| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 |
Paramount
Sweet!
Member since 7/12 4289 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
I don't take it as a personal attack because I see your point in your response. You are also calling for similar changes that I wouldn't be opposed to.
What I do find somewhat offensive is that I stated (by what I wrote) that the reason I have guns is because the law allows it. That's not the case for me. We have guns for hobby and sport as well as home/self defense. Not just because the law allows us to. The people you polled on this seem to have a very one track mind.
I stand corrected. I should have been more clear.
I like to hunt, I want to protect myself, I want to skeet shoot, I want to fire guns (for whatever reason). This was all encompassed in the answers I received. The bottom line (from my research) is that since its legal I want to own a gun so I can hunt, etc etc.
Its not JUST "because I can".
Message edited 10/8/2015 3:16:26 PM.
|
Posted 10/8/15 3:15 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
klingklang77
kraftwerk!
Member since 7/06 11489 total posts
Name:
Völlig losgelöst
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
We are gun owners. They are locked up at all times. It was not easy to get the gun license. We also have no issues with stricter background checks and mental checks because we have nothing to hide. The laws in that sense should be changed. But to think that banning guns all together will stop gun violence is naive. There are plenty of guns in the hands of unlicensed maniacs.
I also agree that an unloaded gun with ammo in another room will do nothing to help yourself in the event of an intruder. They have handgun safes that open with a fingerprint or a 4# pin. that can fix the issue of having a loaded gun on the nightstand.
If you have children, part of being a responsible gun owner is teaching your children about gun safety.
we have a right to defend our home and ourselves to intruders. And that shouldn't change
Stricter laws can help
-better background checks
Including mental, criminal and former drug use
- mandatory gun safety course
- mandatory safes
ALL OF THE ABOVE at time of license renewal
I mostly agree with this.
Thinking we can ban guns is naïve, yes. I'm all for banning guns. I think it could work if we start now, but it won't work now. But that's an idealistic approach.
Regulations need to change, yes. What will work now is more regulation. If you take a look at other countries, it's really difficult (and expensive) to get licenses for a lot of things. I'll use Germany and fishing licenses as an example (I assume getting a hunting license is even more difficuly and it requires guns). One has to do like 12 (?) fishing outings with a teacher / guide. Then there is a theoretical test for conservation. This test is only given once a year, and it's expensive. Getting a driving license is difficult, too. I think that getting these licenses are even more difficult than getting a gun permit in some parts of the US. That needs to change.
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 5:53 PM |
| |
|
PhyllisNJoe
My Box Is Broken
Member since 6/11 9145 total posts
Name:
Phyllis
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
Message edited 10/8/2015 6:27:08 PM.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 6:26 PM |
| |
|
LIRascal
drama. daily.
Member since 3/11 7287 total posts
Name:
Michelle
|
Call to Action - From People Magazine
This one's going to end badly, no matter how many of us share our opinions. While it's a discussion board, can we really discuss freely?
This is my opinion. Judgements will happen, but this discussion board is allowing us to state our opinion.
FACT: the bad guy is always going to get the gun.
FACT: the bad guy isn't going down to a gun store and plunking down a license for a background check, he/she isn't waiting for a handgun permit, and he/she isn't going to abide by a law.
FACT: we need to stop mass shootings, gang shootings and shootings in general, and laws do NOTHING to stop the bad guy from getting the gun.
FACT: the unfortunate will happen, where someone who is a gun owner with a licensed firearm and a background check will kill someone with his/her gun
So, until someone brilliant (Stephen Hawking maybe?) has an idea on how to stop the bad guy from getting the gun, Laws will do nothing to stop gun violence.
A gun ban will do nothing. The bad guy will ALWAYS find a way to get the gun.
I am not smart or thoughtful or insightful enough to come up with a solution to this problem. I wish someone could.
Message edited 10/8/2015 6:55:05 PM.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 6:53 PM |
| |
|
LIRascal
drama. daily.
Member since 3/11 7287 total posts
Name:
Michelle
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by Diane
Im all for the 2nd amendment right to own guns.
I know NY does good background checks. Only problem. I feel is that it is so hard to do a mental health background check with all the HIPPA laws. I feel all these shootings are people who are unstable. Someone doesn't just go intentionally on a shooting spree for no reason. How do you check on mental health without violating HIPPA laws.
