The Gun Control THINK TANK thread

[StrongHeartsWin]

Aside from the debate on banning guns or whether or not to increase gun control regs, for those of you who are in support of stricter gun control laws and how to lessen the damages caused by guns, what ideas could you put forth to aid in controling guns so that that damage caused by them is limited in scope?

Think of this as a round table discussion or think tank where in which the question of gun control has already been decided, and we are now just brain storming on how to go about it and how far (but not all the way to banning them).

Personally, I am not for a ban, because at a fundamental level I do have respect for the 2nd Ammendment and believe direct action at the citizen level can keep a government in check from becoming an institute of tyranny. But, how to keep the spirit of the ammendment in place but limit the impact of guns in our society is a question I think is deserving of exploring -- and I think that inherently entails regulating the ownership of guns.

I`ll wait a while before I add some ideas and let some of you go first. On some of the other gun threads I have already seen some, and think that a thread like this here will allow for collecting those ideas in one area.

[CoffeeSaint]

My best idea is really just an attempt to bring a paradigm shift. If guns weren't cool, then it would greatly reduce the negative impact they have on our society, as untrained and incompetent people wouldn't have the same impetus to own and use them, and they would not be coveted and collected and resorted to in times of stress as often as they are.

The first step to that paradigm shift is to reduce the importance of our military. We need to stop thinking of our country as the biggest badass on the block, as that image is created by the strength of our military. So the first step to reducing guns is to reduce the military: make it smaller, use it less, etc. etc.

[Heather]

Quote by: CoffeeSaint My best idea is really just an attempt to bring a paradigm shift. If guns weren't cool, then it would greatly reduce the negative impact they have on our society...

I agree with your thoughts here. In addition, I think the "guns are cool" mentality could easily be stifled with proper parenting, guidance, and education.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Someone on one of the other gun threads, don`t remember who, suggested that gun owners be required to buy insurance, just as car owners are required to do in many areas. I think this is a reasonable and quite prudent thing to do. A minimal liability coverage of $500,000 would suffice to pay for some of the costs that would come about through accidental or negligent killing or injuries.

Costs of policies could rise or fall according to age or number of previous mishaps with a firearm. Those that take an advanced safety or gun classes could get even further discounts. Further discounts could be given to those who purchase smart guns when those become more developed. Perhaps rifles should be charged a cheaper rate than handguns, as well as bolt actions less than clips for feeding automatic fireing features type weapons.

A whole new industry of insurance adding money and jobs to the economy to administer such a system could come about with an array of policy menues.

[Heather]

An interesting idea SHW, although I personally question it. My first thought behind requiring that gun owners purchase insurance being a flawed concept is that the higher majority of gun related crime and death comes from owners of guns that were illegally obtained in the first place.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Heather An interesting idea SHW, although I personally question it. My first thought behind requiring that gun owners purchase insurance being a flawed concept is that the higher majority of gun related crime and death comes from owners of guns that were illegally obtained in the first place.

Hi Heather,

I am not quite sure you are right on that, Heather. If my memory is correct, I think it was Fushigi in another thread that showed a higher likelyhood of gun injuries to be committed by guns within a family and that most of these are legally owned guns. In fact, I am going to go out on a limb and state that I believe most gun related injuries do come from legally owned and obtained guns. If the injuries from accidental wounding and killing rates are higher than intentional killing rates, that would lead me to believe even more that legally obtained and owned guns are more responsible in injuries and deaths than ilegally owned ones.

Even if I am wrong on that, still, a system in place to compensate for negligence by legally owned guns would help greatly lessen the impact to families that find themselves hurt in those situations.

I don`t think we can expect a perfectly fair system, but we should strive for the most ideal system obtainable. But, it is just one suggestion, and I am keen to see more and think of others to add to the discussion. Remember, it is not just about lessening the incidents of gun use, but also lessening the impact once injury or death has occured.

[5010]

By movie/tv, we are exposed at an early age to careless and negligent gun handling behaviors. This needs to be addressed.

Assuming that
- we retain the right to possess and carry guns for self protection
- we need to minimise dangers associated with such a right
- the lack of parental guidance on proper gun handling
I would recommend including a gun safety/respect curriculum in the education system. I'm not sure what grade this should be introduced. A study on child exposure to improper gun handling could provide the data needed to determine this.

