Guns

there is no proof that he was insane or unreachable. unless you have access to his personal file (and i'm fairly certain that it has not and will not be released. i don't think privilege ends just because he's dead), you have no way of knowing this. further, this in no way necessarily precludes him from knowing that what he did was wrong.

you made the post. you clear things up. you are consistently creating strawmen in this thread. all americans with guns are insecure hillbillies; all people with guns are homocidal maniacs incapable of self-control; all people who oppose gun control want every person to own and use immense, outdated WWI equipment; the constitution only protects single shot arms; and instead of stabbing a person in the arm, a drunken fool's only action with a gun would be to shoot the victim between the eyes.your arguments are against an enemy you have constructed inside your own brain. try joining us here in this debate.

anyone with ordinary access to the facility should definitely be required to participate. however there are those who would never join the fight anyways. they should not be required to participate. if you're willing to entertain mandatory training, i'm more than willing to support it.

sure. but that doesn't mean he was incapable of knowing the wrongness of his actions.

you have intimated all of the above in an effort to demonstrate the alleged insupportability of your opponents' arguments. and now you're further alleging that i'm not clearheaded enough to be involved in this argument. you're not debating honestly, and it sums up to you participating in your own name calling. now stop it.

now i'm paranoid and a conservative. you're clearly incapable of reading. no. i'm saying it's your fault that we haven't got a number of reported accidental deaths as i've asked you for it more than four times.

http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns http://EvC Forum: Guns -->EvC Forum: Guns these are just a few of your "elaborations". should i continue? i'm not making this shit up. if you think you didn't say it, you are sorely mistaken.

i'm asking about accidental death numbers because you keep railing about the accidental deaths that guns cause that knives or what have you would not. you keep proclaiming all these deaths, so show them to us. schraf's post didn't include numbers on accidental deaths, but rather gun use in domestic violence and homicide where women were victimized.i've been asking you throughout this thread and in the last one to produce some kind of numbers. any at all. when wing said something about the 32 at vt you went off on him that more than 32 people were killed accidentally each year. but did you give a real number? no.you're actively avoiding the issue. stop it.

what i'm saying is:there is a huge expanse of gun owners between the swiss and drunken hillbillies and you've artificially created the dichotomy.you've created the false reality that the only place a drunk person would accidentally shoot someone is in the head.that people stockpile automatic weapons for their children to play with or that these are the only people who own automatic weaponsand that you're a pain. oh, that's mature.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

i'm claiming nothing of the sort. see? there you go again building strawmen to attack the intelligence of your opponents. i just ask for some fucking numbers. thank you. jesus. was that so fucking hard?so we have 12 thousand homicides which are already illegal
17 thousand suicides which could be prevented with counseling
and 900 accidental deaths which could be prevented with some simple safety courses or safety measures. i'm not interested in stabbing deaths. you're the one that brought these up. i simply used it to illustrate the question i was asking since you keep mentioning them. i'm frankly not even concerned with accidental deaths outside of asking you for the above numbers. with me it's really another undue burden question. it doesn't place an undue burden on a prospective gun owner to require a waiting period, a family-wide safety class, a psychological evaluation, a background check, and to require that a gun and ammo is safely locked away in some fashion (even if it's a locked nightstand drawer). it does create an undue burden to ban the ownership of all firearms. where should the line exist of what arms are permitted? i really don't know. i'm tempted towards no restrictions of variety except maybe through longer waiting periods and stricter background searches.we don't restrict rights without very clear and demonstrable proof. i understand that people can be killed more easily with a gun. i also understand that that's kind of the point.i also understand that the guy at vt had previously tried to purchase the supplies necessary to build a bomb. there are lots of ways to kill people and lots of ways to stop people from doing crazy shit. if we know now that he tried to buy fertilizer, why couldn't we have known then? should there be an alert on people with past involuntary psychological institutionalization who try to buy anything that might contribute to killing? maybe. would that be more useful than an all out ban on various tools or substances?and why the fuck can't i buy sudafed. i'm dying. goddamnit.
sorry. completely off-topic.

really? must have missed it. oh well. eyeballs.

