Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 3, 2015 14:19:44 GMT -5
The President plans executive action to expand background checks and close the "gun show" loophole. Bravo Mr. President. This is a sensible response to the escalation in gun violence in this country.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 15:07:18 GMT -5
Post by kchoya on Dec 3, 2015 15:07:18 GMT -5
The President plans executive action to expand background checks and close the "gun show" loophole. Bravo Mr. President. This is a sensible response to the escalation in gun violence in this country. Too bad the Prez keeps falling back on the "expand background checks" and "gun show 'loophole'" BS he always brings up. Such changes likely wouldn't have made a difference yesterday: Why don't we focus on stopping the dangerous and/or unstable people who do these horrific acts:
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 15:09:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Elvado on Dec 3, 2015 15:09:27 GMT -5
Even if ineffective against yesterday's carnage it is a reasonable step with no downside.
Now if he would get reasonable about the borders of this country we might be on to something...
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 16:26:52 GMT -5
Post by kchoya on Dec 3, 2015 16:26:52 GMT -5
Even if ineffective against yesterday's carnage it is a reasonable step with no downside. Now if he would get reasonable about the borders of this country we might be on to something... That's a bad approach: it's ineffective, but it has limited downside, so lets enact it.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,906
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 16:44:39 GMT -5
Post by Filo on Dec 3, 2015 16:44:39 GMT -5
Even if ineffective against yesterday's carnage it is a reasonable step with no downside. Now if he would get reasonable about the borders of this country we might be on to something... That's a bad approach: it's ineffective, but it has limited downside, so lets enact it. Just making stuff up now? He said it was ineffective against yesterday's carnage. He didn't say it was ineffective.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 18:46:53 GMT -5
Post by kchoya on Dec 3, 2015 18:46:53 GMT -5
That's a bad approach: it's ineffective, but it has limited downside, so lets enact it. Just making stuff up now? He said it was ineffective against yesterday's carnage. He didn't say it was ineffective. Who's making stuff up? Maybe you can't read. I said they would be ineffective.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 19:57:59 GMT -5
Post by EasyEd on Dec 3, 2015 19:57:59 GMT -5
heyjackass.com/Why does President Obama use this shooting to push gun control? Why not the 412 persons shot and killed in Chicago this year? Or the 2352 shot and wounded in Chicago?
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,305
|
Guns
Dec 3, 2015 22:50:11 GMT -5
Post by tashoya on Dec 3, 2015 22:50:11 GMT -5
Taking the politics out of it if it's at all possible, and I certainly don't have the answers, I welcome any change. It may not stop all or most or a some of these incidents but, if it stops one, I'll take it as a small first step. Of course, it will be impossible to gauge whether one of these incidents was stanched by regulation changes. You'll only ever know that the changes didn't prevent one. In any event, there have been no steps to counteract any of it from a guns standpoint or from a mental health standpoint or from any standpoint at all. Any step in the direction of trying to lessen some of this senseless violence would be, as of now, a huge symbolic step.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,906
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 8:58:05 GMT -5
Post by Filo on Dec 4, 2015 8:58:05 GMT -5
Just making stuff up now? He said it was ineffective against yesterday's carnage. He didn't say it was ineffective. Who's making stuff up? Maybe you can't read. I said they would be ineffective. OK, KC.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 11:22:51 GMT -5
Post by EasyEd on Dec 4, 2015 11:22:51 GMT -5
This particular shooting was done by radical Islamic extremists apparently pledged to ISIS. Until that is admitted by all and addressed as such, we are merely spinning our wheels talking about gun control.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 11:26:54 GMT -5
via mobile
CTHoya08 likes this
Post by Elvado on Dec 4, 2015 11:26:54 GMT -5
This particular shooting was done by radical Islamic extremists apparently pledged to ISIS. Until that is admitted by all and addressed as such, we are merely spinning our wheels talking about gun control. Okay. I happen to agree that it is time to identify that radical Islamist terrorists are both real and here. My overarching point was that more gun regulation will not harm the situation at all. These terrorists apparently had legally obtained guns. Probably made the planning harder and put out a trail that can be followed later. I never suggested gun regulation was the solution to radical Islamist terrorism, but it sure as hell won't make the problem worse.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,816
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 11:28:14 GMT -5
Post by CTHoya08 on Dec 4, 2015 11:28:14 GMT -5
Ed, as you pointed out, gun violence in this country is a much bigger problem than just yesterday's shooting (or any individual mass shooting). The motivations of these shooters do nothing to change that fact, and nothing to diminish the need for increased gun control measures.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,428
Member is Online
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 12:08:51 GMT -5
Post by TC on Dec 4, 2015 12:08:51 GMT -5
This particular shooting was done by radical Islamic extremists apparently pledged to ISIS. Until that is admitted by all and addressed as such, we are merely spinning our wheels talking about gun control. Has anyone been denying the ISIS link? It's been like an hour since that link was reported, maybe we could tamp down the outrage machine there. That said, good move by the President, at least it's something. I doubt it holds up in court, I doubt it makes the process any smoother (it'll probably create long background check backlogs since that system is being given no more resources by Congress), and I'm sure it'll create widespread "they're coming for your guns" panic that causes people to buy more guns and ammo, but it's something.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Guns
Dec 4, 2015 19:39:40 GMT -5
Post by EasyEd on Dec 4, 2015 19:39:40 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,390
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Dec 4, 2015 19:56:32 GMT -5
There is nothing selective or knee jerk about the reactions to such killings, except in your mind. Careful, Ed, next they'll be coming after your guns.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Dec 4, 2015 23:45:29 GMT -5
Read the article in your link. Inner-city violence is what has declined the most since the 1990s. The crack killings stopped. The other big factor in the reduction of the rate of violence is demographic. The baby boomers got old so old people are now a larger share of the population. Stupid males in their teens and twenties are a smaller percentage of the total population than they used to be, so violence per capita has declined. As for guns, localities that have more guns have more gun homicides, so arming everyone will not reduce gun deaths.
