School Shooting at FSU

so what happens if said professional is anti 2nd Amendment

 

Honest question: why do you believe training will help prevent people intent on doing harm from doing harm? Training might prevent people who are well-intentioned from inadvertently breaking the law or accidentally shooting someone, but there is no logical basis to believe that it would do anything to prevent someone intent on unlawfully shooting another person from shooting that other person. It might result in them doing so more effectively, but it isn't a knowledge gap that is causing gun crimes. People are doing unlawful things with guns despite knowing they are unlawful.

As far as sales without background checks, 87% of gun sales occur through FFLs, and all sales that transfer through FFLs have to go through a background check. Private face to face sales are the only ones that do not, and the only way to actually enforce universal background checks is with a registry. That's a bell that can't really be un-rung once it is rung, and has many examples throughout history of government erosion of civil rights once registration happens, to varying ends. As for where those young black males that are murdering each other get their guns from, many are stolen, straw purchased by knowing accomplices who are not deterred by the penalty, or acquired through the black market (from others who have stolen or straw-purchased them)

I'm sorry you're offended. My intent was to engage in discussion on the merits of your points in good faith, not 'gaslight' you, despite your at times blatantly inflammatory comments. You're welcome to disagree with me and rebut me, but it seems you're electing not to do that.

 

While there is no perfect solution, especially now that SCOTUS has decided after 250 years that individual gun ownership is a constitutional right. However my solution would be a lighter version than what they have in Japan - a series of steps you have to go through to be licensed to have a gun. In Japan the requirements are so many and so onerous that very few actually have one, so we would need something less restrictive.

I don’t know how it would affect a situation like this where a young adult child of a cop takes the cops extra gun and uses it to kill people, and by all accounts the adult kid seem generally well adjusted. But it would likely reduce other situations.

I struggle with the idea that people can be trusted to own guns when I read accounts like this.

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/spivey-killing-stand-your-ground-f45a3492?mod=mhp

You had one party drunk with a gun and another party chasing the drunk guy with a gun. The guy chasing was a buddy of the police.

The narrative of “responsible gun owner” just doesn’t stand up to me, at least now how guns are allowed and viewed in society. I’ve seen instances where it changes how people think, and they use it inappropriately. Most of the time that doesn’t result in anybody being shot, but guns have the potential to make non lethal situations lethal.

 

Serious question, do you own a firearm? If so, what?

 

No, what people explain is that implementing a bad policy isn't better than implementing no policy, especially when it comes to peoples' enumerated rights.

Just because we don't favor the things you suggest doesn't mean we want nothing done. We just see the root cause differently.

 

My goodness, your dishonest false discourse is .... something to behold.

Let's take some of the very lowest hanging fruit : "Training" would include education about storing firearms, and abuse such as strawman purchasing.

(Yes, you're obviously lining up "That won't work 100% of the time so why do it?!")

But do you think that maybe the 18 year-old Columbine HS student might have been educated against buying multiple firearms for her younger classmates? Maybe the woman in Sandy Hook would have been educated enough to secure her firearms so her mentally ill son couldn't use them to slaughter in a school? Maybe at least some other purchasers may be motivated to not do so for criminals, or unscrupulous or unqualified buyers?

Also, you cite no background check sales. Those easily lead to criminal purchases. So how 'bout 0% on that?

Now you can respond: 5,000 words on "nothing is perfect, some of this is the slightest inconvenience for gun owners. Therefore we can't do anything but nothing!"

In other words: Gaslighting. Which we've seen for decades. Yawn.

 

Yes, yes. You want to mumble about mental health.

We know you and people like you are very excited to solve this problem.

That's why we've done so much absolutely nothing for literally decades.

 

Can you please quote me where I brought up mental illness so I can better address what you are asking?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

Dude is just an articulate version of the (very sadly) decades old Onion article : "There's Just Absolutely Nothing We Can Do About Gun Violence (says only industrialized nation in the world with record gun violence). [Or such]

I've heard it all. Sadly, for decades.

I understand the laws, and that it ain't gonna change, probably ever. But I will no longer dignify the gaslighting. They can peddle mistruth to someone besides me.

 

Lots of folks who are loudly in favor of more of the same. Carry on.

 

It did?
On another note, has anyone discussed the probability of far more casualties had the shooter being carrying a semi auto/high capacity rifle?

 

What exactly do you think education about straw purchasing would do?

When you buy a gun you literally have to certify on the form that you’re the actual transferee, that you understand that you are not the transferee if you are acquiring the gun on behalf of another person, that the firearm cannot legally be transferred to you if you are not the transferee, and that answering yes to that question if you are not the actual transferee is a federal felony.

The reason straw purchases happen is definitely not because of a lack of knowledge that they are illegal.

 

Not only that, but the Sandy Hook mom had a safe or lockbox of some sort that displayed no signs of forced entry. The problem was never that she didn’t know how to secure her guns. It was that she trusted her son when she shouldn’t have.

 

Clearly her education either wasn't very thorough, sufficient or meaningful.

These are just obvious examples of where better education very well may have prevented a tragedy. Not guarantees.

You may now rebut that since that wouldn't guarantee anything, it wouldn't be helpful at all. In other words, advocate that since we have no absolutely perfect solutions, we need none at all. (We know how it goes.)

 

Definition of insanity exemplified.

 

Yeah, sure - the 18 year-old Columbine girl who bought multiple firearms for her younger HS classmates had to check boxes. And with a more thorough or direct education/training on the seriousness of straw purchasing, she very well might have been dissuaded from doing so. No guarantees, but it's distinctly possible.

You may now rebut that since that wouldn't guarantee anything, it wouldn't be helpful at all. In other words, advocate that since we have no absolutely perfect solutions, we need none at all. (We know how it goes.)

 

There must be a better way to say this. You are perpetuating the "can't do nuthin" nonsense while trivializing mental health issues.

 

In an ideal society, there are no shootings.