what if we stop arguing so hard and start looking for a common solution?

I don't know how you stop a crazy person before they've committed a crime without leaving way too much room for abuse of the system. I don't think the other side does either. Remember, some of them honestly want to help.

 

"in the end we both want the same thing
for crazy people to stop killing innocent people"

I dis-agree.
I cannot control what another person intends to do.
Ban guns, kill with edged weapons, cars, clubs, hammers, wrenches, fire, water, bare handed.
Who is sane, when? Oregon saved some jingle by closing the criminal insane hospitals. Turned the inmates loose. Folks living under a bridge may be nuts, or down on their luck.

Ban the gun? ordinary decent citizens (sheep) obey, maybe. Others won't. No rational discussions can be had because "ban guns" is so opposite of "gun rights".
Give a little to get a little? That got us 40 years of increasingly stringent rules and laws.

Guns know no borders. Let it be known you are in the market, and can pay, the hunk of iron will sprout feet and jump in your pocket. The cartels have grenades, mortars, AT missiles, heavy machine guns. Some came from here to there

I'ts a big picture deal for me. I see newsclips on body dumps in Mexico, dozens, hundreds murdered for dis-agreeing with somebody stronger then they were. Iraq body dumps. Bosnia body dumps.

LaRaza factions, Moslems, Skinheads, Aryan Nation, waiting to clean ethnics from their lands. Churning madness.

Who joins the Marine Corps? Who marries because she's nice? Jumps off a tall cliff in a flying squirrel suit? Sells or takes dope? Rides a motorcycle in traffic? Hires on as law enforcement? NUTTY AS A FRUITCAKE!

I concluded after much thought, that everybody (me, you, even noflinch's dog) are nuts.
To which level or degree of nuts? I just don't know. If someone decides to murder, maim, harm as in the Clakamas Town Center shooting, and I am nearby, armed or unarmed, I will attack.

If it comes to violence, take a leaf from James Mattis.
Be friends with everyone, but ...

Sincerely
Rick

 

The choice is more simple than others believe. Are we so afraid that we are willing to have a less free society than we've had in the past, or so courageous that we are willing to take a risk and live as free as we were intended.

You shouldn't call yourself an American if you are willing to give up any of your freedoms.

I would rather take risks and die a free man than give government the power decide which of my freedoms must be infringed "for my own good". History has proven there's no hope of recovery from that slippery slope.

I think that we are made easy targets by allowing ourselves to become weak, and dependent on government. Our enemies see this, and know we're vulnerable in our "safe spaces" and "gun free zones", where we're nothing more than sheep herded to the slaughter.

The weaker the people are, the weaker America becomes. Think hard before you vote for those willing to make you defenseless, and keep you that way. They're the enemy, not ISIS.

 

I know how to make you feel so much safer in these time.

I sneak in and unplug your electricity and steal your cell phone. The reason it seams like everything is so terrible is that something happens 3500 miles away and as its happening your bomb bared ed with the play by play. Then for the next week you get the same discussion as last time something happened on the other side of the country all the while your own life is peaceful and quiet.

SHUT OFF THE MEDIA and its WHORES.

Listen to the Song Dirty Laundry it explains it all.

 

To ask for a rational solution to any irrational issue, will drive anyone a little nuts. Humankind has always struggled with its own irrational acts, in ourselves and in others, violent or otherwise, because it's something that we are not in control of; this is a source of fear for many. In fact, in modern life, there are a lot of things in life we can't control, and the resultant fear drives people to carry out crazy acts. So this is the paradox: the inability to accept what we can't control leads to acts of irrational behavior, fantastical and delusional thinking, and other extreme measures, in the effort to gain control.
Guns are simultaneously the embodiment of life and death as they have the ability to affect both, in a positive and negative way. It is the ultimate crux of free choice, how a person uses a gun. Since the majority of people can't face the fact they don't have control of their lives in many regards, and certainly not other people, guns come to represent this penultimate choice.
So how then, in a 'free society,' do you control the choice that someone else makes? You don't, and you can't. So the next best things are morality, laws and government, social cohesion and identification, and culture, tradition, and on and on. There may be the illusion of control in individuals successfully adhering to a mutually agreed upon belief system, but that has limits too; and they change and evolve as well. In America, we're supposed to have the rule of law above all, so people look to that mechanism to achieve the sense of control and cohesion that transcends culture, tradition, morality, or any belief system. But even when it is not itself corrupted, the rule of law cannot transcend the irrational and rational inherent in every human.
With these limited options, people under the illusion of positive control by the rule of law, think they can stop irrational behavior with a rational law, or in lieu of that, just remove the choice altogether: no more guns.
So my tortured answer to the OP's question is this: no law will stop human behavior, good or bad, but it will create far more complicated consequences over which we will have far less control.

