Gun Control Tightened in the USA

[Lyndhurst 14]

Another individual who has been playing his part , without so much publicity, is Michael Bloomberg the former mayor of New York. His group, Everytown for Gun Safety, has donated tens of millions since the school massacre in Connecticut in 2012 and has had successes in Delaware and Connecticut. There will also be an advert with NBA players speaking out against gun violence. Progress is slow but it is starting to happen.

 

[The Spanish]

Another individual who has been playing his part , without so much publicity, is Michael Bloomberg the former mayor of New York. His group, Everytown for Gun Safety, has donated tens of millions since the school massacre in Connecticut in 2012 and has had successes in Delaware and Connecticut. There will also be an advert with NBA players speaking out against gun violence. Progress is slow but it is starting to happen.

i have thought for a long time that serious changes would have to be cultural and over a few generations, rather than loggerheads over legislation. there will be further polarisation between the camps before that happens, though.

 

[Triggaaar]

then why would they have to legalise the sale of them?

It's in their constitutional rights, but for some stupid reason it's illegal to sell them.

you're supposed to be the resident pedant!

Have I let everyone down?

 

[The Spanish]

It's in their constitutional rights, but for some stupid reason it's illegal to sell them.

Have I let everyone down?

Not with that post!

 

[Triggaaar]

Not with that post!

One post in 20 thousand. I'll take it.

 

[Mr Putdown]

It's in their rights to be able to buy them.

I thought they had the 'right to keep and bear arms'. A pedant might say that there is nothing in there about having the right to buy them.

 

[Triggaaar]

I thought they had the 'right to keep and bear arms'. A pedant might say that there is nothing in there about having the right to buy them.

That's pedants for you. Nothing useful to add, just tiresome put downs from people who think they're better than everyone else.

 

[maltaseagull]

The only chance America has to tighten gun controls is a Presidet like Obama who isn't standing for reelection.

I'm sure Hilary Clinton agrees with him but she's wisely keeping her head down at this stage.

Sadly some of the Republican candidates are saying that they will remove this if elected. Morons

Thousands of people killed by guns every year and they stick by a amendment that is hundreds of years old.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The US gun culture may seem peculiar from 'here'. It is easy to ridicule it, but to change it will require a sufficiency of American voters to support change.

I understand that lots of US politicians support the staus quo because they believe in the constitution. But lots of US politicians disagree with the status quo, yet say nothing. Presumably they feel they will lose their seats if the front up.

This suggests to me that the prevailing majority view in the US is to retain the status quo. Given the numbers of gun deaths (of the various types, from accident through suicide to terrorism) it seems it will take a lot of time for the tide to turn. All the arguments have been made.

Playing Devil's advocate, if I grew up in a US gun owning household, would I welcome the idea of being 'disarmed' by the state? Probably not. Like most people, I don't like being told what to do. Also, if I were law abiding, and held legal fire arms, safely stored, etc., what would be my personal incentive as a US citizen, to disarm, knowing that the criminals and lunatics will certainly not be handing in their weapons?

These are the sorts of issues that need to be addressed - winning the hearts and minds of Joe Average Yank (attacking the NRA etc is just a distraction).

Hats off to Obama for having a bash, though.

 

[looney]

Gun controll really did wonders for Paris last year didn't it?

Oh my you all must have a lot of confidence in your grovelling and begging for your life skills.

 

[Questions]

Another individual who has been playing his part , without so much publicity, is Michael Bloomberg the former mayor of New York. His group, Everytown for Gun Safety, has donated tens of millions since the school massacre in Connecticut in 2012 and has had successes in Delaware and Connecticut. There will also be an advert with NBA players speaking out against gun violence. Progress is slow but it is starting to happen.

I don't think you can carry a concealed firearm in NY city now. It has to be carried in a case and not loaded. It does not contravene the looney laws but the murder rate through guns has plummeted.

 

[BadFish]

This suggests to me that the prevailing majority view in the US is to retain the status quo. Given the numbers of gun deaths (of the various types, from accident through suicide to terrorism) it seems it will take a lot of time for the tide to turn. All the arguments have been made.

Playing Devil's advocate, if I grew up in a US gun owning household, would I welcome the idea of being 'disarmed' by the state? Probably not. Like most people, I don't like being told what to do. Also, if I were law abiding, and held legal fire arms, safely stored, etc., what would be my personal incentive as a US citizen, to disarm, knowing that the criminals and lunatics will certainly not be handing in their weapons?.

