A discussion of Gun Control for schrafinator

Well, let's explore that.The goal is to keep the BGs from buying guns through private parties.Well, there is no paperwork to turn in to law enforcement even now, including from Dealers unless the person buys more than two guns in a seven day period.Second, in a private sale there is no external trigger to show that anything happened. Those who wish to get around it simply won't report it. So what would it accomplish? What is the mechanism that would help?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Well, there is no paperwork to turn in to law enforcement even now, including from Dealers unless the person buys more than two guns in a seven day period.

---

But they do have to keep a record of each purchase, and they do have to run a criminal background check.I think private sellers should also have to report when someone buys more than two guns in a seven day period.Why should private sales be exempt from this?

quote:

---

Second, in a private sale there is no external trigger to show that anything happened. Those who wish to get around it simply won't report it. So what would it accomplish? What is the mechanism that would help?

---

People who are law-abiding and don't want to sell a gun to a criminal would likely be amenable to keeping a record of the sale and to doing a criminal background check if it was required by law.At leat there would be a paper trail if the gun was used in a crime, perhaps telling law enforcement where the perpetrator was at one time.I think that registering guns with their owners, and licensing people to own and operate firearms, just like we register cars with their owners and require a basic knowledge of how to operate a vehicle and the traffic laws, would be a great idea.Then, the registration is transferred to the new owner just like in a private car sale.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-06-2004 08:55 PM

Well, that's where you and I will have to disagree. Registration is one of the first steps in the chain towards confiscation, and it's one that no gun owner will take graciously. Well, if the gun has been recovered it's usually pretty easy to trace it back to its source even today. If the gun has not been recovered, it's pretty close to impossible to trace it anyway.So just to make sure we all understand how things like that work, can you give us a short summary of how you think gun tracing or ballistic identification works? I think it would be worthwhile to actually go through the steps since there is a lot of missinformation about that shown in the movies.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Registration is one of the first steps in the chain towards confiscation, and it's one that no gun owner will take graciously.

---

If it's in the constitution, and you own your guns legally, why should you fear?By the way, why have you suddenly become really quiet on the subject of criminal background checks once I pointed out that they were cheap and easy to do on the internet?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-06-2004 09:31 PM

We'll come back to criminal background checks and the public services, but basically, the public services are about as accurate as some of the credit reports. Been trying to get one of them straightened out for a friend for nearly three years now. LOL Because I see signs near daily of our government trying to take away rights that were assured under the Constitution. No sense making it easy.So how about explaining to us how you believe tracing, guns or bullets are done?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't really like you attempting to be in control of the questions and answers in this thread.I have said it before, I don't think you are honestly answering my questions, yet you expect me to honestly answer yours.I haven't been coy in my answers, yet you have been quite coy with yours.I have asked you to back up your assertions with facts on a number of occasions and you just kind of glide over them and go on to asking me something we weren't discussing.Why do you disbelieve the FBI when they say that gun shows are a significant source of guns for criminal activity?

quote:

---

Maybe instead of worrying about trying to limit guns as a MEANS of suicide you should focus more on the SOURCE of most suicides: depression. If a person wants to kill themself they only need find the nearest tall building, start their car in a closed garage, etc.

---

It takes planning and effort to find a tall building one can get to the top of. They can also be seen by other people and possibly stopped or distracted.Carbon monoxide poisoning takes a long time and can be uncomfortable.A gunshot is intantaneous and deadly and doesn't require leaving the house, or even the bed.I would imagine that the "instantaneous" part is attractive to people who don't want to feel any pain.

quote:

---

More funding to help educate people about looking for the warning signs of depression (in both themselves and others) and what to do if they see them would go a LOT farther in reducing suicides than even if you could magically make every gun disappear.

---

Possibly.Having a gun in the house makes a suicide more likely to be successful, though. There are certainly other methods, but most other methods are more likely to be survived.That's why guns are so popular. They are very good at killing.

quote:

---

If a person doesn't want to kill themself then they won't commit suicide, guns or no guns.

---

But if they do want to kill themselves and a gun is in the house, they are very likely to use it.

well, I have not been able to find that quote from the FBI, only references from HCI and they have about the same credibility as ICR or Dr. Dino.An analysis by David B. Kopel (an associate policy analyst at the Cato Institute) shows far different statistics. But back on the thread, can you please explain how you understand tracing of guns or bullets is done? This is related to what we are discussing. You have said that private sellers of guns should keep records. You said that it would provide a paper trail if a gun was used in a crime. For that to happen, it is necessary to understand how the process would work. So, please, answer the question.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

That's true but it is financial information only and only used to protect the lender. So how would the financial data relate to gun ownership?