Only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.

 

And Read mine.
Reduce the issue.
Convicted of Murder
Carry out the execution penalty.
Cremate to ashes.
Spread them on an ethanol corn field if it makes everyone feel less icky.

 

Before I speak my mind I will let you know that I am not religious but do reference God.

Yes we all want to stop the madness and stop people from going nuts but guess what we can’t.

This last shooter had background checks for his job, background checks to buy guns and was on a watch list but they found nothing so they taken him off it.

What more could have been done short of a chip implanted in all our brains so we all think happy, happy thoughts.

Here is the kicker the reason we cannot change it is because God gave man “Free Will”. If you do not believe in God then simply put, we have “Free Thought” and “Free Will”.

“Free Will” to do the greatest good or the worst evil or somewhere in between!

Mans “Free Will” allows us to get up in the morning, get dressed and go to work or get up in the morning buy guns and ammo and kill.

“Free Will” gives us the ability to help others through donations, charitable work and acts of kindness.

“Free Will” also gives us the ability to torture animals, bully children and just be rude.

So unless you have a way to change man’s heart and mind you will never get rid of evil.

It has been in man since the beginning of time from Cain and Able, David and Goliath and there have been war lords on every continent, country and city throughout time and still are.

Man has and will always be at war with itself so as long as we have “Free Will” this will not change.

By saying all of this I do not want to give the impression that there is no hope because there is always hope because this too is a part of mans “Free Will”.

Simple Definition of free will

• : the ability to choose how to act
  
  
• : the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God

 

Becuase were too PC and won't take the chance to offend America's fragile feelings.

But we will push political agendas that destroy the Constitution and bill of rights

 

The 1st thing you need to realize is that Islam is a political philosophy and there is no such thing as 'Radical' Islam, the closet one can find to a Radical Islamist is a person born into Islam but who does not practice it at all. The true followers of Islam are to be found in ISIS and Al Queda and they are very observant in citing the Hadith, Suras or Koranic verses that dictate their behavior

 

Part 1

Part 2

End of debate.

 

No - "we" do not want the same thing.

Are there people on both sides of the issue that want the killing to stop?

Yes. But you know what? Not going to happen. Humans have been killing humans since before they were human. It is human nature. So there is that.

But more to the point, there is a significant number of people on the anti-gun side who simply do not want any non-government entity to have firearms, period. Stop all killing tomorrow somehow, and they would still want to ban guns. All guns. Guns, and by extension, any form of power to resist government power, in the hands of the civilian populace, makes them nervous and they want all forms of possible resistance eliminated. That is the nature of tyrants, whether it is an individual or a mob.

So no - "we" do not want the same thing.

 

Of course there are things that can be done, BUT, many of those things infringe on individual rights and liberty, and THAT is where so many of us draw the line. Do we need more laws?? No. There are already plenty of laws on the books. It's been illegal to murder someone for millennia, yet it has failed to stop murder from occurring.

Here is the problem I see with your proposal - you are focusing on the TOOL of murder/mayhem rather than on the person/intent. That is a distraction point, used by the anti-gun crowd to keep us from talking about the real problems - lack of proper mental health care, lack of facilities to contain the most dangerously mentally ill, failing to prosecute criminals and keeping them in prison, allowing illegal immigrants and un-vetted refugees to flood into and remain in our country, an attitude that says we can't even say what race, religion or ethnicity someone who commits a crime is. All of these are the greater problem.

