1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gun Advice

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by KeyFin, Feb 15, 2018.

  1. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,700
    8,543
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Feel for ya brother....but you did the right thing.

    I have a teenage daughter just a little younger and I certainly wouldn't sit on my hands and see what happened. Good for you, and hopefully those little losers find something else to fulfill the necessary drama in their lives soon.
     
    Boik14 and KeyFin like this.
  2. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets

    6,320
    2,492
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    1,000% THIS!!!

    My oldest is an amazing young lady, I won't go on a daddy bragging binge but trust me, she's top 1%. Volunteers at the zoo and in her school, has two jobs, top of her class,, I don't know how we did it, but she's a damn good kid. OK maybe a little bragging :cool0:
    And she comes home and cries because her peers are some of the cruelest most unkind people in the world. It seems like our National Pastime has become punking each other, breaking someone else down in order to be cool. And kids are vicious, like piranha one sniff of blood in the water and they school up and feast.
    They are being trained to divide, to fear the others, devour to survive. That's not what made America great.
     
    Boik14, KeyFin, smahtaz and 1 other person like this.
  3. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    Exactly. I feel for these kids, I really do, but half of them are the reason these kids go insane. As Key has written, social media is a huge problem. (In fact, something I thought about, but not to the extent since Key wrote what he did) I can understand their frustrations and sadness, but they are kids and know jack **** about how to deal with this problem. The fact that they are walking out of school is absurd. The fact that they have been allowed to walk out of school is mindboggling.

    At the other end I think an elephant in the room that no one wants to address is this: (Now, hear me out before you skewer me)

    It used to be that the "different" kids were told, "Stop being that way" or "If you keep acting like this you'll never have friends". Nowadays these same kids are told, "It's OK baby, you be what you want to be. You don't have to change for anybody." And 1 out of 100 of these "weird" kids are really insane and are being told they are "normal" and it's OK. I hope some of you understand my point, I don't think I'm explaining it well. Anyhow, I'm against bullying, just in case someone throws that out there. I tell my kids all the time, "Being a nice person is the greatest accomplishment you can achieve. I'll never be more proud of you than the time you befriend the kid with no friends. And if I ever hear of you bullying a person I will never be more disappointed."
     
    Fin-O and KeyFin like this.
  4. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,627
    7,375
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I completely agree with you- my older kid knew she had problems by 13-14 and all she wanted to know was, "Who am I? Why do I feel this way sometimes?" All the doctors could tell her was that she'd have to be on medications her entire life to balance out the ups and downs. And what the heck were we supposed to say?

    I was the realist saying if you treat your friends/family that way, they won't stick around- you need to apologize and learn from this. My daughter hated me for always being the "mean parent" but I don't regret it one bit...I wasn't going to lie to her or sugarcoat anything. She had to work harder than everyone else and there was no way around that.
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2018
    Puka-head and danmarino like this.
  5. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,627
    7,375
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Same here- my kid was being honored at one of the best music colleges in the nation as the best sax player in the state for her age...and six days later she wanted to quit band completely. And I can't help but think how much of the hate from other kids was jealousy- they don't see the 2-4 hours a day our kid voluntarily practices so she can be the best. Instead of encouraging her though, they all just knocked her down and ruined what should have been an awesome weekend. It makes me so darn mad but that's how kids are today- social media has made them all superficial know-it-all brats.

    My kid got through it though and she's stronger now because of it. All I can say to everyone else is to watch your kids closely, be that parent who combs through their phones every few weeks and don't hesitate to take action if you see something wrong. When it comes to social media and bullying, the best defense is a strong offense...you have to take charge and say "this isn't happening".

