How can we regulate guns ... ?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/.../01/the_red_dawn_fantasy.php

quote:

---

The Red Dawn Fantasy
Josh Marshall January 20, 2013, 12:01 PM 5289

​

I agree with TPM Reader AK that the Red Dawn fantasy is what keeps both sides of the gun debate from coming up with sensible approaches to dealing with gun violence

​

"Red Dawn of course refers to the very entertaining film in which The Wolverines, a bunch of kids from a rural western community, heroically engage a division of Cuban paratroopers and their Soviet advisors who invade the United States at the start of World War III.

​

If you ask those who insist they must own one or more assault rifles and semi-automatic pistols with high capacity magazines, the answer you’ll hear over and over again is: I want to be ready to defend America against the Commies, the terrorists, the immigrant invaders, the United Nations, and yes, even the government of the United States of America. That’s the Red Dawn fantasy.

​

It’s time we saw it for the paranoid delusion it is, and stop giving craziness the legitimacy of the Second Amendment. The gun debate shouldn’t be about whether we need armed guards in every school, movie theater, and place of worship. I shouldn’t be about hunting rifles or weapons for home or personal defense. Take the Red Dawn fantasy out of the equation, and we’ll have no problem coming up with a sensible gun policy in America. But as long as it persists, and as long as we let a delusional minority dictate the terms of the debate, we’re accepting more mass shootings as the price we have to pay."

---

And people with paranoid delusions should be restricted from owning guns ...Enjoy.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=...To end the cycle of violence you need to put the weapons down.EnjoyEdited by Admin, : Fix link.

A tyranny of the majority is still a tyranny.And cartoons still aren't arguments.

You do need to change your focus of attention, and that may affect the outcome somewhat. And the 7 round limit in NY would add another 2 seconds, agreed ...... so magazines should be banned for all guns then.Target shooting would not be impeded using a gun with manual loading ...Hunting would not be impeded using a gun with manual loading ...Mass murder would be impeded.Enjoy

Curiously this is an historical picture documenting an actual historical event.You are just using this (among other similar tactics) to avoid discussing the issues.Cognitive dissonance leads to avoidance behavior.Note that I will ignore further attempts from you to derail the discussion.The topic is "How can we regulate guns" -- so I'll ask you the same questions I asked Faith and Petrophysics: Care to contribute to the thread topic?Participate or pot-shot?Enjoy

I have just gone through the entire thread to pull out what I consider to be proposals for how we can regulate guns. I have made no rating of how valid\useful the proposals are. If I missed anyone's proposal please let me know. Note these are often paraphrases or rewording to fit into proposal form rather than actual quotes. Nor have I listed the actual post. I've listed the author of the posts for each one except the first 8, which are all mine from the beginning of the thread. There is some overlap and I have not sorted them into categories.

