Mass shootings and gun violence are happening way too often

[OtterRuletheWorld]

You entirely ignored the 4A aspect of this conversation.

One person who has a stockpile of guns is likely useless. Millions of gun owners? They might have a shot. Although, your argument of the "government who has way bigger and stronger shit" is exactly why there is a resistance to banning ARs.

Obviously nobody wants to see toddlers hurt. I never said that and I am 100 percent positive I have never heard or seen such a statement anywhere. Teaching an 18 month old about gun safety is obviously not going to be helpful, which is why along with teaching children to get the fuck away from a gun, training for gun owners (which I believe should happen) should include gun safety around children. I have never suggested gun safety looks the same way for children of all ages.

Samantha Bee is making fun of a gun safety program for children. Think about that for a moment. Now, the costume is trademarked and not intended to be used for a comedy skit to make fun of gun safety. By the way, Samantha Bee forgot to note that organizations that are anti-gun are not doing much of anything to teach gun safety. By neglecting to do so, they are leaving it up to the NRA, etc. She also seems to give zero fucks about gun safety to begin with, since she has her fucking finger on the trigger of the gun when she isn't prepared to shoot it. In short, the NRA probably knows a fuck of a lot more than Samantha Bee about gun safety.

[Blahblah]

On 08/11/2017 at 5:41 AM, OtterRuletheWorld said:

Who gets these guns (Where do they go)  and where is the money to to fund this coming from?

That isn't really the same because those cars would be required to GET something, not take something away. Does restricting new ones solve problems or are people going to access them illegally anyway since they are already out there? Would it be better to focus energy on mental health, training people to safely use a weapon (and therefor more effectively use it for protection) and last, but absolutely not least important, enforcing laws.

And start enforcing the laws we already have.

I am Australian. Our gun laws were overhauled in 1996 thanks to a courageous effort by our then Prime Minister, John Howard, following an horrific massacre at a historical site/tourist attraction (Port Arthur). Since then we have not has a single mass shooting. Not one. 

If you bothered to do even minimal research you would not need to ask stupid questions like “who gets these guns” (nobody - they were destroyed) or who funded it (an increase in our national health scheme tax of a tiny amount meant that every tax paying Aussie did. And we were happy to do so).

I know you are a troll. You’ve had a lot of practice here. I usually ignore you. But I am proud of John Howard for his actions (not always the case) and I will play your silly game just this once.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/15/remember-john-olivers-gun-control-interview-john-howard_a_21396150/

I’m not linking to info about Port Arthur. It still makes me cry. You can do that for yourself.

 

[onekidanddone]

3 minutes ago, Blahblah said:

I am Australian. Our gun laws were overhauled in 1996 thanks to a courageous effort by our then Prime Minister, John Howard, following an horrific massacre at a historical site/tourist attraction (Port Arthur). Since then we have not has a single mass shooting. Not one. 

If you bothered to do even minimal research you would not need to ask stupid questions like “who gets these guns” (nobody - they were destroyed) or who funded it (an increase in our national health scheme tax of a tiny amount meant that every tax paying Aussie did. And we were happy to do so).

I know you are a troll. You’ve had a lot of practice here. I usually ignore you. But I am proud of John Howard for his actions (not always the case) and I will play your silly game just this once.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/15/remember-john-olivers-gun-control-interview-john-howard_a_21396150/

I’m not linking to info about Port Arthur. It still makes me cry. You can do that for yourself.

 

I'm interested in knowing of your gun laws differ by region. Here in states for example Alaska used to require all bush pilots to carry fire arms along with other survival items for the interior where bears are king. There is a big difference between the Norther Slope of Alaska and your average Target in suburbia.  I see how universal back ground checks and tighter laws are good.   To sum it up defensive weapon in the wild: yes.  Shot gun to go to Safeway: fuck no.  Combat ready machine guns:  NEVER.

[Blahblah]

2 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

I'm interested in knowing of your gun laws differ by region. Here in states for example Alaska used to require all bush pilots to carry fire arms along with other survival items for the interior where bears are king. There is a big difference between the Norther Slope of Alaska and your average Target in suburbia.  I see how universal back ground checks and tighter laws are good.   To sum it up defensive weapon in the wild: yes.  Shot gun to go to Safeway: fuck no.  Combat ready machine guns:  NEVER.

Federal law controls importation. Use/storage etc is state based. But all states are nominally signed up to a federal / national agreement. There is some minor variance between states.

I don’t usually quote wiki pages because they aren’t always reliable but this give you the general idea:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

It is almost impossible to convey how insignificant guns are in our daily lives. The only person I even know with a gun is our friend who is a farmer and who uses it for pest control (foxes, rabbits). 