    Your kid has likely bullied others as well without even realizing it, so that's definitely a good conversation to have about what it can do to someone long-term in this new social world.
     
    danmarino and Puka-head like this.
  6. invid

    invid Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,603
    3,160
    113
    Dec 9, 2012
    I just think a lot of these kids feel alienated and isolated, without a voice, in real life. When you introduce social media, it's like that reality x2. It's just an ocean to have your voice drowned out. These kids have no outlet, whether that's a productive hobby or someone they have enough trust in to talk to. Unfortunately, they feel like the only voice they have is a loud, violent one.

    This is just a general feeling I have towards these mass shootings, none of this is rooted in any fact. Just thought I'd clarify that.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  7. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,793
    26,981
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I don't think there is a single solution to gun deaths.
    I think the social media issue is real and I have no idea how to solve it.
    I don't believe longer sentences would have any effect. Every study I've seen on the deterrent effect of longer sentences says they don't have a deterrent effect. If I were deciding whether to rob a bank I might consider if it's worth 5 or 10 years of my life if caught, but criminals don't tend to be rational actors.
    I do think making it more difficult to buy guns would have an effect. That approach seems to have worked in Japan although it is extreme. Getting a gun there requires a very rigorous mental health check, classes, etc., and you have to renew it every three years. They have very few shootings and presumably far fewer people with guns. This would probably have an indirect impact on the social media issue. It wouldn't solve it but it would limit how often the gun would be the tool resorted to.
    I don't think arming teachers will have a deterrent effect for similar reasons as the longer sentences. It may have the effect of providing protection, but it will be limited. As I stated at the beginning of this thread, guns don't make people safer. I used to work at a City Attorney's office and many of our cases involved defending officers involved in shootings. The police studies found that officers in stressful situations usually hit with 17% of their bullets. Regardless of how great their proficiency was at the range, the real world reality was pretty low. Obviously, officers train/practice much more than a typical teacher would. So I would expect that teachers in a shooting situation would be spraying bullets that would potentially hit something other than their target something greater than 83% of the time.
    Restricting assault rifles might have a very limited impact. I don't know that there's any additional lethality, but I do think it fuels into the soldier fantasy of the kind of person committing mass shootings. It probably wouldn't have any effect on the other types of shootings.
     
    Puka-head and KeyFin like this.
  8. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Canada has a lot of guns and none of this problem.

    The problem is inherent in Americans. Our values obviously don't mesh well with near unchecked gun ownership.

    We are like children. If we can't handle the responsibility, and we clearly can not, then we should have them taken from us, until we learn how to handle the responsibility. We brought it on ourselves.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  9. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Less than one out of every 3 people in Canada have a gun. Compared to the US that's not even close.

    However, Canada has had it's fair number of school and mass shootings. Canada's population is about 1/10th of the US population. California has more people living in it than Canada.

    Saying that, the US definitely has a culture problem and that culture is slowly finding it's way up North.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  10. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,627
    7,375
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    We have a member here that's a teacher in Canada and it's been extremely tough on them with massive budget cuts, the government trying to cancel pensions, not paying them for lunch-supervision and before/after school, etc. Their govt has even gone as far as calling the teachers greedy crooks for asking to be paid what the previous administrations guaranteed them, so it's not a good situation at all.

    I don't know anything about shootings up there...but I do know that the teachers aren't happy and really worried about job security.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  11. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,627
    7,375
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, when you shoot/shoot at multiple targets, the sentencing stuff doesn't matter- you're getting natural life in prison or the death penalty. So I don't think those laws help at all.

    I already talked about social media so I'll skip that one- I also believe that it's very real on a number of levels (not only the bullying, but making kids feel more alone, more depressed, etc.)

    I also agree on the stricter gun laws (background checks, mental evaluations, delayed ownership, etc.) but I'm not sure what you do TODAY with so many guns already in circulation. And what do you do about used guns (pawn shops, person to person sales, etc)? That would be a monumental task to better regulate all of that. Maybe make a new law that if you don't re-register your firearms and take the classes/checks every 2-4 years, they're illegal? At least that would make the government a ton of money to use as a resource.