1. a federal regulation that all gun owners must be licensed by each state, with
   a. photo ID
   b. fingerprints
   c. DNA
   d. document of training for each gun
   e. record kept by FBI
   f. fees to cover costs
   g. license renewed each year
   ​
2. a federal regulation that all guns must be registered in every state, with
   a. reference to gun owner's license
   b. fees to cover costs
   ​
3. a federal registry (FBI) for background checks of people not allowed to have a gun, including
   a. previously convicted criminal gun users
   b. known irrational/delusional/unstable people
   c. doctors required to submit names
   --- people to be evaluated before adding to list
   ​
4. a federal regulation that guns cannot change hands until
   a. each gun registration is updated
   b. the new and old owner's gun licenses are updated
   c. a background check on purchaser is run
   ​
5. a federal regulation that
   a. no more than 1 operational gun may be carried at any time
   b. no more than 5 bullets for that gun may be carried at any time
   ​
6. a federal regulation that states must require gun owners to carry insurance to cover
   a. liability and
   b. damages from either accidental or intentional use
   c. for each gun owned
   ​
7. a federal regulation that all ammunition must have a tracking system so that the used ammunition can be tracked back
   a. to the registered owner
   b. to the store selling the ammo
   ​
8. a federal regulation that both gun license and registration need to be provided in order to purchase ammunition
   ​
   ----
   ​
9. An outright ban on the ownership of handguns and assault weapons. A recall of existing guns in those categories and strong Federal - not state - licensing of hunting rifles and shotguns (tangle)
   ​
10. not just decriminalize drugs but nationalize all illicit drugs, give them away for free through neighborhood health clinics funded by redirection of all monies now wasted on the "War on Drugs" (jar)
    ​
11. decriminalize assisted suicide so that there were better options than a gun - that would reduce US gun deaths by nearly 50% right away (jar)
    ​
12. list\order weapons capable of killing based on their efficiency in achieving that end (kills per minute) ... from machine guns to pencils (yes a sharp pencil can kill) ... and if we then limited access to the top 50 killing machines, then we should logically see a reduction in the efficiency of killing -- meaning more people (vis-a-vis the Japanese schoolroom assault with a knife) would survive. (razd)
    ​
13. identify other factors -- such as mental health care -- and take action in that direction as well. (razd)
    ​
14. ALL states need to have the same set of gun laws (onifre)
    ​
15. tackle the primary problem ... the Balkanism/tribalism that is developing in many inner cities for socio-economic and other related reasons (coyote)
    ​
16. to prevent these random mass shootings, there should be enough information out there to begin profiling those most likely to engage in them. Certainly the FBI has a good profiling department and presumably has some good ideas of the characteristics and traits to be watching for (coyote)
    ​
17. Control where guns are carried, similar to New York's laws where you are not allowed to carry a gun in public. (Taq)
    ​
18. For those that think weapons are necessary to protect them from government intrustion then fine, keep your firearms at home and have them at the ready in case we need to topple some fantasized tyrranical US government. (Taq)
    ​
19. If you are caught with a handgun/AR in public, with an unregistered handgun/AR, or privately selling a handgun/AR then you serve a one year sentence. We can make exceptions for gaming firearms just as other countries do. (Taq)
    ​
20. If you want to use military grade arms, then join the National Guard and get the training, discipline, and psychological evaluations that ensure that you are of sound mind and know how to properly use the equipment. (razd)
    ​
21. regulate the number of guns an individual can own, the types of guns an individual can own, the amount of ammunition an individual can own, the manner in which guns and ammunition are stored, require training and insurance, require psychological evaluations. (razd)
    ​
22. a town could have a "gun club militia organization" with regulations and controls similar to the National Guard on the use of weapons, training,etc., and that such an organization could provide a safer, better controlled access to weapons of military grade than private homes. (razd)
    ​
23. the gun show loop hole should be 'closed' and that 'closure' should extend to all private sales of guns (panda)
    ​
24. straw purchasing guns should be made universally illegal, as has already been done is several states.(panda)
    ​
25. Illinois has the FOID card: the requirements are not having been convicted of a felony, and not having been incarcerated in a mental institution. Its maintained by the State Police. (catholic scientist)
    ​
