I'm still of the mind that in order to get the progress we are hoping for, it's going to have to happen at the state level. This is definitely a start though. Gotta keep it moving!
It's definitely progress, which is something we definitely need to see more of. I'm curious about your ideas on state level changes though... How are you thinking they could be more effective?
Raising the age requirements for one. Red flag laws and just general laws and regulations on becoming a gun owner. It should be more difficult, not less. Ultimately though, I'm not a state legislator, they are the ones that need to come up with these laws.
I see what you mean. I think it'll take many decades (like a century worth) to get the 30+ states who currently allow permitless open carry to make those changes on their own. I would hope we could get incentive and social based improvements far quicker than that. At the very least, I think it would take a federal law backed by the supreme court to mandate those changes. That could come quicker if the supreme court were weaponized by democrats in the future the way it currently is for republicans. This is hard for me to root for. I'd prefer if the supreme court were 100% apolitical.
I kind of feel most of this conversation has already happened and it's a good time to bow out. The same 6 or 7 posters are saying changes need to be made and the same single poster seems to want to continue to say those changes are not going to happen. I guess we will see.
Well, we seem to be moving ahead with some of the things that "single poster" has suggested (there have actually been multiple posters, but the misrepresentation of the facts has become expected from some). So... here's hoping we don't have to wait more decades to actually address the problem, rather than proposing politically charged (and thereby doomed) policies that rarely go anywhere, and even when they do, aren't successful enough to show a causal relationship to any changes.
Something had to happen before some gun supporters got voted out of office. We'll see if this is enough but I doubt it.
Agreed. The gun rights advocates were not going to budge. For a long time. I also seriously doubt this will be enough to stop mass shootings. Nothing will stop people in the US from killing 3 or 4 people when they decide they want to. I don't really even know the details, so it's tough to know if the policies will be instituted in a responsible manner or if it will just be a barrel for pork...
The gun used in the robbery belongs to the 12 year old boy’s grandfather, who he lives with and is his legal guardian, according to Lt Prince. He had reportedly retrieved the firearm from his grandfather’s safe, where it was loaded with two magazines. Reports are that he used a crowbar to get into the locked safe https://archive.ph/uvvPN#selection-2423.0-2435.146
According to Senator Chris Murphy on The Daily podcast, they couldn't even get democrats to agree on raising the age to buy AR-15s. So they had to settle for enhanced background checks for people under 21.
Gunman killed by police at Texas summer camp after gunman exchanges fire with armed camp staff member If you read more articles about this you'll note the pains most national media outlets go to in an effort to omit the fact that an armed staff member stopped the initial shooting and bought time for police to arrive. This is an example of why so many distrust much of the media. ABC News: Quick-thinking staffers save camp children from suspected gunman in Texas CNN: Police in Texas kill a man who fired his weapon inside a gym hosting a children’s summer camp NPR: Police in the Dallas area kill a gunman who entered a summer camp for kids
Supports my point of needing to pass these laws at the state and local level. And if we could get the different law enforcement agencies to communicate and share data, that would help. On that note, where the fuck is the ATF in all this? Or Homeland Security? Can't we get some sort of national database. Maybe I'm just ignorant, but they need to be the agencies stopping people from falling through the cracks. Especially if our healthcare system can't, which has shown to be the case.
Yeah, I totally get your argument for states to do what they can. But the problem is that you'd only get about 15-20 states doing anything, as the other 30 states have been moving toward fewer gun restrictions over the last few years, and those states who have increased restrictions have seen rises in all crime and murder rates over the last few years, including gun crime and murder rates. So it's just a tough argument to make right now. But you're absolutely right that if all states and agencies were on the same page it could be effective. The database is a really tough sell to many gun owners. The argument they make is that every time a database of gun owners has been created in a country it has been followed by sweeping gun rights restrictions and confiscations. So the database of gun owners is one of the biggest things gun rights supporters fight against. This is the main reason I have suggested a database of dangerous people, much like the sexual predator database (I would also advocate for the creation of an easily accessible and apolitical appeals court for red flag laws to help sell gun rights supporters). You could have each state maintain their own database, and have that database audited annually. Further, you could mark the ID of dangerous people making it easier for the general public to verify if people are safe to lend/sell guns to. All states already have this capability, and no lawful gun owners would be impacted.
To clarify, you believe this increase in gun crime and murder rates are BECAUSE states have increased restrictions? There are other contributing factors, far outweighing the restrictions on guns.