You don't. It's a background check for criminal records only.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 6:57 PM |
| |
|
klingklang77
kraftwerk!
Member since 7/06 11489 total posts
Name:
Völlig losgelöst
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
I think that the "right to bear arms" can be interpreted in a few different ways. If you actually take a look at wording from the Constitution, it's not so clear, especially with all the commas in there ;). I was actually just talking about this with DH tonight at dinner. He pointed out how ambiguous this is (he is a lawyer).
I think Americans have gotten too carried away with this idea, TBH. We don't live in a society like that.
ETA the actual amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It's very ambiguous to me. It's not clear if everyone should be able to own a gun. Then they mention Militia and the people could go with the people of the Militia. It doesn't simply say that individuals have the right to bear arms.
ETA again, sorry!
From a linguistic point of view, it's clear to me. When I compare how language has changed from 1789, "the people" part is extra info. I'm basing this on the capitalization of a few nouns in the original and the commas. Regardless, it's ambiguous nowadays.
I'm sorry. I had a 3 hour grammar meeting at work today, so I'm being extra analytical. It's what I do.
Message edited 10/8/2015 7:15:33 PM.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 7:04 PM |
| |
|
PhyllisNJoe
My Box Is Broken
Member since 6/11 9145 total posts
Name:
Phyllis
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
I think that the "right to bear arms" can be interpreted in a few different ways. If you actually take a look at wording from the Constitution, it's not so clear, especially with all the commas in there ;). I was actually just talking about this with DH tonight at dinner. He pointed out how ambiguous this is (he is a lawyer).
I think Americans have gotten too carried away with this idea, TBH. We don't live in a society like that.
ETA the actual amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It's very ambiguous to me. It's not clear if everyone should be able to own a gun. Then they mention Militia and the people could go with the people of the Militia. It doesn't simply say that individuals have the right to bear arms.
ETA again, sorry!
From a linguistic point of view, it's clear to me. When I compare how language has changed from 1789, "the people" part is extra info. I'm basing this on the capitalization of a few nouns in the original and the commas. Regardless, it's ambiguous nowadays.
I'm sorry. I had a 3 hour grammar meeting at work today, so I'm being extra analytical. It's what I do.
It seems that "the right to bear arms" has Already been interpreted by our country as we all see it now.
I'm glad to see that most people aren't trying to completely ban firearms all together in this thread. And we all seem to agree that changing the laws may be helpful going forward.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 7:45 PM |
| |
|
cj7305
=)
Member since 8/05 12296 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by LIRascal
This one's going to end badly, no matter how many of us share our opinions. While it's a discussion board, can we really discuss freely?
This is my opinion. Judgements will happen, but this discussion board is allowing us to state our opinion.
FACT: the bad guy is always going to get the gun.
FACT: the bad guy isn't going down to a gun store and plunking down a license for a background check, he/she isn't waiting for a handgun permit, and he/she isn't going to abide by a law.
FACT: we need to stop mass shootings, gang shootings and shootings in general, and laws do NOTHING to stop the bad guy from getting the gun.
FACT: the unfortunate will happen, where someone who is a gun owner with a licensed firearm and a background check will kill someone with his/her gun
So, until someone brilliant (Stephen Hawking maybe?) has an idea on how to stop the bad guy from getting the gun, Laws will do nothing to stop gun violence.
A gun ban will do nothing. The bad guy will ALWAYS find a way to get the gun.
I am not smart or thoughtful or insightful enough to come up with a solution to this problem. I wish someone could.
I agree. We are gun owners (DH shoots matches for sport) I feel better knowing if (god forbid) there was ever an intruder, I would have the capability of potentially defending myself and my children. The alternative of calling the cops and praying they get there in time isn't good enough. I absolutely agree that safety is number one and if someone is careless with their guns and they get in the hands of the wrong person/child, they should be held accountable. I also agree that the mental health problem is huge. There are way too many guns out in the streets already. Criminals will not be following the laws so in the end I feel this is the truth...If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have gunsl Think about it. Drugs are illegal and we currently have one of the biggest drug epidemics this country has ever seen! If a criminal or psycho wants to get a gun, they will, no matter what any law says.
Just think about all of these mass shootings. If one "good guy" in the crowd was carrying, how many lives could have been saved. This is not an easy debate and something needs to be done but like the poster above said, I don't know what the answer is. I wish I did.