    Or if we want to "pass the buck", make the NRA fully certify all legal gun owners and fine the crap out of them for every shooter that slips through the cracks.

    I'm for arming teachers IF the teachers want to be armed. I would want those teachers to be police trained through summer and/or weekend courses and give them police powers, much like a part-time deputy or reserve officer. If we're going to do it, then let's do it all the way and make sure we have good, responsible marksmen inside schools.

    For the assault rifles; I don't know the answer there- how do you remove something like that from the streets? Would that cause more school shootings short-term as people worry about the new laws? We don't have access to that kind of data to really know the answer there.
     
  12. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Lots of great points here Raf.

    There is certainly not a one solution fix for this problem.

    I think the point of making the sentences longer is you don't have these criminals using jail as a revolving door. You shoot someone or commit armed robbery you should be doing more than the 3-8 years average. Put someone like that away for 15-20 and see if that's enough time to change them. It will also keep them off of the streets for 15-20 years which will in turn lower the number of people like that on the streets.

    I have no problem with making people jump through hoops in order to purchase ANY type of firearm. I'd gladly give my guns to the state and go through a mandatory 1 year training and mental eval to get them back if it meant no schools would be shot up.

    I think the point of arming teachers is just a catch all phrase. Basically, making schools gun free zones makes the students and teachers sitting ducks. I think the point is, make everyone know that there may be one or more people on campus armed. I do think this would be a deterrent. Another fact is, as a lone shooter is approaching his victims cowering in the corner, if even one of them had a gun they could at least TRY to defend themselves. Better than nothing, IMO.

    One thing I disagree with you on is that guns don't make people safer. That is just flat out wrong. If they didn't cops wouldn't carry, air marshals wouldn't carry, military members wouldn't carry, and I wouldn't carry. Cops, for the most part, suck at shooting when in high pressure situations. I've touched on this in this thread. The problem isn't the stress, however, the problem is lack of training. 90% of all departments need more training. I shot just as well in real life as I did at the range. Why? Because Marines train and train and train and train some more.

    I also touched on the AR empowering people. The media and movies have hyped this rifle like nothing else. I equate it to the pit bull situation. A lot of people think pit bulls are somehow stronger or ferocious than other dog breeds their size. Some think they have a "locking" jaw. None of this is true. However, what's happened is morons, due to the hype, get pit bulls and treat them badly and then the dogs bite people. Same thing with the AR. An AR is no more dangerous than any other type of firearm. In fact, a .22 handgun was used to kill multiple people in the VA Tech shooting...along with a 9mm handgun. And that was the deadliest school shooting in American history.
     
  13. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets

    6,320
    2,492
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    Can I respectfully ask that you stop excusing the weapons role in mass shootings. Firearms in general make people superhuman. Semi-auto weapons create a whole new dimension to that dementia.

    Yes, all firearms are deadly. But when whackadoodles go wahckadoodle they go for the deadliest weapon they can easily acquire.
     
  14. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    I've clearly stated that the firearm plays a role. It's just not a very big role. The person plays the biggest part in these massacres.

    For example, and I've stated this a few times now with nary a response, the deadliest school shooting in American history happened with a .22 cal handgun and a 9mm handgun. Ask Robert Kennedy how a .22cal pistol feels. Oh, you can't because he was killed by one. lol An AR is really no more deadly than those weapons at close range. It will, however, travel further and more rapidly through the body in most instances. Although, I've shot through a frozen turkey at 200 yards with a 40gr .22 round. The problem is that people are being led to believe, falsely, that the AR is the "deadliest weapon" and so they tend to choose that one. A shotgun would have killed and injured more people in this latest shooting.
     
    Den54 likes this.
  15. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,793
    26,981
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Statistically, guns not making people safer is a fact. Accidental shootings, suicides, etc., are far more common than situations where people have to use a gun to defend themselves. The military is obviously a different situation b/c you're training for situations where you will be defending/attacking people in a gun v. gun situations. Outside of those involved in the drug trade most people don't face gun v. gun situations very often. And in fact there are many countries whose police don't carry guns.