26. If it was on a national level, then a person would not be able to simply step over the state line and by-pass the FOID. (xongsmith\panda)
    ​
27. if you don't have state border guards, then there's nothing stopping people bringing in guns from out of state. Gun legislation needs to be national else it is too easy for people to by-pass. (panda)
    ​
28. Make it a crime if your gun is used in a crime even if it wasn't you using it (even if its stolen). (catholic scientist)
    ​
29. remove the depraved human and the problem will be solved. (icant)
    ​
30. instead of removing the guns the same sort of restrictions that are applied in New York are applied across the board (straggler)
    ​
31. rapid fire types guns and guns with interchangeable large clips of ammunition, along with the ammunition, can be provided by congress to the militias -- per the constitution -- along with the training and discipline in their use (razd)
    ​
32. if you want to be part of a well regulated militia you can join the National Guard. State police and town police perform similar functions, and you can join them if you are interested in preserving law, order and peace in the towns and states. (razd)
    ​
33. A comprehensive program to reduce gun deaths should have to look at ways to reduce crime in general, so that means that social programs also need to be considered. (razd)
    ​
34. failure to disclose your guns results in a criminal record that now prevents you from lawfully owning a gun, and whether there are significant fines for failure to disclose, and whether confiscation of unregistered guns was included. (razd)
    ​
35. Whatever the answers to the social issues only an absolute lunatic would look at such a situation and conclude that what the situation needs is a citizenry armed with guns. (straggler)
    ​
36. we should only allow people to own black powder muzzle loading ball muskets since those are the arms that the founders were talking about. (taq)
    ​
37. gun regulations would limit the damage such a psycho could do: If we limit magazines to 9 rounds instead of 30 then the shooter will have to stop shooting after 9 rounds instead of 30, (taq)
    ​
38. If we want to stop gun violence then it makes much more sense to regulate gun sales, register guns so owners are held responsible, and limit the right to carry in public. (taq)
    ​
39. things DC has done, post DC v. Heller would be possible candidates: implemented a prohibition on assault weapons, and a prohibition on large capacity feeding devices. DC also uses zoning laws to deny establishment of gun shops in the district. Guns are registered. (nonukes)
    ​
40. one type of weapon is banned (or severely restricted), so this ban can be applied to other weapons that are virtually the same, especially in the ability to fire a large number of bullets in a small amount of time. (razd)
    ​
41. just ban ammo clips and magazines altogether. (razd)
    ​
42. 1 - Universal background checks. 2 - Mandatory Gun Registration. 3 - Mandatory Gun Safe Registration (tempe 12ft chicken
    ​
43. check-ins with posted guards at the main entrance(s) to schools (similar to what exists in most government buildings) would be a nice addition. (Jon)
    ​
44. drug testing, Include prescription drugs related to mental health (razd)
    ​
45. legislation should be about who qualifies to carry a gun. (faith)
    ​
46. Strict standards for qualification for gun possession are good too, training sessions being mandatory perhaps. Drug testing might not be necessary but doctors could supply information about whether an applicant for a gun is on psychiatric drugs. (faith)
    ​
47. Universal background checks for every time a gun changes hands, otherwise it will be as ineffective as current background checks. (razd)
    ​
48. Straw purchases should be illegal for used guns as well as new guns. Registration of the gun owner with the gun ensures this. (razd)
    ​
49. If you have no problem with banning of certain kinds of weapons, then the issue is what constitutes weapons that should be banned ... such as assault type weapons that can load lots of ammunition, fire it at a fast rate, are are easy to reload with interchangeable clips of ammunition. (razd)
    ​
50. part of the testing for ability to safely carry a weapon should be a determination of how much a persons beliefs are founded in reality - irrational beliefs, such as in government conspiracies, should indicate unstable mentality. (razd)
    ​
51. Pass a law that there should be at least one armed person on school premises for every couple hundred children or something like that... don't mind if you want to require more training. Nothing wrong with training, the more the better. (faith)
    ​
52. pass universal background checks on all gun sales, mental health restrictions, and set up a national database to track gun sales. (razd)
    ​
53. define depraved person: someone who wants a type of gun that is capable of killing a lot of people in a short period of time and can be reloaded quickly with clips of ammunition, a type of gun that serves no rational civilian purpose. (razd)