Message edited 10/8/2015 7:51:06 PM.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 7:49 PM |
| |
|
klingklang77
kraftwerk!
Member since 7/06 11489 total posts
Name:
Völlig losgelöst
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
I think that the "right to bear arms" can be interpreted in a few different ways. If you actually take a look at wording from the Constitution, it's not so clear, especially with all the commas in there ;). I was actually just talking about this with DH tonight at dinner. He pointed out how ambiguous this is (he is a lawyer).
I think Americans have gotten too carried away with this idea, TBH. We don't live in a society like that.
ETA the actual amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It's very ambiguous to me. It's not clear if everyone should be able to own a gun. Then they mention Militia and the people could go with the people of the Militia. It doesn't simply say that individuals have the right to bear arms.
ETA again, sorry!
From a linguistic point of view, it's clear to me. When I compare how language has changed from 1789, "the people" part is extra info. I'm basing this on the capitalization of a few nouns in the original and the commas. Regardless, it's ambiguous nowadays.
I'm sorry. I had a 3 hour grammar meeting at work today, so I'm being extra analytical. It's what I do.
It seems that "the right to bear arms" has Already been interpreted by our country as we all see it now.
I'm glad to see that most people aren't trying to completely ban firearms all together in this thread. And we all seem to agree that changing the laws may be helpful going forward.
I'm sorry, but could you clarify your first sentence? Are you talking about the Heller case?
Yes, it's a start. going back to the OP and your last statement, yes, it's a start. We need to go forward and change laws.
I think it's really interesting that People magazine pointed this out. I also think it's really good. It kind of gives me some hope.
Message edited 10/8/2015 7:59:11 PM.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 7:58 PM |
| |
|
PhyllisNJoe
My Box Is Broken
Member since 6/11 9145 total posts
Name:
Phyllis
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
I think that the "right to bear arms" can be interpreted in a few different ways. If you actually take a look at wording from the Constitution, it's not so clear, especially with all the commas in there ;). I was actually just talking about this with DH tonight at dinner. He pointed out how ambiguous this is (he is a lawyer).
I think Americans have gotten too carried away with this idea, TBH. We don't live in a society like that.
ETA the actual amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It's very ambiguous to me. It's not clear if everyone should be able to own a gun. Then they mention Militia and the people could go with the people of the Militia. It doesn't simply say that individuals have the right to bear arms.
ETA again, sorry!
From a linguistic point of view, it's clear to me. When I compare how language has changed from 1789, "the people" part is extra info. I'm basing this on the capitalization of a few nouns in the original and the commas. Regardless, it's ambiguous nowadays.
I'm sorry. I had a 3 hour grammar meeting at work today, so I'm being extra analytical. It's what I do.
It seems that "the right to bear arms" has Already been interpreted by our country as we all see it now.
I'm glad to see that most people aren't trying to completely ban firearms all together in this thread. And we all seem to agree that changing the laws may be helpful going forward.
I'm sorry, but could you clarify your first sentence? Are you talking about the Heller case?
Yes, it's a start. going back to the OP and your last statement, yes, it's a start. We need to go forward and change laws.
I think it's really interesting that People magazine pointed this out. I also think it's really good. It kind of gives me some hope.
I was speaking of basic knowledge. I actually had to read some info on the heller case just now to be sure of what you were saying
I know professionally, you fact check and use proper grammar. It's obv I do not lol
But I do have a pretty decent understanding of most things.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 8:08 PM |
| |
|
|
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
It is nice to see gun owners that are able to realize that changes need to be made to our laws.
I don't think anyone disagrees that mental health issues are grossly ignored and are a big problem.
What I would like to see is very harsh jail penalties for gun owners that do not practice safe gun storage which results in harm to someone. The adult gun owner needs to be held responsible in situations where an unlicensed person (adult or child) gets hold of their gun and hurts or kills themselves or someone else. A child getting their hands on a loaded, unlocked gun is NOT an accident. It is a crime! I am sick of hearing that the adult has "suffered enough" when a kid gets shot. What about the kid?
Likewise there needs to be mandatory life sentences for anyone convicted of a crime involving an illegal gun, whether or not harm came from that gun.
