Scholarship table
Everybody talks about it.
So it's common sense for an 18-19-20 year-old American to serve in the U.S. military, often being highly trained in the use of guns and other more dangerous weapons, but not able to buy a gun of any kind?
a) make a drug and psych and medical test required before one can get a license to buy a gun (medical test because lots of hunters die of heart attacks due to the exertion of walking while hunting being their only annual exercise)b) gun license cost $10,000 per gun, per yearc) guns must be stored at a safe storage facilityd) you must apply 2 weeks in advance to get your gun from the storage facilitye) you must return your gun timely to the safe storage facilityf) $100 tax on bullets (each one) and shells UNLESS bought at and used at a licensed range or game expeditiong)Offer $10,000 per gun for return of guns for those who don't want to pay the new gun license feesAfter a few years of the above, there will be very few guns, very few shootings, and then we can talk about disarming the police (like most other civil countries) so they stop shooting people.
It’s all over the news. Sorry you missed it. Perhaps you should pay attention instead of spending so much time building strawmen. And last I checked, Chicago was in America so I think it is inclusive of Jockey’s statement.
what we missed was uncle joe and dr jill visiting these mass shootings as well.
if you were really serious about getting positive results, you would be a little bit more serious about remedies most could abide by. i'd START by increasing the punishments of those who abuse/break the laws we presently have. 1) felons with guns 2) felons with guns in restricted areas. 3) uzi machine guns and machine pistols and the like 4) anyone caught with a gun whose ID has been altered or scraped off you start with just these 4 things and you will see the number of shootings drop...i said start. until many of the reasonably minded pro gun people see some serious attempts, you will not see anything
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
We already do this. We incarcerate more people than China and Russia combined. By itself, increased incarceration doesn't work. In fact, I'd argue it contributes to the gun problem in places like Chicago. We need to try something else. Plus, how many mass shooters would this have stopped? I can see the argument for why it helps in intercity gun violence (though I think long term it increases it), but I don't think any of the shooters in Buffalo, Uvalde, Las Vegas, Parkland, Orlando, Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc. had previous arrests for gun related crimes.Tertiary prevention is important, but it is reactive. It requires that a crime already be committed meaning damage has already been done. We need to look to primary prevention as well.
I think what Rocket is getting at, is that prosecutors drop the gun charge quite often, like in the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
I don't think that's what Rocket was getting at
1. Background checks to get a gun license.2. Allow 18 year olds to buy single shot handguns, rifles and shotguns3. If they go three years without incident, they can get apply for and get a license for AR-15's and the like4. Come down hard on illegal gun transfers. Immediate reporting of all guns stolen, etc. Repeat offenders get their license revoked.5. Give judges the ability to temporarily revoke licenses and have the guns removed from the home.All of this can be done within the bounds of the 2nd Amendment.
How about the mass shootings in Chicago over the weekend that killed way more people? Why don’t these get as much attention?
It would be a start, but what the heck do you need an AR-15 for? Much easier to just tax guns and ammo into oblivion. No 18 year old could buy a gun if it cost $10k and no-one would be shooting 40 rounds a minute if each one cost $100. At least they would go into the school and shoot just one person because that's all they could afford.. Yes, that is exactly how senseless this whole discussion is!!!
I'm glad you brought this up.As you know, more guns in circulation result in higher amounts of gun-related death. This includes mass shootings like schools as well as gang activity.As you know, gun control measures would hopefully decrease guns in circulation. If nothing else, at least by creating barriers to entry for either legal or illegal obtaining.So I'm sure you'd agree that we need to implement some amount of gun control to reduce the incidence of gun-related deaths.Otherwise, we're just going to have to accept the gun-related deaths in our country as a consequence to the freedom of easily obtained guns.
Right, but Chicago has some of the toughest gun control in the country and clearly that doesn’t matter. It’s a more of a cultural, local policy and politicians and mental health issue. No fathers in the home, no respect for life, etc.
Right, but Chicago has some of the toughest gun control in the country and clearly that doesn’t matter.
It would be a start, but what the heck do you need an AR-15 for?
Because you didn't say AR-15. You said all guns and ammo would be subhect. You just destroyed the hunting industry (something that countries with strict gun control like Canada or the UK still have in plenty).I'm not pro-gun and agree with basically all of the common sense measures that Fluff suggested (and would be fine with no AR-15s period) but your suggestions are as ridiculous as people on the other side who think nothing should be done at all.
Everyone owns a lot of things they don't "need" but they get joy from. If someone wants to responsibly own an AR-15...or ten of them...to show off in pictures or shoot off at ranges, that's fine by me. I would have no interest in that, but others do.
And on top of that, this is where gun control advocates get into trouble and start mentioning ideas that have no potential to be adopted. 98% of the people who own AR-15s aren't the problem. It's keeping them out of the hands of the 2% that's the issue here.
What nobody talks about is the black supremacist driver who mowed down people in Waukesha. Or the black on black gang mass shootings in Chicago every day. Why don’t both get as much attention? We know why, just don’t know why it’s not called both ways.