs - from the government or whomever - with a gun? If so, has anyone actually considered the idea of looking to other countries whose populations DON'T have an obsession with guns and as to how they somehow manage to get by without a second amendment?
This is a serious question.
This may come as a surprise to the staunch nationalistic American (not all of you, I realize this), but ...there REALLY ARE other countries out there that DO have sufficient freedoms that enable them to live satisfying, productive and non-threatening lives ....even though they may not have a second amendment to wave round like some nationalistic flag. To be sure, as expected, they do have their own share of problems. But these problems don't involve being randomly shot at by some gun-crazed individual. Why is this? How are these people different from 'Americans'?
Again, a serious question.
People get by without all forms of freedoms - looking to other countries is not a good argument. Someone could say that North Koreans get by just fine without freedom of speech, freedom of X,Y, and Z.
Not to say gun ownership is the be all and all, but it's a freedom. Removing that freedom makes us all less free.
These mass-spree shootings that dominate the news cycle are incredibly rare, and in the grand scheme of things, should not concern any rational, thinking adult. Most gun crimes in this country happen in domestic situations or gang-associated violence. These should concern you more, but they rarely make the news.
Guns are not the problem, they're a symptom of a problem. The problem is we have such mentally ill people who are willing to kill random people. The source of this problem is many but in large part is due to the medicalization of mental disorders - amphetamine like meds (Adderall, Ritalin) and SSRIs (Paxil, Prozac) are creating mental illness, not solving them. There is a 1-1 relationship between % increase in spree-shootings and the prescription of these meds. The first SSRI was approved in 1987. In the 90s, psychiatrists invented the phony disease, ADHD, and began prescribing our kids powerful Amphetamine like drugs during a critical point in their mental development. In the mid 90s, SSRIs began being prescribed to kids for everything under the sun.
I don't know if this has already been suggested, but . . .is this obsession with guns SOLELY an 'American' phenomenon? Is it Americans themselves who are under some mass inherited red-neck delusion that their future survival is dependent on their ability to protect themselves at all costs - from the government or whomever - with a gun? If so, has anyone actually considered the idea of looking to other countries whose populations DON'T have an obsession with guns and as to how they somehow manage to get by without a second amendment?
This is a serious question.
This may come as a surprise to the staunch nationalistic American (not all of you, I realize this), but ...there REALLY ARE other countries out there that DO have sufficient freedoms that enable them to live satisfying, productive and non-threatening lives ....even though they may not have a second amendment to wave round like some nationalistic flag. To be sure, as expected, they do have their own share of problems. But these problems don't involve being randomly shot at by some gun-crazed individual. Why is this? How are these people different from 'Americans'?
Again, a serious question.
3 of those other countries that changed their gun laws successfully curbing mass shootings are Australia, UK, & New Zealand...way overdue in America
People get by without all forms of freedoms - looking to other countries is not a good argument. Someone could say that North Koreans get by just fine without freedom of speech, freedom of X,Y, and Z.
I should have emphasized looking to nations that are 'culturally-similar' to the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrCoffee57
Not to say gun ownership is the be all and all, but it's a freedom. Removing that freedom makes us all less free.
It needs to be emphasized that 'guns' and 'gun ownership' was not an issue in these other countries to begin with. Again, 'guns' are an 'American phenomenon'. I've certainly not been aware of any adverse reactions from those in countries (including Australia where I reside) where this 'loss of freedom' (i.e. gun control) has been imposed. In fact, if anything, I think that most would subconsciously approve of gun restrictions and go on - as pretty much always - with their daily lives without giving the matter much, if any, second thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrCoffee57
These mass-spree shootings that dominate the news cycle are incredibly rare, and in the grand scheme of things, should not concern any rational, thinking adult. Most gun crimes in this country happen in domestic situations or gang-associated violence. These should concern you more, but they rarely make the news.
I don't disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrCoffee57
Guns are not the problem, they're a symptom of a problem. The problem is we have such mentally ill people who are willing to kill random people. The source of this problem is many but in large part is due to the medicalization of mental disorders - amphetamine like meds (Adderall, Ritalin) and SSRIs (Paxil, Prozac) are creating mental illness, not solving them. There is a 1-1 relationship between % increase in spree-shootings and the prescription of these meds. The first SSRI was approved in 1987. In the 90s, psychiatrists invented the phony disease, ADHD, and began prescribing our kids powerful Amphetamine like drugs during a critical point in their mental development. In the mid 90s, SSRIs began being prescribed to kids for everything under the sun.
Overall an intelligent response to my post, especially the last paragraph. Thanks.
No need to change gun laws.............only add to them.
Starting with age 25 when brain is fully developed.
Background check and psyche evaluation just like
the police force and military allowing for exception
to ages earlier than 25.
All crime/abuse victims who develop PTSD will be forever stripped of the ability to protect themselves.