And there is more that can be done and I won't ever believe that reform can't happen. People just need to accept that the status quo isn't working and accept that we have to keep trying until it makes a difference.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 8:14 PM |
| |
|
klingklang77
kraftwerk!
Member since 7/06 11489 total posts
Name:
Völlig losgelöst
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
Posted by klingklang77
Posted by PhyllisNJoe
What I don't so much agree with is the fact that we have a right to protect ourselves with a gun. To me, that is naïve.
But still, your point is valid and well said.
Why don't you agree with that statement? I do have the right to protect myself and my household with a gun. I hope to never have to use it. But I feel better knowing I have it. Criminals carry guns. Someone breaks into my home with a Gun, it's a fair fight.
I think that the "right to bear arms" can be interpreted in a few different ways. If you actually take a look at wording from the Constitution, it's not so clear, especially with all the commas in there ;). I was actually just talking about this with DH tonight at dinner. He pointed out how ambiguous this is (he is a lawyer).
I think Americans have gotten too carried away with this idea, TBH. We don't live in a society like that.
ETA the actual amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It's very ambiguous to me. It's not clear if everyone should be able to own a gun. Then they mention Militia and the people could go with the people of the Militia. It doesn't simply say that individuals have the right to bear arms.
ETA again, sorry!
From a linguistic point of view, it's clear to me. When I compare how language has changed from 1789, "the people" part is extra info. I'm basing this on the capitalization of a few nouns in the original and the commas. Regardless, it's ambiguous nowadays.
I'm sorry. I had a 3 hour grammar meeting at work today, so I'm being extra analytical. It's what I do.
It seems that "the right to bear arms" has Already been interpreted by our country as we all see it now.
I'm glad to see that most people aren't trying to completely ban firearms all together in this thread. And we all seem to agree that changing the laws may be helpful going forward.
I'm sorry, but could you clarify your first sentence? Are you talking about the Heller case?
Yes, it's a start. going back to the OP and your last statement, yes, it's a start. We need to go forward and change laws.
I think it's really interesting that People magazine pointed this out. I also think it's really good. It kind of gives me some hope.
I was speaking of basic knowledge. I actually had to read some info on the heller case just now to be sure of what you were saying
I know professionally, you fact check and use proper grammar. It's obv I do not lol
But I do have a pretty decent understanding of most things.
No worries.  s all around. I just wanted to make sure I understood correctly.
I was just saying to DH that I wish I could just pull facts and figures out of my head with such ease. I just can't do that.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 8:30 PM |
| |
|
ElizaRags35
My 2 Girls
Member since 2/09 20494 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by BaseballWidow
It is nice to see gun owners that are able to realize that changes need to be made to our laws.
I don't think anyone disagrees that mental health issues are grossly ignored and are a big problem.
What I would like to see is very harsh jail penalties for gun owners that do not practice safe gun storage which results in harm to someone. The adult gun owner needs to be held responsible in situations where an unlicensed person (adult or child) gets hold of their gun and hurts or kills themselves or someone else. A child getting their hands on a loaded, unlocked gun is NOT an accident. It is a crime! I am sick of hearing that the adult has "suffered enough" when a kid gets shot. What about the kid?
Likewise there needs to be mandatory life sentences for anyone convicted of a crime involving an illegal gun, whether or not harm came from that gun.
And there is more that can be done and I won't ever believe that reform can't happen. People just need to accept that the status quo isn't working and accept that we have to keep trying until it makes a difference.
Completely agree.
|
| Posted 10/8/15 11:03 PM |
| |
|
ElizaRags35
My 2 Girls
Member since 2/09 20494 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Call to Action - From People Magazine
Another day, another shooting.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 8:00 AM |
| |
|
Diane
Hope is Contagious....catch it
Member since 5/05 30683 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by LIRascal
Posted by Diane
Im all for the 2nd amendment right to own guns.
I know NY does good background checks. Only problem. I feel is that it is so hard to do a mental health background check with all the HIPPA laws. I feel all these shootings are people who are unstable. Someone doesn't just go intentionally on a shooting spree for no reason. How do you check on mental health without violating HIPPA laws.
You don't. It's a background check for criminal records only.
YES>>I KNOW!!!!!
|
| Posted 10/9/15 8:37 AM |
| |
|
LSP2005
Bunny kisses are so cute!