[brien]

If guns weren't cool, then it would greatly reduce the negative impact they have on our society, as untrained and incompetent people wouldn't have the same impetus to own and use them, and they would not be coveted and collected and resorted to in times of stress as often as they are

Let's examine who creates the myth that guns are "cool". Generally speaking, it is from Hollywood where most people get their first, lasting, ongoing and most impressionable exposure to firearms. And it is as unrealistic as the tooth fairy. Everyday in film and TV, people are shot with guns point blank, and they aren't affected by the momentum of the bullet, they don't bleed, nor does Hollywoood show the awful affects of the torn flesh and broken bones that are all too often the effects of a shooting. The "John Wayne" effects of shootings persist into today's TV and films.

What is worse is the very people who produce and direct these films are primarily "anti gun" people who support the elimination of firearms as held by the everyday citizen, yet they, like Rosie O' Donnel, maintain armed bodyguards. They will advocate to take away my right to protect myself and hire armed body guards for themselves. The issue is rife with these hypocrites.

Most legal firearms owners are responsible people who understand, better than those who aren't firearms owners, the real responsiblity for those who keep and carry firearms. We understand the deadly nature of firearms as oppposed to those who merely watch the "Follywood" nonsense put across the screen where many people get their irresponsible ideas regarding firearms. Legal firearms owners are trained and educated as to the safety and responsiblity that comes with owning firearms. They have trained on the firing range and understand the velocity and ferocity of a projectile that hits a target at 1200 ft per second. Legal firearms owners aren't the problem in society. It is those who indulge in fantasy, misunderstanding, and ignorance of firearms who contribute to the problem of irresponsible and criminal use of firearms.

It is Hollywood, and those who aren't trained in the use and responsibility of firearms, that use all of the rhetoric born in their misundersatnding of firearms, which inflames a situation that is already rife with misconceptions. It is unrealistic and foolish Hollywood illustrations where the average citizen forms their misconceptions of firearms and the consequences of their use and misuse. It is people who use and visit firinig ranges who come away with a true educated sense of reality with regard to firearms.

It is Hollywood that is irresponsibile in its obligation in society to show the responsible consequences of the use and misue of firearms.They have a responsibility to be realistic in their portraits of the use of firearms in their industry, yet they do absolutely nothing of the kind. It is legal fireams owners are the most repsonsible members of society when it comes to their obligation with regard to the safety and their use of firearms. They understand what Hollywood doesn't; when someone is the victim of a shooting, they bleed, their flesh is torn, and their bones are broken. This is what makes us so cautious and intellectually responsible in these matters. Hollywood shirks their responsiblity to seriously depict the use of firearms in favor of their reckless approach that is as fake and phony as they are themselves.

This blatant and hypocritical position on firearms by Hollywood needs to be addressed before anyone comes to legal firearms owners and whines about the problem we have in society with regard to the the use and misuse of firearms. Either portray firearms, and the violent effects of them in a realistic manner, or don't use them at all in TV and films.

[brien]

Someone on one of the other gun threads, don`t remember who, suggested that gun owners be required to buy insurance, just as car owners are required to do in many areas

More "feel good" legislation that targets and penalizes the legal firearms owners and does nothing to solve the problem of the criminal use of firearms. The problem is NOT with legal firearms owners, it is with illegal use of firearms by criminals. Direct your soutions towards criminals, not the law abiding citizens, please.

[brien]

the higher majority of gun related crime and death comes from owners of guns that were illegally obtained in the first place.

Bingo. Give that woman a star. Even if the statistics don't bear this out, it is the criminal who uses a firearm in the commission of a crime that is the real problem in society that affects us all, not the accidental discharge of a firearm.

[Heather]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin I am not quite sure you are right on that, Heather.

I was able to find this article which offers the following on the subject:

Most gun crimes are committed by people who cannot legally own a firearm; sales to such people are by definition illegal.

Also, I wonder if life insurance policies take the ownership of a gun into consideration. I would be interested to hear for sure either way if anyone knows.



As to television, movies, video games, media; these are all things that should be monitored by parents.

[ZNFYRH]

brien

But dial the causality scale back a couple steps.

Every gun acquired illegally was once a legal gun.

Statistics of injuries or accidental household shootings or streetside muggings aside, all those guns were, at one point, legal.

Pick any gun used in an illegal crime and trace it back. Serial numbers are removed for that very reason. But if you could magically trace it back, you'd find that it didn't just leave the factory and get handed to a hood on the street.

Someone bought it legally.

The only way to prevent that initial, legal purchase is to not have the gun in the first place.

[Heather]

Quote by: ZNFYRH The only way to prevent that initial, legal purchase is to not have the gun in the first place.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression your suggesting that we shouldn't have guns at all?