Additional notes: Nor, apparently, does the Constitution (as currently amended) prevent states from enacting legislation regarding what kind of ammunition, and ammunition delivery systems, are allowed in the state.Discussion can now focus on the number proposal and replies made to that. For instance:Proposal #51 for "one armed person on school premises for every couple hundred children"

• would likely produce little actual effect, when the presence of professionally highly trained secret service and DC police did nothing to prevent, stop or reduce the Reagan shooting incident (see Message 771),
• did not work at Columbine, Virginia Tech or Fort Hood, where armed guards failed to prevent, stop or reduce those shooting incidents,
• would go a long way to greatly increasing ongoing costs of schools with little benefit,
• would begin to turn schools into armed police state camps,
• others have argued that school shootings are rare and thus do not justify much increase in cost, so
• one-time costs to increase security in the infrastructure of schools would likely be more effective, and,
• does nothing to address the social and mental health issues that lie behind such events.

I have not included reference to proposals from Obama at this point, nor to the new regulations in New York (other than by reference in 17 & 30).Let me know of any further proposals you may have.Enjoy

You can sling all the personal attacks all you want; you can even pretend that my reference to cartoons was directed at your real-life picture of Gandhi as opposed to the post you made consisting of three cartoons.But at the end of it all is still your failure to present the actual workings of your model; your failure to outline the costs and benefits of your model; your failure to outline the potential constitutional feasibility of your modelin short: your failure to support your model. I hope that's a joke, RAZD. I've posted numerous requests for you to provide evidence supporting the sanity of your proposals and you've failed in all ways to present even the slightest bit of evidence. When confronted with the fact, you just post some silly ad-hominem cartoons and slip out the back. I'm not Faith and petrophysics; I have no interest in playing Twenty Questions with you.Present something to show the feasibility of your proposals.Stop stalling.

Folks,There's a problem to be solved here, and many proposed solutions. Some of these solutions will be more effective than others. Some of them will be more costly than others. The solutions we choose should have positive net benefits. The solutions also cannot be illegal; and they should be feasible.What this means is that we can't really have a discussion on proposed solutions unless those proposing the solutions bring some numbers to the table so that the costs and benefits of their solutions can be measured and real decisions made. We can't have a discussion on proposed solutions unless those proposing the solutions bring some evidence to the table that their solutions will hold-up in the courts; and that their solutions will be generally feasible.Unfortunately, not a single person who has made a policy proposal has put down any evidence; has defended the legality of their proposals; has shown the feasibility of their models.This thread is going nowhere, and it is so very obvious why it isn't.It's also really too bad; because this is a very important topic that should be treated rationally and reasonably but has so far been only treated emotionally and unrealistically.Jon

ah, nothing to contribute, just pot shots and distain.Enjoy

Nor have you shown what would not work and what would make it better.It is easy to criticize, but empty criticism with no suggestion of fixes or correction or alternatives is not productive.Problem solving at it's worst? Thanks for helping get there.Enjoy.

When you are looking to resolve a problem one of the approaches is to start with brainstorming -- setting out as many possible solutions as can be made, without regard to how practical any of them are.Then you review the possible solutions, discard the most impractical and proceed to fine tune the rest.Curiously, we have a list now of some 53 proposals of varying worth (Message 801) and if there are no further proposals then we can start the review process ...EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : 801 not 800

Hi Dr, When did foreveryoung or you have the right to possess heroin?It has always been a right to possess and bear Arms in the US.The second amendment does not limit or give that right. What the second amendment does is limit the government to the point it is not able to infring the right of the people to possess and bear Arms.God Bless,

Hi No, They have illegally taken away my ability to posses and bear either one.It doesn't make any difference whether I have had one or not.God Bless,

Proposal #1 was (Message 801): There was some semantic quibbling over the term "licensed", so we can use "registered" instead. For argument sake let me note that I am a registered medical marijuana user (rather than licensed), and that this registration gives me certain legal rights that don't apply to non-registered users.As noted in proposal #25, the state of Illinois currently has an Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) card: the requirements are not having been convicted of a felony, and not having been incarcerated in a mental institution -- ie - a background check. The FOID card is currently required for any resident of Illinois to possess or purchase firearms.Thus it would seem to be a practical thing to expand this program to other states. This is a photo ID card, and their cost for this registration is $10, which is cheaper than my cost to register as a pot user.There was some reluctance regarding DNA and fingerprinting (altho imho they likely already have it) so we can drop those for now.Training and strict standards for gun ownership shows up in proposal #46, and thus these three proposals can be combined into one revised proposal: This registration could also be used to regulate whether a person can get a hunting license, as there is no "right to hunt" in the Constitution.It could also be used for "instant background checks" by calling the national registry or going on-line and using the FOID registration number to see that the background check is up to date.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : ...

