BANG !

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 May 19 17:40

I think to require liability insurance for gun ownership is a little overboard.
I think most gun owners live by the same rules that I do.

Rule for gun ownership
Keep the guns and ammo secure where only you have access.

Rules for handling guns.
#1-Every gun is loaded until you make sure it isn't
#2-If a gun leaves your possession it's loaded again. (See rule #1)
#3-Keep the muzzle pointed away from anything you don't want to shoot.
(At the ground is good, bullets fired into the air come down on something or someone.)
#4-Keep your finger off of the trigger until your sight is on the target.
#5-Know what is behind your target.
(Bullets have no brains so you need to think for them.
#6-If your gun has a safety, keep it on until you're ready to shoot.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 May 20 09:15

Cannoneer wrote:I think most gun owners live by the same rules that I do.

Good rules, I'm glad you live by them, but the evidence is undeniable that many people do not. And that's why our gun deaths per capita are highest in the developed world.

To your rules I'd add, "Take steps to assure that your gun will always, always me in your complete control and that no other person good or bad can get their hands on it."

Finally, these good rules fail to address the problem we have in the United States and nowhere else: there are so many guns everywhere that even the most trivial dispute or temporary instability can escalate instantly to death.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 May 20 11:17

Our gun deaths are high because such a high percentage of them are suicides, and the rest are either criminals or caused by people with a shortage of brains. Like those who do not follow the rules of safe gun ownership.
Back to my post of a couple days ago.
Since kids can't purchase guns they are using another person's guns. Usually dad's guns. In those cases there should be a federal law making the gun owner guilty of being an accessory to murder and it should carry a death sentence. That would probably help to stop the school shootings.
If you do a survey you will probably find that most gun owners follow exactly the same rules of gun ownership and safety. Especially ex service people.

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 May 25 09:59

Gunman in Oklahoma city opened fire in a restaurant wounding a woman and her twelve year old daughter. An armed civilian shot and killed the gunman before he could shoot anyone else.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

DGU, happens all the time....

Postby Crux » 2018 May 26 17:30

Cannoneer wrote:Gunman in Oklahoma city opened fire in a restaurant wounding a woman and her twelve year old daughter. An armed civilian shot and killed the gunman before he could shoot anyone else.


https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/

It isn't even an issue for many of us. Why?

Because we actually BELIEVE in and CHAMPION the right to self defense. The God Given Right to use the effective means of Self Defense against the evil-doers and criminals. Women, Minorities, Gays, AMERICAN have the RIGHT to defend innocent life and I TRUST We The People....

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 May 31 15:40

Why do gunnies reject absolutely a simple and effective preference for PREVENTING a gunman from ever opening fire, rather than stepping in after the an attack to try (usually unsuccessfully) to reduce further carnage?

Everybody now accepts the wisdom of preventing automobile injuries/death. NRA and know-nothing gun nuts cannot accept this principle for guns. Incredibly stupid.

PS. Yes, there were idiots 50 years ago who objected to measures that would prevent auto deaths, saying they'd "limit freedom." Bogus arguments like, "Seatbelts? No, they will only prevent a rider from being thrown clear in an accident." This kind of wrong-headed thinking is always with us, but it must be rejected in favor of evidence-based risk assessment.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 May 31 18:00

You are so right Wise One, and now we have the idiots who think private gun ownership is a bad idea.

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 01 01:48

I just reread your post wise one. What is the absolutely and effective preference for preventing a gunman from ever opening fire???

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 Jun 01 17:23

Cannoneer wrote:I just reread your post wise one. What is the absolutely and effective preference for preventing a gunman from ever opening fire???

For starters, adopt some features of the automobile model, used worldwide and in the United States already, and more:
  • Every firearm must be registered, at all times, to a licensed firearms operator. If no licensed operator is willing to accept the firearm, the state will hold it until one is found by owner nomination or sale.
  • Firearms registrations can be transferred, but only to a licensed firearms operator.
  • Firearms must carry liability insurance at a level at least that required for automobiles
  • Firearms operators must be licensed, after passing rigorous knowledge, safety, and operator tests
  • Reasonable criteria would be established for temporary or permanent revocation of licenses (conviction for felonious use of a firearm, violent felonies, certain mental illnesses, threatening behavior under "red flag" laws, etc.
  • Registrations and operator licenses must be renewed periodically, under the criteria then applying.
  • When not in use, firearms must be stored safely in a manner that keeps them under the control of the licensed owner and operator at all times. Criminal and civil penalties would attach to firearms that pass out of the control of their registered owners.
All the above are fully consistent with the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court's DC vs Heller decision. Nevertheless, NRA and radical gunnies will object to all of these because they care only about radical ideology and/or manufacturer revenues, not public safety.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 01 17:54

THANK GOD YOU AREN'T RUNNING THINGS!

I just got over the initial shock of your post.

Are you really stupid enough to believe that set of rules would change anything?

Every murder involves the breaking of rules.
Last edited by Cannoneer on 2018 Jun 01 18:35, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: BANG !

Postby Coondog » 2018 Jun 01 18:31

Going off the deep end a little bit there, Wise One?

CD :hum:

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 Jun 02 00:20

Why yes, by current American standards. Which are abominable.

My list is not dissimilar to practices already implemented throughout the rest of the civilized world, and accepted happily by those citizens.