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Dec 5, 2015 13:01:03 GMT -5
Why I'm for the Brady Bill By Ronald Reagan; Ronald Reagan, in announcing support for the Brady bill yesterday, reminded his audience he is a member of the National Rifle Association. Published: March 29, 1991
LOS ANGELES— "Anniversary" is a word we usually associate with happy events that we like to remember: birthdays, weddings, the first job. March 30, however, marks an anniversary I would just as soon forget, but cannot.
It was on that day 10 years ago that a deranged young man standing among reporters and photographers shot a policeman, a Secret Service agent, my press secretary and me on a Washington sidewalk.
I was lucky. The bullet that hit me bounced off a rib and lodged in my lung, an inch from my heart. It was a very close call. Twice they could not find my pulse. But the bullet's missing my heart, the skill of the doctors and nurses at George Washington University Hospital and the steadfast support of my wife, Nancy, saved my life.
Jim Brady, my press secretary, who was standing next to me, wasn't as lucky. A bullet entered the left side of his forehead, near his eye, and passed through the right side of his brain before it exited. The skills of the George Washington University medical team, plus his amazing determination and the grit and spirit of his wife, Sarah, pulled Jim through. His recovery has been remarkable, but he still lives with physical pain every day and must spend much of his time in a wheelchair.
Thomas Delahanty, a Washington police officer, took a bullet in his neck. It ricocheted off his spinal cord. Nerve damage to his left arm forced his retirement in November 1981.
Tim McCarthy, a Secret Service agent, was shot in the chest and suffered a lacerated liver. He recovered and returned to duty.
Still, four lives were changed forever, and all by a Saturday-night special -- a cheaply made .22 caliber pistol -- purchased in a Dallas pawnshop by a young man with a history of mental disturbance.
This nightmare might never have happened if legislation that is before Congress now -- the Brady bill -- had been law back in 1981.
Named for Jim Brady, this legislation would establish a national seven-day waiting period before a handgun purchaser could take delivery. It would allow local law enforcement officials to do background checks for criminal records or known histories of mental disturbances. Those with such records would be prohibited from buying the handguns.
While there has been a Federal law on the books for more than 20 years that prohibits the sale of firearms to felons, fugitives, drug addicts and the mentally ill, it has no enforcement mechanism and basically works on the honor system, with the purchaser filling out a statement that the gun dealer sticks in a drawer.
The Brady bill would require the handgun dealer to provide a copy of the prospective purchaser's sworn statement to local law enforcement authorities so that background checks could be made. Based upon the evidence in states that already have handgun purchase waiting periods, this bill -- on a nationwide scale -- can't help but stop thousands of illegal handgun purchases.
And, since many handguns are acquired in the heat of passion (to settle a quarrel, for example) or at times of depression brought on by potential suicide, the Brady bill would provide a cooling-off period that would certainly have the effect of reducing the number of handgun deaths.
Critics claim that "waiting period" legislation in the states that have it doesn't work, that criminals just go to nearby states that lack such laws to buy their weapons. True enough, and all the more reason to have a Federal law that fills the gaps. While the Brady bill would not apply to states that already have waiting periods of at least seven days or that already require background checks, it would automatically cover the states that don't. The effect would be a uniform standard across the country.
Even with the current gaps among states, those that have waiting periods report some success. California, which has a 15-day waiting period that I supported and signed into law while Governor, stopped nearly 1,800 prohibited handgun sales in 1989. New Jersey has had a permit-to-purchase system for more than two decades. During that time, according to the state police, more than 10,000 convicted felons have been caught trying to buy handguns.
Every year, an average of 9,200 Americans are murdered by handguns, according to Department of Justice statistics. This does not include suicides or the tens of thousands of robberies, rapes and assaults committed with handguns.
This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them. If the passage of the Brady bill were to result in a reduction of only 10 or 15 percent of those numbers (and it could be a good deal greater), it would be well worth making it the law of the land.
And there would be a lot fewer families facing anniversaries such as the Bradys, Delahantys, McCarthys and Reagans face every March 30.
|
|
|
Guns
Dec 5, 2015 22:43:18 GMT -5
Post by Problem of Dog on Dec 5, 2015 22:43:18 GMT -5
heyjackass.com/Why does President Obama use this shooting to push gun control? Why not the 412 persons shot and killed in Chicago this year? Or the 2352 shot and wounded in Chicago? Because the majority of the country doesn't care about those people because they don't look like them, and it doesn't hit home. Mass shootings get a ton of public attention and make people feel much more vulnerable.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 6, 2015 6:53:31 GMT -5
heyjackass.com/Why does President Obama use this shooting to push gun control? Why not the 412 persons shot and killed in Chicago this year? Or the 2352 shot and wounded in Chicago? Because the majority of the country doesn't care about those people because they don't look like them, and it doesn't hit home. Mass shootings get a ton of public attention and make people feel much more vulnerable. If true that is very sad. It may also be that he chooses not to focus on the failings of his buddy Rahm and the Democrat Party Chicago machine. Either way, his call for enhanced registration and regulation is a step forward and I applaud it.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,390
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Dec 6, 2015 9:52:27 GMT -5
|
|