Hi RAZD, The second amendment to the constitution protects the right of the people to possess and bear Arms from the government infringing on that right.The second amendment does not grant the right to possess and bear Arms. The people had the right to possess and bear Arms prior to the Federal government being formed.The constitution has no amendment that guarantees the government can not infring on your rights to possess and operate a motor vehicle.So yes there are things that need to be controled.The right to possess and bear Arms is not one of them without changing the constitution. I did that is the reason I asked the question because I never made the claim you said I made. I was taught if you wanted to survive in war you did not look at what kind of a weapon your opponent had you just made sure he did not use his weapon.I made several references to what I was talking about but I will repeat it for you one last time.I don't care who you are. If you break in my house through either of the steel doors or through the steel storm shutters you will be dead by the time you get in the house. I don't care what kind of a weapon you have because if you go to all the trouble it would take to get in my house you would not have good intentions. And I am not going to discuss it with you over tea and crumpets. I am not sure which statistics you are talking about as I did not mention any in the post you are replying too.But if you want some I will give you a couple. Between 460,000 and 2.5 million times guns are used to protect law abiding citizens from someone that is intent on doing them bodily harm or relieve them of their posessions. It just depends on whose numbers you use. The government during Clintons adminstration determined that 1.5 million law abiding citizens used guns to protect themselvs or their family,every year. If he believes his life is important to him/her they better not break into my house. So, according to you I should say, hey fellow, lets sit down and discuss the situation you find yourself in. When I don't know whether he has a handgun, knife or whatever. You can do that if you want too, I will not. So far as I know I do not have an enemy that is personally known to me.Why do I need justification for anything.What gives anybody the right to break into my house? Where have I ever said I would shoot someone trying to break into my house?I said if they broke into my house they would be dead just as soon as they were inside my house.If someone was knocking on my door in my neighborhood I would know who was on the other side of the door. And since it is lit up where you can see I would be able to tell if they had a weapon visible. If I did not know them and I know everyone in my neighborhood I would inform them I was calling 911. But if they broke into my house I would shoot when they entered my house, and I would not shoot to wound. That is not the way I was trained in the military. I told you in the message you are replying too but you seem to be getting to the point you can't read or understand what you read.In Message 758 I said:

quote:

---

Simple, the army did not obey Mubarek's orders and fire on the people. If they had it would have been a lot worse that Syria. Hint: the US was paying the soldiers salary's.

---

Pay close attention to the HINT. I have those also because one day I may need them. But so far I have never had to use any of them. Does that mean I should drop them or should I keep them just in case?Well I have a Ruger 44 magnum loaded with hollow points as an insurance policy that no one will break into my house and do my wife or myself bodily harm. What part of: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." do you not understand?Actually it was the Democatic party that wanted to keep the slaves on the plantations. And now they have them back on the plantation along with a lot of white slaves that are totally dependent upon the Democratic party to supply their needs. And a lot of the Republicans go right along with the plan. I have never agreed to not being able keep and bear arms and never will.When you get all the criminals off the streets get back to me and we will discuss it. The constitution was a contract entered into by the states that drew up the constitution and those states who have joined that union.Having experienced mistreatment at the hands of the British government, writers of the United States Constitution were careful to limit the powers of government and protect the rights of individuals. The primary purpose of federal government was to:1. Defend the shores
2. Establish a system of currency
3. Deliver the mail
4. Protect individual rightsThat is what the contract was. You are getting bad about putting words in peoples mouth, you should refrain from that. It is unbecoming of you.I have enough food supplies to last me until I can grow another crop. So your assumption is way off base and boderline on caracter assination. Well I like wild meat (deer, turkey, quail, wild hogs, etc) so I couldn't ever be to the point I did not need my guns.I do agree that an ideal society of people would be a lot different that the people in the world today.Let me muse a bit.An ideal world would be:A place where everyone had everything they needed and wanted.
No one would have to work.
There would be no death.
There would be no sickness.
There would be no pain.
There would be no sorrow.
There would be no jails.
There would be no thieves.
There would be no liars.
There would be no shortage of anything.
I would get to live in a mansion.BTW you can read about such a place in Revelation chapters 21 and 22.But as far as this world and the people living in it ever coming to the point that there is no thieves or murders is impossible.Mankind is depraved and wicked and no laws can control or stop a person that is determined to kill a bunch of people to get themselves plastered all over the TV'sGod Bless,