A good guy with a gun, indeed.

[Galactic Spin]

It seems you want them. Do you want them without knowing what they entail? That would be strange.

No it wouldn't. I listed goals. The strategy and tactics are best left to the experts. It isn't strange in any way whatsoever.

 

[Rucker61]

What else is it good for? Paperweight?

Guns in general? "...hunting, trap shooting, target shooting, personal protection and any other lawful purpose".

 

[Winston]

Guns in general? "...hunting, trap shooting, target shooting, personal protection and any other lawful purpose".

So, to kill, to threaten to kill, or recreation by simulating the act of killing

 

[Rucker61]

No it wouldn't. I listed goals. The strategy and tactics are best left to the experts. It isn't strange in any way whatsoever.

I would consider "better reporting and background checks" to be the strategies and tactics, with "less violence" and "fewer deaths" as the goals. We can certainly have the former without actually impacting the latter.

 

[Winston]

Bought and sold freely is not the cause of gun deaths.

I am actually in favor of examining certain restrictions.

But the self-righteous left causes me to be very very careful.

And the self righteousness of the gun grabbing Australia too?

 

[Rucker61]

So, to kill, to threaten to kill, or recreation by simulating the act of killing

Nope. Very few of those who practice any of these activities murder anyone. Besides, it's the Democrats who came up with that list. It's excerpted from the Gun Control Act of 1968.

 

[Rucker61]

And the self righteousness of the gun grabbing Australia too?

They didn't have any Constitutional protections to violate.

 

[RF667799]

Take a guess.

No. That's just an admittance you're baiting. Throw it out somewhere else. I'll just note that- again- you show no interest in supporting your statements....such as they are.

 

[Winston]

They didn't have any Constitutional protections to violate.

I just wondered if the Australians gave @HikerGuy83 pause

 

[jaeger19]

The topic is guns, show me a gun that cannot be used to tear through flesh from a distance.

why? It can. So what? A knife can be used to tear through flesh from a distance as well. So can a hatchet.
The number of injuries I treat from firearms is miniscule from the number of injuries I treat from other tools.. from cars to and unfortunate incident with a reciprocating saw.

So that is their purpose.

For most firearms.. sure. there are some firearms that are specifically designed for shooting targets.

The Native Americans lost their lives, cultures and their territories to firearms designed to kill. As to the bolded - emotional tripe.

Sure.... and Hiltlers massacre of the jewish people was STOPPED by the firearms designed to kill. We could go back and forth for hours. and the fact remains that firearms are simply a tool. That can be used for good purposes.. or can be used for bad purposes.
What also is clear is that the firearm gives a means for those without physical prowess or martial arts training a means to defend themselves from a larger trained aggressor.

Ghandi and his people did quite well using nonviolence to wrest freedom from their British oppressors. Civil rights came about in this country due to sit-ins, marches and nonviolent protests.

Yeah.. no that is a bit of populist history that doesn;t actually fit reality:
"Quit India 1942

The Quit India movement, launched in 1942 by Gandhi and other Congress leaders, is perhaps the best example of the successful use of violence in the Indian Independence Movement–notably because it was endorsed by Gandhi himself. The movement saw widespread insurrectionary acts across India, with the participation of millions of common people. (Read a more in-depth account of the Quit India Movement, its context, and its impact here). Government buildings were bombed, trains were sabotaged, and mass strikes paralyzed the economy. Mobs dragged officials out from their homes and killed them; police stations were burned to the ground. The British counter-attacks were even more brutal; troops indiscriminately razed neighborhoods and raped women in “troublesome” villages. By the time the rebellion had died down, 763 Indians and 63 British police and troops had been killed, and 1941 Indians and 2012 British police and troops had been injured (Hutchins 1973: 230-31).
"

Firearms allow freedom to come about? Tell that to all the parents in this country that have lost children to the violence that comes along with that freedom.

Sure. The parents in this country live in this country because we fought a war with the british for independence. We did not get our independence with sit ins.

Animal populations that were naturally controlled before humans with guns interfered. How did that work out for the buffalo?

Well... actually the buffalo were saved by hunters. Thats why buffalo did not go extinct...

Family cohesion? That's a stretch you should further explain. I sense an NRA ad in there somewhere.

Naw just facts. My father, my sons and I all shoot firearms together. not to mention hunting... though dad at 82 doesn;t hunt as much anymore. But he can still go out and shoot with his grandsons. Or do you think they should try to do pick up basketball with their 82 year old grandpa.?