    As for stress not being a factor, I disagree. It is a fact that increased heart rate is correlated to decreased shooting accuracy. There are some people who don't experience increased heart rates during combat or fight situations but they are certainly not the majority. I doubt it would be possible to field a police force made up of just such people. And while increased training can provide some small improvements in a police forces overall accuracy in combat situations, the margins are small. Several departments have attempted improve their in field accuracy through increased training from military models and it has not worked. Policing involves many other tasks. It's simply not economically viable to have police training all the time for combat situations. That's also why I doubt having teachers carry guns will change anything. They'll never be able to train enough to be even as accurate as police (which is poor) are in real-life situations. That will make them pretty ineffective in actually stopping the shooter. I also don't believe that a person who is planning to shoot up a school b/c they were bullied or some other reason will decide not to b/c the law allows teachers to carry guns.

    And economic viability is also an issue with just putting everybody in prison. We already incarcerate a huge percentage of the population. Despite having a huge number of prisons, we have to release people early all the time. That is something that is already not working.
     
  16. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,700
    8,543
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Issue with automatic weapons is it allows the idiots to do much more damage and gives them the ability to carryout this media driven fkd in the head fantasy.

    Make no mistake, it is the little troubled bastards fault these things happen (along with the media where they get the idea in the first place). However, I can't think of one good reason a civilian needs to own an automatic weapon. I mean.....why?

    AS someone who would never claim to commit to a political party, I find it amusing that both of those sides are angry with the Donald, when he NAILED it.

    Somehow someway, saying "we have to have much stricter background checks" somehow pissed off talking heads and headline readers the same. Want some irony for the idiots on both sides??? HE IS RIGHT.

    In short.

    - The person is the number one reason dumb things happen.
    - The media attention is the reason these things are now happening in bulk. How many schools have closed to "threats"? Must be a coincidence.
    - There is no justifiable reason a civilian needs to have an assault rifle, its not cool it doesn't add hair on your *** and it is an unnecessary risk to make and sell these things.

    You're all right yet all wrong.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  17. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Not true at all.

    The real facts show that nearly 1.5 million people in the US defend themselves every year using a firearm (Not including police). Compared to the 30,000 TOTAL firearm related deaths in a year and you see why it's not true.

    Stress is not the factor. In fact, stress, if trained properly (training is the real factor in regards to police accuracy) actually helps a person shoot more accurately. Not once did I ever fire a weapon in Afghanistan and NOT feel my heart beating out of my chest. Every single Marine I served beside would tell you the same thing. And yet I can shoot a man at 500 yards with iron sites. Again, if trained properly stress is helpful.

    Police don't need to train for combat situations. They need to train how to use their stress effectively.

    I have a teacher friend who never served in the military, was never a cop, and could out shoot me any day of the week. Why? He's been through proper training and he practices.

    I think that schools who allow teachers to carry will not be the first target for a shooter. They'd go down the street to the school that doesn't allow teachers to carry. Of course this won't prevent all shootings. Cops and laws don't prevent all shootings. Should we get rid of both?

    Again, should we just let everyone out of prison because it's a cost burden? People who commit crimes with guns need longer jail sentences. Period. If that means letting people who are in for weed related offenses or other victimless crimes so be it. But that's another discussion.
     
  18. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    There is no issue with automatic weapons. Was that a typo? If not, you've fallen victim to the media's diatribe. No one is using automatic weapons to shoot up schools.