 

[Blahblah]

I may have posted this clip before, but it is still valid. NSFW.

https://www.vox.com/2016/6/13/11911948/australian-comedian-us-gun-laws

[GrumpyGran]

17 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

This I say not because I think we are better in any way

You are. I remember my times in your country fondly. Would love a weekend in Sorrento right now. Well, actually any time.

[SilverBeach]

Firearms are hella expensive, where do folks find the money to stockpile weapons? Stupid and expensive.

[nausicaa]

45 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

Firearms are hella expensive, where do folks find the money to stockpile weapons? Stupid and expensive.

I always wonder that as well. The cheapest handgun in a gun shop is about $480. Larger semi-automatics start at $700  and can go up to several thousand. When I learned this, I started wondering where my poor cousins got all this money from for their collections. 

[GrumpyGran]

1 hour ago, SilverBeach said:

Firearms are hella expensive, where do folks find the money to stockpile weapons? Stupid and expensive.

Then they bitch about how they pay too much in taxes, they can't afford health care. They'll spend what would be premiums for a month on one gun to use at the range. WTF.

[Smoochie]

A friend posted this today and it says so much!

 

Spoiler

 

[VelociRapture]

I haven’t read most of the thread and I likely won’t because my anti-nausea meds are making me super tired. I just want my baby and every person in this country to be safe from gun violence. I wish that wasn’t so much to ask. 

[Flossie]

5 hours ago, SilverBeach said:

Firearms are hella expensive, where do folks find the money to stockpile weapons? Stupid and expensive.

Well, my ex has (or I think he still has) a rifle that is normally used for big game - I mean BIG game.  He once said that maybe he'd take it deer hunting and his cousin told him to decide in advance which end of the deer he wanted, because that gun would vaporize half the deer.  It was probably OK for elk hunting though, or moose if we had them in our area.

Anyway, he got the gun because one of his cousin's bought it back when the cousin was single and had a good job and an interest in having the biggest gun in his county.  A few years later he was married with a couple of kids, his good job had disappeared, he was about to lose his house, and it was almost Christmas.  He sold it to my husband for $400, and they've been selling it back and forth to each other over the years as need be.  

In the meantime, my husband only got to shoot it a couple of times because the ammo for such a big gun was super expensive.  It really wasn't good for target practice, and too big for regular hunting.  The .22 was better for hunting deer or dealing with vermin, the shotgun was better for bird hunting, and that or the pistol was better for personal protection.

Still, I haven't felt the need or the inclination for any type of firearm once he and his guns left and I became a single parent with children in the home.  (Was I considered a single parent when the kids saw their father regularly, or is there another designation for parents who live alone but the kid's other parent is nearby and doing their part?)

[Rachel333]

Re: Jayne Mansfield: It's actually not true that all tractor trailers have to have an underride guard. It was recommended after the crash that killed her but it didn't actually get implemented very widely and it's still not required in the US. I know a girl who had two teenage sisters die a few years ago because the car they were in went under a tractor trailer in an accident that was determined to be the truck driver's fault. Since then their family has joined other families of people who died that way to try to get regulations requiring an underride guard, but it hasn't happened yet. I've seen discussions online where people insist that it would be too expensive for companies to install them and that the money it would cost the company is more important than saving a few lives.

So there are some parallels to gun control there, unfortunately. 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

1 hour ago, Rachel333 said:

Re: Jayne Mansfield: It's actually not true that all tractor trailers have to have an underride guard. It was recommended after the crash that killed her but it didn't actually get implemented very widely and it's still not required in the US. I know a girl who had two teenage sisters die a few years ago because the car they were in went under a tractor trailer in an accident that was determined to be the truck driver's fault. Since then their family has joined other families of people who died that way to try to get regulations requiring an underride guard, but it hasn't happened yet. I've seen discussions online where people insist that it would be too expensive for companies to install them and that the money it would cost the company is more important than saving a few lives.

So there are some parallels to gun control there, unfortunately. 

Here underride guards are mandatory. I suppose that if the laws had mandated them on every new truck since 1967 there wouldn't be many still circulating. But heaven forbids regulating situations before they worsen and get out of control. Plus it seems that in addition to safety benefits, underride guards may improve fuel mileage by reducing air turbulence under the trailer at highway speeds. It would seem like a no brainer, much like gun safety regulations.

The "we won't be able to own guns ever again" objection is bullshit. This I say as a citizen of a heavily regulated  country in whose home there's currently a hunting rifle. Complying with regulations ain't that hard.

The "omg we live in a sparsely pupulated, full of wild beasts area" objection is bullshit too. Australia is known for being quite wild and even more sparsely populated, yet they somehow make do.