No, it is not like those other tools, if it were we would see more of those items you mentioned and less guns at crime scenes, but we don't. Why is that?

Um no.. actually as pointed out.. we see more of those other tools at crime scenes. and in injuries. I treat far more injuries caused by other tools.. even in criminal events.

Your tired old repetitive talking points are just that.

Naw.. just facts and logic that you cannot dismiss with your emotional tripe.

 

[Galactic Spin]

would consider "better reporting and background checks" to be the strategies and tactics

How nice for you. But my stated, desired goal is better background checks and a better database to check.

 

[Galactic Spin]

No. That's just an admittance you're baiting

Your entire method of interrogation instead of discussion is nothing but baiting. So spare me if I think you're just putting on a little act, now.

Go ahead, take a guess.

 

[jaeger19]

Primary purpose is to kill all other purposes below it

So?
So what? I have safes full of firearms. None of them have harmed me or anyone else. Yet I use them roughly 2-5 times a week.
Please explain how they are going to jump up and start killing me.. or turn me into a murderer etc.
Again.. I use them 2-5 times a week and I have never killed anyone with a firearm.

 

[jaeger19]

Absolutely! And attaching that to better reporting and background checks.

Which will defeat the purpose of mental health reform by reinforcing the stigma that someone with mental health issues is dangerous and or should not be allowed to own a firearm. Then I have to worry about my patients refusing to tell me about their depression after their wife has died... because they are afraid that the sheriff will be at their door to collect their grandpa's old shotgun.

 

[jaeger19]

No it wouldn't. I listed goals. The strategy and tactics are best left to the experts. It isn't strange in any way whatsoever.

Well then.. please explain why this goal when most mass shooters have either passed a background check
OR they have circumvented it by killing someone and taking their firearms..

 

[Galactic Spin]

will defeat the purpose of mental health reform by reinforcing the stigma that someone with mental health issues is dangerous and or should not be allowed to own a firearm

I think the benefits will outweigh that. And it won't be close.

 

[jaeger19]

I think the benefits will outweigh that. And it won't be close.

Based on what?
Please give us your evidence on the effectiveness of background checks today.. specifically the number of people prosecuted when they try to buy a gun by lying on the federal form (a felony).

 

[Rucker61]

How nice for you. But my stated, desired goal is better background checks and a better database to check.

Regardless of their efficacy?

 

[Galactic Spin]

Based on what?

Based on beliving your fears are contrived and greatly exaggerated, so even a little benefit far outweighs them.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Regardless of their efficacy?

I won't yet know their efficacy, when the effort is undertaken. That's a hindsight question.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

I wouldn't blink! That confident.

Say goodbye to all your stuff.

 

[Rucker61]

I think the benefits will outweigh that. And it won't be close.

Given that you have no idea of the details of the processes you're seeking to implement, are you just relying on blind optimism?

What if "better reporting" is just "improved" to reduce the mandatory FFL reporting of multiple handgun purchases from 5 days to 4 days, and better background checks meant checking a buyer at an FFL twice instead of once. Happy with those?

 

[Galactic Spin]

Given that you have no idea of the details of the processes you're seeking to implement, are you just relying on blind optimism?

In some ways, sure. Anyone who supports efforts to reach those goals would be employing optimism that the efforts would work. They would be new to us. If you think you are somehow diminishing them to say this, you are wrong.

 

[jaeger19]

Based on beliving your fears are contrived and greatly exaggerated, so even a little benefit far outweighs them.

Hmmm...
So in other words you have no evidence to support your beliefs.

I do.
"The way we talk about gun violence — and the laws that we support — should be based on facts, not falsehoods. To be effective, we must focus on dangerous behavior — not genetics and not diagnoses. It is a common misconception that individuals living with mental illness are responsible for gun violence. In reality, the majority of people with mental illness do not engage in violence against others, and most interpersonal violence is caused by factors other than mental illness. In fact, people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators of violence. Focusing on mental illness as the cause of gun violence stigmatizes millions of Americans and does not actually address the root cause of the gun violence problem — easy access to guns. Policies to reduce gun violence should focus on risk factors for violence and overall dangerousness, not on a mental health diagnosis."
https://efsgv.org/learn/learn-more-...ental illness as,on a mental health diagnosis.

 

[Galactic Spin]

So in other words you have no evidence to support your beliefs.

Looks like we have equal evidence.