Let's be honest, the left only panics about guns when mass shootings occur. I don't have a problem with that. These laws won't affect everyday crime because those guns aren't bought legally. It really is two different issues and it would be politically expedient for the left to acknowledge that. Address the issue head on because aside from the rights diehard religious adherence to the 2nd amendment this is the second biggest issue. The left is soft on crime blah blah. So don't play the game. Be honest, this is about mass shootings. Other violence is improving, we have one type of gun violence getting worse. Inner city violence is improving so take advantage.
Let's be really honest. The majority of Americans are in favor of stricter gun laws, background checks and gun safety. Another fact. Women and children are more at risk of injury or death with a gun in the home.
changed how? from the very beginning, I've been in favor of supplying UKR w/ all the weapons they need, and have been quite critical of the biden administration's dithering about on this point.
Agreed but the focus right now should be on assault rifles. Other violence is is more than a gun issue and again those guns aren't legal anyway and you're never gonna ban guns. Mass shootings aren't a simple issue but they are elaborated by assault rifles. You can single out assault rifles in relation to mass shootings. Gun violence is really improving despite the pandemic
I agree that AR-15 type guns should be banned, but I also don't understand why if most Americans are in favor of stricter background checks, etc..why you can't focus on both. Republicans don't want to do anything but point fingers and vote no to any safer gun laws. To say gun violence is only from illegal guns isn't true. Many people who are victims of domestic violence or kids getting their hands on parents' guns were legal gun owners committing the crimes, or being negligent with their guns and/or safety of their children. There is more we can do as a country with red flags, annual gun licensing, and practical/written gun safety tests to help weed out ownership from people and flag those ineligible for license renewal who are subsequently charged with domestic violence, child abuse, DUIS, illegal drug use, PTSD or other mental issues, or threatening behavior or violent threats on social media or towards others. Those types with violent behavior, alcohol or drug problems, or mental issues shouldn't own guns, even if they don't have a criminal record.
Those are bigger issues. You're talking about gun violence that you can't stop with background checks and really a kid getting his hands on his parent's gun is a news story. That doesn't happen that much and you can only punish afterwards regardlessof the severityof penalty. It shouldbe punished but im guessing that eliminating those shootingsis going thave that much affect on numbers. Mental cases are a touchy subject but really those things don't happen that much. One thing I've learned from cop shows, People kill over money and love/lust. But I really think those don't happen much either Secondly a lot of those are hard things to weed out. You can't drug test for guns for instance. You can keep guns away from criminals (but there are just so many guns) and certified mental cases. https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gu...al and mental,domestic violence, and drug use. Current background checks red flags a lot of these things already. Gun violence is really a culture problem. Unfortunately it's only so much that can be done
No one wants to go to bad neighborhoods at the dead of might to settle a violent dispute. A gun prohibition won't do anything there at best, except maybe give police a reason to stop a car and fish for a crime. And at worst, prevent innocent families from protecting themselves when no one else will. The framing and needs are much different.
What is the disconnect on background checks from what Democrats want from happens currently. I read what happens and what is wanted and it looks the same.
I guess you are a minority in wanting stricter gun laws and background checks, red flag laws, etc.. Not all gun violence is a culture problem, any many people who have never been officially diagnosed or committed for mental issues go unchecked, or can still legally buy guns. People can not know a damn thing about gun safety and proper use, and still buy guns legally. People with drinking and alcohol problems can use guns legally. Texas’s firearm prohibition generally does not apply to people convicted of violent assaults against a current or former dating partner, unless the defendant has been married or lived with the victim; and it does not apply to people convicted of threatening a family or household member with imminent violent injury. That in itself is scary.
There is nothing you can do about that. This isn't about appeasing Republicans, its about tbeingr ealistic. you mention it's harder to get a driver's license. A drinking problem can't prevent it. How many people die from that. Lawa can't fix everything there is nothing you can do about an diagnosed mental problem. How can you stop that?
The assault rifle ban and crime bills were passed at the height of the Crack epidemic, a really violent time. It was Democrat House and Senate but people were panicked and wanted something done. Couldn't stand that dumb ass racial criticism of Biden about the crime bill in 2020. I'm like do you remember the late eighties early nineties. Regardless focus on assault rifles, that's a battle that probably can be won
Are you saying to only focus on assault rifles and not the other aspects like background checks, licensing, etc.? FWIW: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2023/...ound-checks-gun-licensing-assault-weapons-ban
If you are asking what's the current back ground check vs what's being asked for (universal background check): The existing background check system typically involves checks conducted when someone purchases a firearm from a federally licensed dealer. This process is meant to assess the buyer's criminal history, mental health status, and other factors that might disqualify them from owning a gun. On the other hand, the proposed universal background check would expand this process to cover private sales, including those at gun shows and online transactions. The aim is to ensure that all gun transactions, not just those involving licensed dealers, undergo a thorough background check. This extension is intended to close potential loopholes that might allow individuals to acquire firearms without undergoing the standard checks. The goal is to enhance overall gun safety by making the background check process more comprehensive. Furthermore, the existing background check related to mental health status is weak and could be vastly improved upon (though no one is seriously asking for this). The current process is also very labor-intensive and slow, which could be improved by modernization through using a modern system instead of an archaic background check that can take days, when a modern electronic system should take minutes (this has been proposed, but people are very afraid of a "database" for background check).
Thanks like many other subjects I comment on I'm not fully informed. I just started on this here because imo there are mass shootings and assault rifles and then there is everything else. This mass shooting epidemic imo can be real issue that Republicans have to compromise on
The majority of Americans want stricter gun laws, but it's Republicans voting no no no. Why do we have laws against drinking under the influence? Yes, you can do more. You act like what's common practice in other countries is impossible. People who have something to hide are the ones afraid. I agree that modernization to make the process quicker and more extensive is not only possible, but necessary. The majority of Americans want these changes. The loopholes enable guns into the wrong hands far too often.
while we're having this (very worthwhile) discussion on various steps that might be taken to mitigate mass shootings, it's worth going back to the shooting that started this round (not thread). the KC shooter appear to have been juveniles. Federal and MO law both make the sale to, carry by (whether concealed/open), possession of, transfer to, firearms by juveniles illegal. how does one prevent what happened in KC, if everything about it is already illegal?
Ihow do you logistically know whose an alcoholic before getting into their rights Nobody likes drunk drivers, a non controversial issue. Why hasn't it been tried with driver's licenses? The first issue is defining an alcoholic. It's not realistic. So stop being emotional or trying to make me appear uncaring or whatever. It's not practical. You can make a law about handling a gun under the influence but like a drunk driving conviction the damage is done, and you're talking about preventing an alcoholic from obtaining a firearm. If someone is drunk and shoots someone there are already legal steps to make punishments more severe. You're just going off on tangents I'll ask just to be clear, are you talking about preventing someone obtaining a firearm or punishment. If you're arguing punishment then if someone has mental issues that aren't diagnosed, that's a tough thing to punish. If you prove metal problems, then responsibility is already in question. Why waste time, or since you are stuck on this, I'm telling you it's impractical and therefore a waste of time. He'll it's hard enough getting funding for mental health