Member since 5/05 19461 total posts
Name:
L
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by LIRascal
This one's going to end badly, no matter how many of us share our opinions. While it's a discussion board, can we really discuss freely?
This is my opinion. Judgements will happen, but this discussion board is allowing us to state our opinion.
FACT: the bad guy is always going to get the gun.
FACT: the bad guy isn't going down to a gun store and plunking down a license for a background check, he/she isn't waiting for a handgun permit, and he/she isn't going to abide by a law.
FACT: we need to stop mass shootings, gang shootings and shootings in general, and laws do NOTHING to stop the bad guy from getting the gun.
FACT: the unfortunate will happen, where someone who is a gun owner with a licensed firearm and a background check will kill someone with his/her gun
So, until someone brilliant (Stephen Hawking maybe?) has an idea on how to stop the bad guy from getting the gun, Laws will do nothing to stop gun violence.
A gun ban will do nothing. The bad guy will ALWAYS find a way to get the gun.
I am not smart or thoughtful or insightful enough to come up with a solution to this problem. I wish someone could.
if the law was that all guns must be registered and finger printed to a licensed, insured owner, and then the gun gets stolen, the licensed gun owner would need to file a police report. Carrying a gun without the proper license and insurance would be a criminal act, just like it is for driving a car without a license and insurance.
So you would report your gun stolen, much like you report your car is stolen. If you don't, and the gun is used in any incident, then you would go to jail for its use. You did not lock it up when it was in your possession, so it fell into criminal hands. Therefore, your negligence was e proximate cause of its theft and use.
There are guns that have the capability of only being used by their owner via fingerprint scanners. Can we retrofit existing guns to have that technology. Then they would not be able to be used by anyone other than the registered owner. It would make it useless to steal those guns.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 8:56 AM |
| |
|
beachgirl
LIF Adult
Member since 7/05 7967 total posts
Name:
sara
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Another day, another shooting.
Yes and nothing changes
|
| Posted 10/9/15 9:34 AM |
| |
|
klingklang77
kraftwerk!
Member since 7/06 11489 total posts
Name:
Völlig losgelöst
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by LSP2005
Posted by LIRascal
This one's going to end badly, no matter how many of us share our opinions. While it's a discussion board, can we really discuss freely?
This is my opinion. Judgements will happen, but this discussion board is allowing us to state our opinion.
FACT: the bad guy is always going to get the gun.
FACT: the bad guy isn't going down to a gun store and plunking down a license for a background check, he/she isn't waiting for a handgun permit, and he/she isn't going to abide by a law.
FACT: we need to stop mass shootings, gang shootings and shootings in general, and laws do NOTHING to stop the bad guy from getting the gun.
FACT: the unfortunate will happen, where someone who is a gun owner with a licensed firearm and a background check will kill someone with his/her gun
So, until someone brilliant (Stephen Hawking maybe?) has an idea on how to stop the bad guy from getting the gun, Laws will do nothing to stop gun violence.
A gun ban will do nothing. The bad guy will ALWAYS find a way to get the gun.
I am not smart or thoughtful or insightful enough to come up with a solution to this problem. I wish someone could.
if the law was that all guns must be registered and finger printed to a licensed, insured owner, and then the gun gets stolen, the licensed gun owner would need to file a police report. Carrying a gun without the proper license and insurance would be a criminal act, just like it is for driving a car without a license and insurance.
So you would report your gun stolen, much like you report your car is stolen. If you don't, and the gun is used in any incident, then you would go to jail for its use. You did not lock it up when it was in your possession, so it fell into criminal hands. Therefore, your negligence was e proximate cause of its theft and use.
There are guns that have the capability of only being used by their owner via fingerprint scanners. Can we retrofit existing guns to have that technology. Then they would not be able to be used by anyone other than the registered owner. It would make it useless to steal those guns.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 10:05 AM |
| |
|
MrsMick
Baby #2 debuts in March 2016!
Member since 9/09 1977 total posts
Name:
Michele
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by quasi3
Posted by Penny4YourThoughs
Well, for one thing, if you have a gun for home protection its unlikely that the intruder is going to wait a sec for you to get your gun out of the safe...
and second... sorry kids, Crazies and Criminals are going to get their guns regardless of how much everyone wants to regulate gun control.
Agreed.
The focus needs to be on increased mental health services.