---

It wouldn't, but a record of criminal activity woukd potect the seller from selling a gun to a criminal.If criminal background checks for private sales became the law, then a private seller would be held accountable if they sell a gun to someone who is a criminal.

quote:

---

well, I have not been able to find that quote from the FBI, only references from HCI and they have about the same credibility as ICR or Dr. Dino.

---

Sorry, I misremenbered FBI.What I should have said is the ATF, the Department of the Treasury, and the Justice Department.Are they equivalent to Hovind to you?Page not found - Game Online Menarik 2020 Do you have a link to the studies cited?I'd like to read them for myself and not take the analysis of a conservative policy analyst at face value.

Well, I've been over the ATF site and haven't found that yet. Can you help?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, how would that work. To be effective there would need to be some way of tracking the gun's histroy. That brings us back to the process of tracking. Can you explain how you think that works?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
there are several companies which produce very popular low quality handguns that are used frequently in criminal activity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------Making a low cost product in and of itself isn't bad. I shop at Wal-Mart all the time. As to people misusing the product I say it is bad. But again, let's try and fix the root of the problem. Why are people committing crimes in the first place? It's not because they have a gun. I don't need to list the social problems that are plaguing many of our cities today. Fixing these social problems would cut down on ALL types of crime, including those that are non-gun related.quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Theses guns generally fail the "drop test" in which they often will discharge when dropped.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------I agree with you on this one Schraf. There is no reason a firearm should fail a drop test, especially in this day and age. Making a manufacturor produce a quality product is a very reasonable request. This particular safety standard would not infringe upon the right to own and use a firearm. But before you load up the wagon and go to town on me for saying that this doesn't mean that the government should be able to do anything it wants simply in the name of safety. Safety is a good thing. We should always strive to make all areas of our life safer, but NOT if it comes at the cost of giving up those rights that our nation was founded upon. Like I have said time and time again. Let's start looking at the roots of all these problems and come up with ways to fix them that do not take away ANY of our rights.This message has been edited by xavier999, 08-07-2004 02:49 AM

Sorry about that. Your posts kind of fell throught the cracks when contracycle started replying.

It takes planning and effort to find a tall building one can get to the top of. They can also be seen by other people and possibly stopped or distracted.

[trumpet playing]. OK, Shraf, I have to raise the flag on this one. Planning and effort to find a tall building? Distracted from killing themself? Let's not forget about bridges, cliffs, water towers, radio towers, and grain elevators (for those in the Midwest). I'm not saying there is no truth to what you said, but just so little that it can't really be used to draw the conclusion you have made. (OK, so the trumpet was a little overdramatic)

Carbon monoxide poisoning takes a long time and can be uncomfortable.

Not according to the CDC. It can be very quick. It may be nausiating, but it may not. Note that high levels (the kind you would find from someone intentionally trying to kill themself) can cause unconsciousness rather quickly (thus no more pain). Looks like 2,000 people do it every year.CDC - Page Not Found

I would imagine that the "instantaneous" part is attractive to people who don't want to feel any pain.

While it may make it more attractive as a method, that does not mean that they would not take other means if they are the only ones available.

More funding to help educate people about looking for the warning signs of depression (in both themselves and others) and what to do if they see them would go a LOT farther in reducing suicides than even if you could magically make every gun disappear. ​ Possibly.

Reducing the internal motives for suicide would ABSOLUTELY reduce the number of suicides.

Having a gun in the house makes a suicide more likely to be successful, though. There are certainly other methods, but most other methods are more likely to be survived.

Most, but not all. Remember that a suicide attempt is not always about killing yourself, but is often done as a cry for help. If a person has decided they want to kill themself and have decided to do it in a way that they cannot be stopped they don't need a gun. A gun might be one method they would choose, but certainly need not be the only one.

But if they do want to kill themselves and a gun is in the house, they are very likely to use it.

So let's stop them from getting to that point in the first place. Let's help out those who are depressed. Let's train our teachers to look for signs of depression in their students. This way people don't kill themself (with guns or by ANY other means) and the right to bear arms is not infringed.This message has been edited by xavier999, 08-07-2004 04:07 AM