I agree that you can't take the approach of another country and copy it, it probably wouldn't work. You have to find your own solutions. But discarding any possible solution because not good enough is not a solution it's just a way to stagnate the discussion and  prolong the status quo.

[Flossie]

3 hours ago, Rachel333 said:

Re: Jayne Mansfield: It's actually not true that all tractor trailers have to have an underride guard. It was recommended after the crash that killed her but it didn't actually get implemented very widely and it's still not required in the US.

One of my cousins was stopped behind a logging truck.  The driver in the front kind of spaced off and didn't notice that his rig was slowly rolling backward.  My cousin started honking her horn, but when the truck kept rolling back over her car she didn't get out, she probably panicked.  Instead, she threw herself sideways so she was lying over her passenger seat as the trailer passed over her car.  Other vehicles were honking their horns and some people ran up to the logging truck and finally the driver realized what had happened and pulled forward.  I think everyone was expecting the worst, but my cousin was OK.  She chalked it up to God hearing her frantic prayer to save her.

Even so, I still don't think that I see semi's today without guards on their trailers.

(P.S.  Did it get it right when I said lying over?  I wanted to say she was laying over.)

[Ali]

Michigan Senate passed legislation allowing concealed weapons everywhere. It still has to go through the House and the Governor. This passed through both the Senate and the House a few years ago, but the Governor vetoed it because it didn't allow an opt out option.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/11/08/michigan-concealed-pistol-carry-schools/843443001/

Which state should I move to to hopefully keep kids safer if this passes? 

[formergothardite]

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

You entirely ignored the 4A aspect of this conversation.

This is the 4th Amendment for everyone:

Quote

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So if you build onto your house, or build a house or anything like that, you have to deal with inspectors, My parents are currently going through this right now and you have to get inspectors for every single fucking thing. It isn't a violation of the 4th Amendment. Neither would having an inspector come check to see that you have a proper place to store a gun every time you purchase one if there are children living in the house. If you are reported for putting children at risk by not properly storing your guns, that also wouldn't be a violation of the 4th amendment anymore than the CPS reports are now. Any excuse against making parents lock up guns just comes off as loving guns more than children. 

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

Millions of gun owners? They might have a shot. Although, your argument of the "government who has way bigger and stronger shit" is exactly why there is a resistance to banning ARs.

Millions of gun owners still wouldn't stand a chance. If the government turned truly evil they would just start blowing up families who resisted. Many of those millions would then turn the guns over to keep their children from getting killed. And again, what is more likely to happen, your dystopian evil government apocalypse or a mass shooting? 

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

Samantha Bee is making fun of a gun safety program for children. Think about that for a moment.

Wow, the point of that clip went right over your head, didn't it? No she wasn't mocking a gun safety program for children, she was showing how easy it was for her staff to get guns without a background check because of the NRA fighting legislation all while they have strict registries, back ground checks, and waiting periods for a costume that can't be used to kill people. She was showing how the NRA loves their eagle costume more than the actual safety of people.

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

She also seems to give zero fucks about gun safety to begin with, since she has her fucking finger on the trigger of the gun when she isn't prepared to shoot it.

It was a comedy sketch where she pretended to be terrible with guns. Did you see where they pretended a loaded gun went off because it was improperly stored? She was licking the gun and putting her finger on the trigger on purpose because she knew it was unsafe. It also shows how not only can you guy guns without a background check, you can buy them without anyone bothering to find out if you have a clue about gun safety, which is pretty damn scary. 

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

By the way, Samantha Bee forgot to note that organizations that are anti-gun are not doing much of anything to teach gun safety.

Probably because teaching gun safety to children really isn't that effective.

19 hours ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

In short, the NRA probably knows a fuck of a lot more than Samantha Bee about gun safety.

I will agree that the NRA actually knows about gun safety, I disagree that they have programs that push gun safety, especially for children, in an effective way. Probably because just like a giant dog saying "just say no" didn't stop kids from using drugs, a giant eagle saying to not touch a gun doesn't stop children from picking them up. The only way is to keep the guns stored in a way children can't reach them. Training is not the answer. 

Quote

When asked to act out this response, behavior skills
training program students performed significantly better than did Eddie Eagle
program students, who performed significantly better than did control
students. However, neither the Eddie Eagle program, nor the behavior
skills training program was successful at teaching students to respond properly
when presented with a real-life scenario that involved finding a gun.