and yet no one has suggested their "comprehensive policy plan," which i have tried to do in a few posts. (not the above one.) absolutely. tax, tax, tax. it's brilliant stuff really. sure. if all we had access to was paper, people would slice each other to death. it would take a long time, but someone would try. i think that depends on the drug and whether you take to little and make yourself sick or too much and reject it. maybe it's the first sign people notice, but i really doubt it's the first actual sign. i think they are. just saying "this isn't a toy" can do a great deal. now when i say simple, i don't mean short or overly basic, i mean safe gun training like you take to get a license but based on age and whether that person should be handling the gun or not. also, requiring that guns be locked up at all times unless in use or transit by the licensed owner(s) is a big help. absolutely. i think that qualifies as an above mentioned mandatory safety measure. the nra can go fuck itself. that means being there before the counter closes. *shakes fist*i'm really just trying to bring in a little lightheartedness. cause this whole thread has its panties in a bunch. i understand it's a very serious matter, but it really doesn't require the kind of nastiness that's going on.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

see, i did see that and forgot about it. i apologize. there's been a lot of fighting and a lot of being mean and that first page just got lost. i know, i's being difficult. but many people do demonstrate symptoms that can be identified if people know what to watch for. my ideas of national policies of mental improvement don't really belong in this thread. but it goes along with my thoughts on using a well funded education system to instruct on racism, sexism, sex ed, depression, and so forth. i don't expect it to work in isolation. but i'd hope it would be more useful than that. boys are so difficult

well that's easy enough to say.where do you propose we draw it?i say we turn a new page in this thread and go in that direction. schraf reminded me of her ideas.message 12 my policy suggestion was listed here seems to not have been in one post (unless i managed to get it in the wrong thread somewhere) and is a little hard to follow, so i'll relist here. some of my suggestions are recently informed. (i was talking to my fiance about going to classes and a range and he said something about how expensive guns are and linked a few... i was not convinced that expensive is the right word.) i've generally avoided the reality of gun ownership out of lack of interest, so i'm learning a bit. that's always useful. anyways. on with the shit.-increased taxes on weapons and ammo.
-more effective background searches (integrated, national database).
-mandatory psychological evaluation.
-easily available gun safety courses for non-owners.
-mandatory safety and "sensitivity" training (for want of a better word) for owners as part of a waiting period in addition to whatever may already be required for licensure. (laws, what is defense...)
-mandatory child-proof trigger locks (i really thought that was already in place).
-mandates on safe gun storage (proof and inspection of proper facilities required for purchase. i hesitate to suggest periodic checks because to be effective, they'd have to be unannounced and that is an undue burden, and separately illegal. is someone going to waste time issuing a warrant to inspect a gun cabinet unannounced?).
-local infrascructure and mandatory training for interested non-regular forces to eliminate the need for excessive private collections for "freedom fighters" like me volunteer fire department, meet volunteer local militia.
-increases waiting period for second and higher parity purchases, say an extra month tacked on for the parity level (one for the second gun, two for the third...). this should be tempered with good behavior bonuses. afficianados who demonstrate that they only use weapons in ranges or responsible and incident-free hunting should not be overly punished with this. there should be a max extra time (say whatever double would be, maybe).i'm sure i could think of a few more things.
what would you like to add?Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

the burden of proof would be on the prosecutor to demonstrate that the weapon was in fact not properly secured. i agree in principle, but just because access was gained doesn't mean it wasn't secured. yes. case in point, vt, i believe. it is a small point, but jon does have a real issue with the collector thing. perhaps there should be a separate collector's license which requires that none of the weapons or munitions purchased under that license can ever be discharged or used. this would probably require separate storage for collection and non-collection weapons and loss of licensure in the case of a breach of the collection license non-use rule. also, if any more deadly weapons are permitted in these collections (grenades, whatnot), they should be disabled. this is kind of complex, but i think it easily solves that complaint.also, those kinds of munitions should be permitted in the case of my suggested local militia armories. keep in mind, weapons and munitions in these armories should be accessible only for training or emergencies and must be under tight guard.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.