    Very few civilians have assault rifles. In order to get an assault rifle you need to:

    1. You need to be eligible to possess firearms in general.
    2. You must live in a state where NFA items are permitted and automatic weapons, specifically, are legal to possess.
    3. The automatic weapon you wish to acquire must have been manufactured on or before May 19, 1986. That is the cutoff date for entries to be made in the NFRTR (National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record), the registry of all NFA items in the United States including machine guns.
    4. You must locate a Class III dealer (FFL01+SOT) that sells or can transfer in theautomatic weapon you wish to acquire in your state of residence.
    5. You must purchase the automatic weapon upfront prior to transfer and have it shipped to your Class III dealer. For a full-auto M16, this will be anywhere from $12,000 and up. Typical prices for an M16 hover around $14,000 to $16,000. Some automatic weapons go for $30k and up.
    6. Once purchased and with your dealer, the dealer will fill out the Form 4 application on your behalf to submission to the BATFE and collect your $200 NFA transfer stamp tax.
    7. The application will be submitted. Now you wait 8+ months for the full FBI background check and BATFE processing to complete.
    8. Once the Form 4 is processed, it will be returned to the dealer along with the tax stamp which is part of your paperwork. You can then take possession of your automatic firearm and take it home.
    9. The tax stamp must be kept with the firearm it belongs to at all times! The tax stamp is your only affirmative defense to prove you are not in possession of an illegal automatic weapon. The tax stamp is proof you paid the transfer tax and legally transferred the automatic weapon. Ranges that allow Class III will want to see the stamp. If you get pulled over and the gun is discovered/inspected, law enforcement will definitely want to see it too. You may be required to present the firearm for inspection on demand by the BATFE.
    10. You may not transport the fully automatic firearm across state lines for any purpose without prior consent of the Federal government. You must request this in advance and provide details on where the firearm is going, when you are leaving and when it will return to its registered location of residence.
    11. You cannot leave the presence of your fully automatic firearm. If someone else is shooting it, you must be with it, legally speaking. The one exception to this is if you have formed a legal trust for the purpose of possessing the firearm, in which case all beneficiaries of the trust (usually family or employees) may have access to the firearm.
     
  19. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,700
    8,543
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    I don't know the lingo, I do know that the type of gun used in the shooting has absolutely ZERO justification in being purchased by a high school kid.....even a sane one.
     
  20. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Wasn't this guy 19? Just because he either started school late or failed a grade shouldn't infringe upon his rights.

    And you wrote "this type of gun"...

    Would you let an 18 year old purchase this:

    upload_2018-2-28_8-36-11.png
     
  21. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Scientific American article

    It is an excellent and very in depth article tackling many things, including some of the stuff you're touching on and how the NRA used their lobby power to stop real research form being done by the one agency with the skills to do it correctly, the CDC.



    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    But again, considering the stranglehold that the NRA has on our government, it should be extremely difficult for any rational person to accept data that would side with the NRA. They are playing the dirtiest of pool, to the point that not even the government can't present the truth. That is fact. So until their reign is over, we should all be very skeptical.

    The only groups that specifically prevent studies are cults and authoritarian governments.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  22. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    I didn't read all of your post, but a lot of this is just flat out wrong or are studies done poorly.

    For example, the rape rates. Most rapists know their victims and there is no violence involved. The study should have looked at violent rape. I know that sounds absurd, but there is a difference in regards to self-protection. Mainly because when a "boy-friend" gets a woman drunk and rapes her that's different than when a man breaks into a woman's house or tries to grab her in the back alley. Of course a gun won't help in the former, but it will in the latter two. Of course both should be equally punished. (I had to throw that in there because you know someone was going to claim I don't think all rape is equal.)

    All a person has to do is look at Australia's rape stats pre and post firearm ban. Rape, robbery, and violent crime INCREASED substantially after Australia banned firearms. For example, in 1995 (the year before their gun ban) there were around 12,000 sexual assaults in Australia. In 1997 (the year after the ban) there were over 14,000. In 2014 there were 22,000. Ergo, guns make people safer.


    The UK banned guns in 1996. From 1990 until the ban was enacted, the homicide rate fluctuated between 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010. In other words, the 15-year experiment in a handgun ban has achieved absolutely nothing.
     