So basically there are programs that did work better than the NRA one, but neither were effective in a real life situation that involved finding a gun. For those who don't want to read the whole thing, they had three groups of children, one group received the NRA training, one group behavioral skills training, and one group nothing. When it came to roll playing the behavioral skills training did better than the children with no training and the children with the NRA training. But when the children were placed in a real life situation with a gun where they did not know they were being tested or watched this is what happened:

Quote

However, neither program was successful at teaching young
children to use these skills in real-life scenarios.

Here is another article about children, training and gun safety:

Quote

85% of gun-owning parents did not practice safe gun storage and that "the only predictor of parents' incorrect perceptions about firearm safety training was the children will be safe if taught.' This parental misperception provides further evidence that parents have unrealistic attitudes about children and guns." 

85% that is horrifying. 

Quote

At least two other studies have evaluated the effectiveness of the Eddie Eagle program, and another may have. Neither offered good news. An effective gun-accident prevention program must actually prevent children from picking up guns they find, prevent them from pulling the trigger and prevent subsequent gun injuries and deaths.

Again, training isn't the answer. Not even NRA training. 

This is another study where they put children in a situation with a real gun to see what would happen:

Quote

Then the kicker: "90% of the boys who handled the gun or pulled the trigger reported that they had previously received some sort of gun safety instruction." The authors still conclude that children should be taught not to touch a gun and to get an adult if they find a gun, but "if gun safety education gives parents a sense of complacency without fundamentally altering child behavior, then it might do more harm than good," they add.

So all the gun safety classes might be doing more harm than good because it makes parents think that their kids are less likely to pick up a gun. 

Quote

In the Pediatrics study that came out a few days ago, the authors wrote, "Our findings indicate that most children who died of unintentional firearm injuries were shot by another child in their own age range and most often in the context of playing with a gun or showing it to others. Previous research shows that children are curious about firearms and will touch a firearm even when instructed not to do so."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2017/06/21/gun-safety-programs-wont-save-your-child-but-this-question-might/#395908bf55b8

[OtterRuletheWorld]

Michigan Senate passed legislation allowing concealed weapons everywhere. It still has to go through the House and the Governor. This passed through both the Senate and the House a few years ago, but the Governor vetoed it because it didn't allow an opt out option.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/11/08/michigan-concealed-pistol-carry-schools/843443001/
Which state should I move to to hopefully keep kids safer if this passes? 

California has pretty strict gun laws.

[Ali]

13 minutes ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

California has pretty strict gun laws.

I wish I could afford to live in California. That's were I grew up.  

[laPapessaGiovanna]

1 hour ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

California has pretty strict gun laws.

Not that it matters when all you have to do is cross unchecked borders.

[apple1]

Why continue to argue with a known troll?

[OtterRuletheWorld]

Absolutely, but she asked. Lack of borders is precisely how guns have gotten into France during terrorist attacks. Definitely a huge thing to consider when having discussion about about gun laws.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

52 minutes ago, OtterRuletheWorld said:

Absolutely, but she asked. Lack of borders is precisely how guns have gotten into France during terrorist attacks. Definitely a huge thing to consider when having discussion about about gun laws.

Wrong, as most of the things you spout. Lack of control, enforcement and communication between countries led to Paris mass terrorist attacks. Our intelligence agencies and LEOs basically fell asleep at the wheel. The firearms used in Paris were illegal in every EU country and had every EU country enforced their laws it wouldn't have happened. As you may have noticed, most recently terrorists had to resort to other type of attacks with a less casualties on average. That's because our police forces started to control more, enforce existing laws and communicate between states.

The additional problem in the US is that in addition to no border control you have wildly different laws among different states.

ETA BTW you are the trolling one dear.

[candygirl200413]

Florida school offering bulletproof armor for students’ backpacks

Quote

A private school in South Florida is offering bulletproof armor that students can use to protect themselves from gunfire.

Florida Christian School in Miami-Dade County, which has students ranging from preschool to high school, is offering parents the ability to buy a piece of ballistic armor that can be placed in their child’s backpack, according to the Miami Herald.

“It’s just a tool,” George Gulla, the school’s head of security, told the Miami Herald. “I’d rather be prepared for the worst than be stuck after saying ‘Wow, I wish we would’ve done that.’”

Gulla, who has 27 years of law enforcement experience, was running through safety drills with parents at the school when Alex Cejas, founder of the body armor company Applied Fiber Concepts, suggested the idea.

Cejas created binder-sized armor that can protect students from some bullets, but not bullets from a rifle.

 

1

Welp. Now we're here.

[onekidanddone]

1 minute ago, candygirl200413 said:

Cejas created binder-sized armor that can protect students from some bullets, but not bullets from a rifle.

How are these binders supposed to stop the kind of weapons used in Las Vegas, Orlando or Sandy Hook.  Yet another example of a TD doing absolutely nothing.