Guns don't kill people....people kill people.
Criminals are not obtaining their guns legally.
Let's focus on securing our schools, increasing access to screening and mental health services.
Should their be screening to see if you're eligible for a gun -- yes, but I don't think this is the true issue.
This. People are always going to have more access to guns. Look up killings in Chicago and they have the tightest gun laws.
More guns are being purchased on the black market. More people are stocking up on ammo and guns due to the fear that they won't be able to have them anymore.
They won't go away. It's like banning cars because of drunk drivers. Or stabbings because of kitchen knives. Or even medicine due to overdoses.
Mental illness is a giant factor, The government keeps closing facilities as well as limit funding. This should be a priority.
I do agree with the fact that people of firearms need to be responsible and have fun locks on firearms and ammo kept in separate locations.
FYI- I grew up with guns in the house and there has never been an issue. We were taught to respect the weapons and to never touch them. We never did nor had a desire to...
|
| Posted 10/9/15 1:28 PM |
| |
|
Alexandra17
Keep It Positive
Member since 4/09 6262 total posts
Name:
Alexandra (ali)
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by beachgirl
Another day, another shooting.
Yes and nothing changes
Seems it.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 1:40 PM |
| |
|
chilltocam
LIF Adult
Member since 11/11 9141 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by LIRascal
Posted by Diane
Im all for the 2nd amendment right to own guns.
I know NY does good background checks. Only problem. I feel is that it is so hard to do a mental health background check with all the HIPPA laws. I feel all these shootings are people who are unstable. Someone doesn't just go intentionally on a shooting spree for no reason. How do you check on mental health without violating HIPPA laws.
You don't. It's a background check for criminal records only.
This whole thing is a complicated topic that I don't feel well enough versed on to really take a position (yet). But, HIPAA would not be a barrier to doing a mental health background check - if you want a gun, you would have to provide authorization for the release of any relevant medical health treatment records. As long as the person whose records they are signs a consent to release form, there is no HIPAA violataion. Make that a mandatory part of obtaining a permit - not very difficult to do
|
| Posted 10/9/15 1:54 PM |
| |
|
ElizaRags35
My 2 Girls
Member since 2/09 20494 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by Alexandra17
Posted by beachgirl
Another day, another shooting.
Yes and nothing changes
Seems it.
And another. Yup. 2 shootings at colleges today.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 2:12 PM |
| |
|
Alexandra17
Keep It Positive
Member since 4/09 6262 total posts
Name:
Alexandra (ali)
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by ElizaRags35
Posted by Alexandra17
Posted by beachgirl
Another day, another shooting.
Yes and nothing changes
Seems it.
And another. Yup. 2 shootings at colleges today.
Two since the start of this thread. Wake up people.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 2:15 PM |
| |
|
LSP2005
Bunny kisses are so cute!
Member since 5/05 19461 total posts
Name:
L
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
What I would like to see is the following:
1. Permit system where you submit to both a background check and a mental health screening. If you pass both parts, then you could start to apply for a license.
2. Classes (like drivers ed) where you learn how to shoot, store, maintain, carry, safety, and laws of your state.
3. Written and practical testing.
4. Once you pass you receive a license to have guns.
5. Liability insurance for the guns and the individual
6. Each gun you own would need to be registered and insured to the individual.
7. Guns should have a GIN (gun identification number) like a vin.
8. If a gun is stolen report it immediately to police.
9. The only type of gun that could be left in a nightstand legally would be one that has a finger print ID system so that it can only be used by the registered user. All other guns would have to be locked up when not in use.
10. Private sales would, like cars, need to notify the state for a new title of ownership.
Edit you would have license renewals with a new mental health screening.
Message edited 10/9/2015 2:20:57 PM.
|
| Posted 10/9/15 2:17 PM |
| |
|
DRMom
Two in Blue
Member since 5/05 20223 total posts
Name:
Melissa
|
Re: Call to Action - From People Magazine
Posted by Penny4YourThoughs
I think that even if the 8 year old took a baseball bat to his neighbor's head over such a stupid issue it would demonstrate mental illness. Sounds like a bit of a sociopath in the works.
Yes-this kid obviously either has mental issues or is being raised by animals. I could never picturing either of my kids doing this!
|
| Posted 10/9/15 4:06 PM |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 |