Make it illegal to carry anything other than a small arms pistol, shotgun and hunting rifle in public. All firearms should be banned from protests of any kind. Anyone seen carrying one of these war weapons in public should be immediately shot dead by any witness, not just a cop. These weapons (call them what you will. We all know what we're talking about!) have no place in public, period.
Anyone seen carrying any firearm into a protest or school should also be shot on sight by any and all witnesses.
Banning the manufacture, sale and ownership will have as much effect as our "war on drugs". The solution is to take off America's shackles and let us protect our own.
How will someone shoot someone else on sight if they don't also have a firearm?
Gun laws DO NOT work, banning stuff DOES NOT work...it never has and never will.
As long as there is a demand, there will be a supplier! Heroin is also HIGHLY ILLEGAL, (but it can be easily bought in most cities large to small all across the country and on a consistent basis).
I take comfort in knowing that all the federal, state and local laws, restrictions, bans, etc have failed miserably over the years. Any small time corner drug dealer has access to a global network, where anything and everything is available 24/7...thats right, they can get ANY gun you like, as long as you are willing to pay for it and be patient in some cases.
Point being...the govt and law enforcement ARE LOOSING.
Actually, laws restricting fully automatic weapons were fairly effective.....
But there's reasons why they were that don't really apply to attempting to put the same restrictions on semiautomatics.
First off, fully automatic weapons are expensive.
Expensive to buy and expensive to shoot, because they go through ammo very quickly.
So, they were never produced in anywhere near the numbers of semiautomatics......so there were very few of them in the hands of the general public in the first place when they were restricted.
The ban applied to any fully automatic weapons made after 1986......so manufacturers largely quit making them for distribution in the US. And collectors with deep pockets snatched up the rest.
Semiautomatics on the other hand, are all but ubiquitous.
There are hundreds of millions already in the hands of the general public, since they've been in mass production since 1911.
21 to own. Under 21 ok to use in the company of a licensed adult. Like driving.
Mandatory safety and operator class. Like driving.
Stop treating guns as taboo in schools. Offer gun safety and training courses.
Bring back rifle teams. Being educated is your friend. Being treated as the bogeyman does nothing but instill fear and ignorance. This country has turned into a gelatinous mass of stupidity.
I love the outdoors. I live in very rural area. Middle of nowhere. There are creatures that may do some real harm to me. I am NOT giving up my lifestyle. And I also am not going into the woods with a pocketknife and “bear spray” or some other ridiculous means of security. There is 100% a legitimate reason for many people who live rural or work rural or recreate rural, to carry a firearm.
Gun safety has only really been offered for hunting reasons and typically have only been mandated for liberal states to have. I went through New York state's hunter safety course when I was 14. Granted I was a boy scout and have shot and own a rifle from my grandfather's death. The fact remains I am responsible but many gun owners are not and are not forced to go through those courses except for concealed carry (if the state allows for it.)
Rifle teams aren't entirely gone. It just isn't as offered. I knew some kids in liberal New York that were on rifle teams in school. The "Boogeyman wasn't exactly anyone with a gun, just not knowing who exactly was 'a bad guy with a gun.'" Does that make sense? If that is a reason for us becoming as you put it "turning out country into a gelatinous mass of stupidity," that is a good one.
Also realize, that we are not a monolith and we all don't live in rural settings. Not all of us need guns to protect our livestock or plants from invasive species that are looking for food, to hunt or people that are trying to steal from you. I'm not saying there aren't legitimate reasons to own a firearm in suburban and urban settings, just it is lessened.
My new gun control would be for most of the federal agencies to be disarmed, & all those weapons and ammo to be given to NRA members for free. Only the military & U.S. citizens would have guns and ammo...& local law enforcement.
No guns/ammo for EPA, DOE, USPS, DOJ, OSHA, DFACS, FBI in Washington DC, FHA, HUD, HHS, ect..
Reinstate the assault weapons ban. Background checks for all gun purchases. 48 hour cooling off periods. Limit external magazines to 3 or 5 shots or something.
I would make it 10 tops. That is the typical amount for both hand-gun and rifle cartridges on the high end. High capacity cartridges or banana clips should not be allowed and I do not understand why they currently are and are supported by the gun owners and more so gun nuts. FYI, what I call gun nuts are the ones that use the slippery slope as their reasoning to not allow that, bump stock bans or the assault weapons ban to be reinstated.
My new gun control would be for most of the federal agencies to be disarmed, & all those weapons and ammo to be given to NRA members for free. Only the military & U.S. citizens would have guns and ammo...& local law enforcement.
No guns/ammo for EPA, DOE, USPS, DOJ, OSHA, DFACS, FBI in Washington DC, FHA, HUD, HHS, ect..
So how does the federal government arrest and protect the federal laws on the books? We are a single nation with 50 states, not 50 individual nations. States do not enforce or try federal laws.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