  23. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,700
    8,543
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    If he enjoyed hunting? Yes.

    If not? Stop playing with guns....you want some feeling of more hair on your *** buy a video game or something.

    The kid with the gun IS the biggest reason, but I still see ZERO benefit in an average joe being able to buy a weapon that can kill 17 people that quick (thats with missing a bunch)

    It's senseless.

    And the Donald saying we need much stricter background checks, isn't taboo or some bad idea.
     
  24. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I'm sorry but the studies aren't wrong or anything like that.

    This is Scientific American.
     
  25. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Also, ALL lobbying should be illegal. But, the CDC isn't forbidden from doing studies on firearms.

    A lot of anti-gun people like to say that Congress (with the help of the NRA), when they passed the "dickey amendment" in 1996, basically outlawed the CDC from doing studies. This is patently false. The CDC was doing firearm related studies up until 2001.

    The Dickey Amendment forbade the CDC from advocating or promoting gun bans. It didn't outlaw them from doing studies on firearms. In fact, from 2013-2014, Obama obtained over $10mil for the CDC to do firearm related studies. They failed to because they thought $11 million for research and prevention of arthritis and $6 million for research into prion disease, which affects an estimated 300 people in the U.S. each year, was more important.
     
  26. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    The picture I posted is the exact same gun as an AR, It just doesn't have all that scary plastic that the AR has. Both are .223/5.56 calibers. Both are semi-auto. Both have 30 round magazines available to use.

    Once more...A shot gun would have killed more kids in Parkland. A handgun would have killed just as many. A handgun was used in the deadliest school shooting in American history.

    I also want stricter background checks that entails mental health evals.
     
  27. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    upload_2018-2-28_9-48-53.png

    This rifle is far more powerful than an AR. .223 vs .308 calibers. Is semi-auto. And has high capacity magazines made for it. This rifle caliber is one of the preferred calibers used by snipers in the U.S. Military.
     
  28. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Sorry, not true.

    Obama tried to obtain the funding and was denied by Congress and the CDC's funding is being toyed with to prevent gun research.

     
  29. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    upload_2018-2-28_9-51-28.png

    Same rifle as the one above...Ohhhh...scary! lol
     
    aesop likes this.
  30. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Conduct research on the causes and prevention of gun violence, including links between video games, media images, and violence: The President is issuing a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control and scientific agencies to conduct research into the causes and prevention of gun violence. It is based on legal analysis that concludes such research is not prohibited by any appropriations language. The CDC will start immediately by assessing existing strategies for preventing gun violence and identifying the most pressing research questions, with the greatest potential public health impact. And the Administration is calling on Congress to provide $10 million for the CDC to conduct further research, including investigating the relationship between video games, media images, and violence.
    Better understand how and when firearms are used in violent death: To research gun violence prevention, we also need better data. When firearms are used in homicides or suicides, the National Violent Death Reporting System collects anonymous data, including the type of firearm used, whether the firearm was stored loaded or locked, and details on youth gun access. Congress should invest an additional $20 million to expand this system from the 18 states currently participating to all 50 states, helping Americans better understand how and when firearms are used in a violent death and informing future research and prevention strategies.


    As you can see in that first graph, Obama is asking Congress to pony up $10 million to fund said research. While it's unclear whether lawmakers will give him the cash he wants, regardless it appears as though those at the CDC will have the freedom to examine something that they've turned something of a blind eye to since 1996. NBC explains the back story:
     
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Yes, he asked and they said no.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  32. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets

    6,320
    2,492
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    I get your POV brah. You can kill bunches of people with all kinds of weapons. Me too. What you don't get is the ease with which someone can pick up a weapon like the evil AR-15 and without any training beyond some you-tube videos become a deadly killer. That is much harder for someone like that with handguns or a shotgun. That and the media coverage advertising for that particular weapon, sure. But doing nothing is the definition of insanity.