To help prevent the illegal sale of guns, we need to better think ways to prevent the illegal sale, not the legal sellers, or the manufacture of guns to begin with.

It's a matter of guns falling into the hands of individuals who shouldn't legally have them, and sellers who shouldn't be selling guns.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: brien The problem is NOT with legal firearms owners, it is with illegal use of firearms by criminals. Direct your soutions towards criminals, not the law abiding citizens, please.

Hi Brien,

That, too, is fine. And I hope that you will brainstorm on some ideas to affect that part of the problem. I think there are a few ways we could tackle the different parts of this issue.

What would be your suggestion(s) in regards to making it more difficult for criminals to get posession of guns? Looking forward to hearing them.

[ZNFYRH]

Quote by: Heather It's a matter of guns falling into the hands of individuals who shouldn't legally have them, and sellers who shouldn't be selling guns.

Theory of Economics says that, according to your statement, the illegal sale of guns will continue.

Quote by: Heather Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression your suggesting that we shouldn't have guns at all?

It's the absolute extreme, guaranteed way to make sure that the use of guns in crime will die out.

[Heather]

Quote by: ZNFYRH Theory of Economics says that, according to your statement, the illegal sale of guns will continue.

I think what we're discussing here is how to minimize the impact of gun crimes. Yes, as it is right now the illegal sale and purchase of guns does occur, and the majority of crimes are committed by those who obtained those guns illegally. We have already established that. Do you have any useful suggestions as to how we could go about reducing the illegal sale and purchase of guns?

It's the absolute extreme, guaranteed way to make sure that the use of guns in crime will die out.

I doubt this. To make guns outright altogether illegal will not change the fact that there are plenty of guns out there. In fact, making it illegal, besides the fact that it would go against the constitution of which this country was founded, it would drive all guns underground into illegal sales and purchases making the problem even worse than it is currently.

[brien]

The only way to prevent that initial, legal purchase is to not have the gun in the first place.

Because someone may use something illegally is no reason to prevent its sale or manufacture. You can't penalize people who act in a legal manner because a small minority acts in an illegal manner. Focus your efforts upon those who act illegally, please.

[StrongHeartsWin]

All right, to keep in the spirit of furthering ideas on the issue of decreasing guns used for crime or negligent death and injury (remember, this is not a thread for debating the banning of guns); how about as technology for smart guns become more advanced, require manufacturers to make that an integral part of the feature?

I am not sure of the technology that would enable this to come about, but if sensors or some kind of combination, or whatever, could be added to the gun so that only the person to whom the gun was registered and sold to could fire it, then I think that could make an impact on gun use for crimes or accidental shootings.

[Heather]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin All right, to keep in the spirit of furthering ideas on the issue of decreasing guns used for crime or negligent death and injury (remember, this is not a thread for debating the banning of guns); how about as technology for smart guns become more advanced, require manufacturers to make that an integral part of the feature? I am not sure of the technology that would enable this to come about, but if sensors or some kind of combination, or whatever, could be added to the gun so that only the person to whom the gun was registered and sold to could fire it, then I think that could make an impact on gun use for crimes or accidental shootings.

Interesting idea. How about one of those fingertip reader devices. I've seen these used on laptops and well as employment time clocks, etc.

One could easily have their finger on the gun while it reads.

But then we bring into the picture the problem of hackers... :eek:

[ZNFYRH]

Quote by: Heather I doubt this. To make guns outright altogether illegal will not change the fact that there are plenty of guns out there. In fact, making it illegal, besides the fact that it would go against the constitution of which this country was founded, it would drive all guns underground into illegal sales and purchases making the problem even worse than it is currently.

That is why I also stated that bullets should also not be manufactured.

Quote by: brien Because someone may use something illegally is no reason to prevent its sale or manufacture. You can't penalize people who act in a legal manner because a small minority acts in an illegal manner. Focus your efforts upon those who act illegally, please.

Those who act illegally have either legally acquired a gun or illegally acquired a gun.

At some point in the long chain of causality that gun was, at some point, acquired legally.

If you stop making guns available for legal purchase, they can't illegally end up in someone's hands.

If you stop making ammunition for guns, the existing guns will not be used.

For every suggestion on how to prevent illegal acquisition of a gun, there is a counter. Hackers to fingerprint scanners. Corrupt cops selling confiscated guns.

You cannot produce a tool and then try to find ways to stop specific people from using it, especially when the Constitution allows people the right to have that tool.

The only way to stop the negative consequences of illegal use of the tool is to not have the tool in the first place.