Go ahead, take away all the guns. If there wasn't a single gun in this country, these attack would still happen. People would still die. The Boston bombers proved that just as many people could be killed with a pressure cooker as they can with an AR 15. Timothy McVey did even more damage with some off-the-shelf fertilizer components. The gal from Portland that ran through the crowd of people in Vegas last year with her car. No, focusing on the tool that was used is a huge mistake and only serves to turn our attention away from the real issues at hand.

We need to stop talking about MORE LAWS. We have enough already. If we simply got these folks to enforce the laws already on the books they would have more than enough to do what they can. But so long as we have protected groups of people that we can't even mention or we're racists, bigots, etc., then we will not make progress.

This push for more gun laws is nothing more than political posturing combined with an opportunity for them to play against the fears of many Americans. The LAST thing we should be doing is basing new laws on fear, especially without taking the time to calm the hell down and have reasonable debate over the issue. But these folks know if they don't move fast, they won't get their new laws, further restricting our rights, to pass. Just ask how acting quickly out of fear worked out for the citizens of Australia - nationwide gun confiscation. We need to learn lessons from them and not rush to judgment and act on emotion.

So turn your gaze away from taking our liberties further away and look to the real problems. There is no 'compromise' needed because it's not the issue we should be discussing in the first place. And when someone says we need more gun laws, tell them that's not the answer. Fact is that laws simply don't stop all crime, they never will. If we are to live in a country with the kind of freedom our forefathers imagined, then we will be exposed to some risk. The greater risk is removing that liberty under the false promise of safety, only to find we've all become prisoners of our own government.

 

maybe it's meant to be this way - in the big picture. Humans killing humans. In the final judgement, it's got to make it easier to separate the wheat from the chaff. And there will be one huge bonfire for the those good ones left to warm themselves by.

 

Go back and re-read my second paragraph again. I identified a number of items that I believe are the real issues. Issues such as putting known felons and the mentally ill out on the streets. Issues like allowing illegal immigrants, particularly those who commit violent crimes to remain here and on the streets. The fact is that the government blew it on this guy - he passed a BGC because they chose to ignore warning after warning about him. That's why I don't want to talk about finding more gun laws - they were already in place, and the system failed. He should never have passed the BGC to begin with. So what good would another law do, when those charged with upholding the law choose to ignore it, or in this case, out of sheer incompetence, fail to stop a killer?

 

The challenge with the current thinking is that to prevent or stop any act of mass violence SOMEBODY has to lose his or her rights.

We either stop anyone from accessing any gun (loss of 2A, right to defend one’s self, etc.) or we magically decide who is “crazy” and suspend their civil and human rights (can’t buy a gun, can’t drive a school bus, can’t run with scissors, etc.).

We know banning all guns is not the answer since crazy people will use potato peelers if that’s all they can get their hands on. But we also know that “crazy” is in the eye of the beholder and I’m not too keen on our government’s definition of anything.

So let’s be proactive and create a Crazy List. How does one get on the Crazy List? What is the qualifying criteria for joining that club? Can we nominate people? Once on the list, what rights do you forfeit? Can new rights be revoked when deemed appropriate? How do you appeal your crazy status? Can you ever be deemed “un-crazy”? If so, who determines that? How do we know that you truly are “un-crazy? Wouldn’t it be better to just leave you on the list permanently just to be safe? If it saves just one life….

While this seems a bit far fetched (or at least I would have thought it was a few years ago), this is the path we are embarking on. It’s either the road to no guns or crazy lists, or both. There’s no in between in the current political climate.

Do you really want to entrust your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness to some all-knowing government that can randomly determine you are crazy and therefore are no longer entitled to the rights your neighbor has? Or, is the correct path to evaluate each incident and determine root cause and try to fix the core problems? Or maybe we just keep blaming the gun instead of the idiot? Or it’s the village’s fault for not raising the idiot correctly? Video games? Social promotion? Add your excuse of the day here…

You cannot legislate morality, decency or any other form of self control. Contrary to popular belief, laws can’t prevent crimes they can only hold people accountable after the fact. Short of mind control, there is no “solution” to this problem.