    We can all agree that weapons like these should not be easy to get. Highly regulated, waiting periods, notional background checks and 21 yr restriction.
    Now we have major retailers, God Bless you Dick's sporting goods deciding to do something. It's costing them real money. Why can't congress do the same?
     
    texanphinatic, danmarino and Fin-O like this.
  33. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets

    6,320
    2,492
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    And I want to say that I really appreciate the respectful dialogue between differing opinions happening here. Thank you
     
    Fin D, danmarino and Fin-O like this.
  34. Den54

    Den54 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,377
    10,478
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Raccoon City
    Yes it's made with real bits of Panther so you knows it's good.:001_rolleyes:
     
  35. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Role your eyes all you want, but SA is not a biased source. They don't use compromised studies. They actually understand how science works.
     
  36. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    It's really not, though. The VA Tech killer wasn't some trained expert and yet he killed 32 people and injured another 27 with handguns. The vast majority of mass shootings happen with a handgun. "Assault weapons" are used in less than 15% of all mass shootings.

    A shotgun is typically the weapon most recommended by experts when asked "What's the best weapon for home defense". They suggest this weapon because they are very easy to shoot and even with poor aim and training a person will tend to hit their target. Cruz would have killed many more if he had brought in a shotgun and randomly started firing down the hall.

    Now, and I'll say again, the AR I starting to become the weapon of choice because people are being told that they are more deadly. They give a false sense of invincibility due to this false belief.

    I'm all for making it harder to get ANY firearm. My point is, banning AR's will do nothing to prevent mass shootings. It would be a waste of time. I would prefer to do something that would matter.

    1. Mandatory training
    2. Mandatory mental health evals
    3. Mandatory background checks for ALL firearms and not just handguns
    4. Mandatory periodic background checks and practical testing. (We do this for a drivers license but not a firearm?)


    1. I don't think raising the age to purchase a firearm will help. The vast majority of mass shooters are 21 and over and the average age is 30.
    2. I don't think banning certain types of guns will help. I've already shown that the AR is no different than many other rifles.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  37. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    They are one of the very few unbiased sources left out there. However, being unbiased and correct are two different things.

    The fact is, guns protect people and make people safer. I gave you a legitimate mistake they made in their "rape statistics". I also provided proof that shows taking away people's firearms leads to higher rates of rape and other violent crime.

    Now, and just like pools, electricity, toasters, cars, ovens, lighters, fireplaces, and 1000's of other things, guns can be deadly and can lead to "accidental" deaths.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2018
  38. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    It is refreshing to see no one arguing. A good debate over important matters will not only allow others to see differing points of view, but will create a better fix in the long run.

    I wish Congress would take heed. I'm sick of the childish actions by my Government.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  39. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,728
    42,341
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    The thing you pointed out about the rape rates isn't actually relevant though.

    There's no reason to think that one area has more or less "non violent" rapes. If that is true then the numbers for non violent and violent rapes should be well dispersed enough across areas that wouldn't change the end results.

    The other things you gave were directly rebutted by the info in the SA article. You might of have missed that, since as you said, you didn't actually read it.
     
  40. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,483
    10,148
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    It's extremely relevant. Did non-violent rape increase? Did violent rape decrease? And just looking at certain areas is also bad science. The entire population needs to be accounted for. Much like the stats I used that showed the entire population of Australia.

    The biggest problem with most gun studies, besides bias (from both sides mind you), is they are looking at the wrong figures. Most love to tout, "Firearm related homicides and suicides decreased after banning guns, buybacks etc etc". Well, no **** Sherlock. lol

    However, only a few studies, like the one I cited in my earlier post, concentrate on ALL homicides, suicides, crime etc. And those studies typically show that banning guns doesn't work. And in fact, crime rates usually get higher after such bans.

    In regards to whether or not guns protect people, it's provably so that they do.

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent

    "The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”"
     

Share This Page