You know, places where carnage from guns is way, way less than in the US.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 Jun 02 00:28

Cannoneer wrote:Are you really stupid enough to believe that set of rules would change anything?

Yes I am. Rules governing the following items/behaviors have decreased the incidence of harm, death and injury:
  • Explosives
  • Murder
  • Military munitions
  • Hazardous materials and waste
  • Embezzlement
  • Kidnapping
  • Cars
  • Airplanes
  • Stealing
  • Hazing
  • Infections diseases
  • Arson
  • etc., etc.
And experience has show that rules controlling guns also work, in every country they have been tried. They have not been tried here yet, so you can blithely draw upon your ignorance to aver that they will not work. You are wrong.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 02 09:36

You left out he rest of my quote, "Every murder involves the breaking of rules."



In your little world maybe you could make a law that all guns must be kept in a lock up with the local police and in order for a gun owner to use his gun he must sign it out. But before he's allowed to have it he must convince the police his reason for wanting his gun is legal. I bet you would just love that.

If people who commit crimes would only obey all of our laws we wouldn't have any crime would we?

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 Jun 02 23:46

Cannoneer wrote:You left out he rest of my quote, "Every murder involves the breaking of rules."

True but irrelevant to the discussion. Nearly every death/injury from any cause involves a breaking of rules but the point is that most people, most times, observe the rules ... recognizing they exist for their benefit.

For example, there are fewer accidents at red/green traffic lights because most people observe the rule. Some still do not, and collisions result, but that's no reason to abolish the rule and remove the traffic light.

Cannoneer wrote:In your little world maybe you could make a law that all guns must be kept in a lock up with the local police and in order for a gun owner to use his gun he must sign it out. But before he's allowed to have it he must convince the police his reason for wanting his gun is legal. I bet you would just love that.

This is what conservatives do, again and again. They refute an argument nobody made. You will find nothing in my list of practical suggestions that corresponds to this preposterous straw man. This is as silly as requiring car owners to check out their car from the police station, instead of the perfectly reasonable registration/licensing system we employ.

Cannoneer wrote:If people who commit crimes would only obey all of our laws we wouldn't have any crime would we?

No matter how many times I remind you that the main problem with guns has nothing to do with crime, you and the NRA will come back to this framing. You will always deny the public health perspective. Over 95% of the injuries/deaths from guns have nothing to do with criminals and planned crimes.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 05 10:46

Its quite relevant. We are discussing gun violence and you suggest rules will cause people to behave themselves. And your analogy about traffic lights is out of place. Big difference between running a red light and shooting someone.

What you wrote is not a list of practical suggestions, and what other countries do is irrelevant in the United States. We are still a country of nearly free people.

My statement about your little world was meant to be as silly as your list of laws. I guess you are just too wise to understand that.

When I suggested arming teachers to stop the shooters you rejected it because it would only reduce the number of murders. Now you say the main problem has nothing to do with crime.
A very large percent of gun deaths are a result of suicide. People commit suicide for many different reasons. Both physical and mental pain, or to escape some kind of consequences for something they had done. How they choose to kill themselves is nobody's business but their own.

Also. I'd like to remind you that the second amendment is part of The Bill of RIGHT'S, not the bill of "PRIVILEGES."

IsmaelJackson
Posts: 1
Joined: 2018 Jun 27 14:39

Re: BANG !

Postby IsmaelJackson » 2018 Jun 27 14:46

Cannoneer wrote:A very large percent of gun deaths are a result of suicide. People commit suicide for many different reasons. Both physical and mental pain, or to escape some kind of consequences for something they had done. This review of phenqHow they choose to kill themselves is nobody's business but their own.


Although suicide is technically a crime, in this scenario, it shouldn't be considered as a crime as our emphasis is on the guns. And you're right, how a person commits suicide is his/her decision.
Last edited by IsmaelJackson on 2018 Jun 29 08:36, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 27 20:19

I just tried without success to find out if suicide is against the law. It would be hard to prosecute some after they are dead.
That being said I'm enough of a libertarian to believe every adult should have the right to kill themselves if they choose.
Ask anyone who condones abortion by saying a woman has a right to her own body. Even though the baby in her is a separate body from hers.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: BANG !

Postby Wise One » 2018 Jun 28 01:48

Again, in an irrational defense of guns rather than people, you ignore the most important point ... public health, in this case gun suicide.

It is well documented that many suicides are related to medical depression, when people make a poor choice for permanent death as the solution to a temporary problem. Instant availability and high lethality of guns for suicide lead to more suicides than occur when people have a cooling-off period for proper medical treatment of depression.

Many people who were at the brink of suicide are thankful later they did not commit the act. Such people deserve our compassion and protection.

Yes, there are instances where suicide is the rational course of action. I would not stand in the way of such decisions, although the preferable option would be legally choosing to terminate one's life with humane medical assistance.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 492
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: BANG !

Postby Cannoneer » 2018 Jun 28 17:40

wise one, I believe humane medical assisted suicide is against the law.
And you should read before you write. My post is not in defense of guns, its in defense of suicide.
Also note that when I defend the right to bear arms I'm defending the second amendment. Number 2 in the Bill of Rights. That's RIGHTS!
After reading your ridicules first post on this subject I'm certain you haven't read what the writers of the constitution had to say about the whole of the people bearing arms.