This is one of the successful strategies of the NRA et al from what i can see. Any attempt to control the use of guns is successfully framed as an attempt by the government to disarm the people. Leaping to extremes like this is an often used tactic (especially on NSC) and attempts to stall any discussion of the middle ground in which I believe the answer will probably be found.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This is one of the successful strategies of the NRA et al from what i can see. Any attempt to control the use of guns is successfully framed as an attempt by the government to disarm the people. Leaping to extremes like this is an often used tactic (especially on NSC) and attempts to stall any discussion of the middle ground in which I believe the answer will probably be found.

I hope you don't think it was my intention of stalling discussion by leaping to extremes. I don't agree with arming civilians. But I do think its important to understand the thinking of the people who, in the end, will decide the issue, if it ever comes to a vote (the electorate).

I am aware that going gung ho against people with whom I disagree serves no useful purpose (and - apologies again to one or two on here that I have 'emoted' at, even quite recently - ahem). But sometimes its hard to see where there is any middle ground. I've known a few Republican NRA types over the years, and there is absolutely no entry point. They don't even get cross with me - they just laugh When people get angry with me (e.g., on here) there is at least half a chance of a conversation and perhaps some seeking of common ground. I don't see much chance of this with the US intractables. Anyway, hopefully I'm wrong. It happens (quite often!).

 

[BadFish]

I hope you don't think it was my intention of stalling discussion by leaping to extremes. I don't agree with arming civilians. But I do think its important to understand the thinking of the people who, in the end, will decide the issue, if it ever comes to a vote (the electorate).

I am aware that going gung ho against people with whom I disagree serves no useful purpose (and - apologies again to one or two on here that I have 'emoted' at, even quite recently - ahem). But sometimes its hard to see where there is any middle ground. I've known a few Republican NRA types over the years, and there is absolutely no entry point. They don't even get cross with me - they just laugh When people get angry with me (e.g., on here) there is at least half a chance of a conversation and perhaps some seeking of common ground. I don't see much chance of this with the US intractables. Anyway, hopefully I'm wrong. It happens (quite often!).

Not i wasn't suggesting that and understood that you were paraphrasing their argument. I agree also that the middle ground is going to be hard to find.

 

[scamander]

Badfish,

Spot on - the NRA treats any attempt at gun control as "Govt is coming into your homes to take your guns!!!" it then keeps peddling it. Obama was making this point yesterday.

In my first post on here I tried to draw the analogy of how some react when the NHS is re-organised or changed in any way, it's a very, very sensitive subject for what it represents to the American people.

 

[omgitsjames]

This is one of the successful strategies of the NRA et al from what i can see. Any attempt to control the use of guns is successfully framed as an attempt by the government to disarm the people. Leaping to extremes like this is an often used tactic (especially on NSC) and attempts to stall any discussion of the middle ground in which I believe the answer will probably be found.

That's because the majority of proposed gun laws are attempts to disarm the people written by people that tend to know nothing about guns, and gun hobbyists (whether hunting or sport shooting) are culturally alien to them. The loudest and most common rhetoric when a mass shooting occurs is the push to ban assault weapons which gun control activists label as middle ground and common sense. Advocates of the law argue they aren't after all your guns, just the really bad stuff. The reality is assault weapons are guns primarily defined by their cosmetic features and are not more deadly than "normal" guns. They are just very popular style of guns among hobbyists, it looks scarier than a traditional gun, and it conveniently fit under an umbrella term that instantly lends a negative connotation. Furthermore, it is handguns not assault weapons that are the most common weapons used in crimes and mass shootings. So what does an assault weapon ban actually do? It has zero provisions that makes it harder for a bad person from getting guns. It only prevents gun owners from possessing "assault weapons" and violent felons are already prohibited from possessing or acquiring any and all types of guns. Now when you consider that 61% of all gun deaths in the USA are suicides and that every single mass shooter is someone that is or should have been diagnosed with a serious mental disorder, gun rights people know the real problem isn't actually solved and its only a matter of time before the next scariest looking class of weapons becomes the target. So they fight tooth and nail which leads Gun control proponents to feel their middle ground proposal is being snubbed because they can't understand why those against them cling to "bad" guns and why they can't just stick to "good" guns. Its actually not a middle ground stance at all, just unconstitutional and ineffective.

Obama's executive action is actually a middle ground stance. I highly welcome his initiatives to expand background check requirements to private sales, ensure that mental health databases properly report with the background check system, and directing more mental health research. These are all steps that directly make it more difficult for bad people to get getting guns.