What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Gun Control Laws - Where are we really? Where to go? (3 Viewers)

But you said there was a major opportunity to fix big problems that we were missing by focusing on the problem of school shootings. I'm totally game for a major opportunity to fix big problems, now you're telling me it's all but impossible? 
Sure, there is.  It's a tougher problem than assault weapons, though.  Because I understand where the big problems are doesn't mean I have a politically soluble game plan for fixing or ameliorating it.  I'm sure others do.

It's whack a mole. It's intentional. 
Yes, it's an intentional conspiracy.  

Dobriy vecher, comrade.

 
So, in the aftermath of a school shooting, why can't we just focus on what we can do to make this particularly American problem better, rather than using the fact that there are bigger problems to brush it aside? 

Fixing this problem doesn't mean that we can't fix other problems. 
WhereTF was the FBI when somebody saw something (posts about becoming a professional school shooter) and somebody said something to them?  Fix that problem. Surely somebody can do something about that today rather than the bang your head against gun control that may never happen.  

 
WhereTF was the FBI when somebody saw something (posts about becoming a professional school shooter) and somebody said something to them?  Fix that problem. Surely somebody can do something about that today rather than the bang your head against gun control that may never happen.  
WhereTF was the NRA...oh right... in every bodies pockets....Surely somebody can do something about that today rather than the bang your head and wait for another massacre that will happen.

 
Whose the somebody you're talking about that can do something immediately about the NRA?  I'm just asking the FBI to do their job. 
Charlton Heston? I dont give a ####. Plenty of $$ going around to prevent regulation/ control.  But why stop at FBI? lets blame the dead kids like Trump did -- they didnt do their job either apparently. 

 
WhereTF was the NRA...oh right... in every bodies pockets....Surely somebody can do something about that today rather than the bang your head and wait for another massacre that will happen.
It's not the NRA's fault that the FBI didn't properly act on the reports.  You seem to be mixing up two different issues.  Badly.

 
Charlton Heston? I dont give a ####. Plenty of $$ going around to prevent regulation/ control.  But why stop at FBI? lets blame the dead kids like Trump did -- they didnt do their job either apparently. 
You're asking the devil to do something righteous. That's what I meant by banging your head against a wall. 

Like it or not the this kid was reported to the FBI and they had an opportunity to stop it. Something is broken there. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been pondering the mentally ill question for several days. I think we can all agree that, at least in theory, people who are mentally ill should not be allowed to own firearms. Scalia even acknowledges this in Heller. But how to categorize who is mentally ill without violating privacy rights? Of course we could limit this to people in mental institutions (which, as Joe Bryant pointed out in the OP, the law already does) but we all know that most people who are mentally ill don't ever enter into an institution. We could revamp Obama's idea of making a list of those who receive medication for mental illness from the government, but beyond this still be very limiting (it excludes all of the people who get the same medication from private sources), the ACLU objected, again for privacy reasons. And though I disagree with them on this, I'm troubled by their point. The vast majority of mentally ill people don't commit crimes and shouldn't be treated as if they do.

One way to start, which I have mentioned before, is to extend gun prohibitions to those who commit violent misdemeanors. From what I've read this is almost a standard characteristic of these mass shooters- at one time in the past they committed an act of domestic violence, but because it was not a felony, it didn't stop them from gun purchases later on. It should. Another idea would be to allow juvenile crimes to play a role in prohibiting gun sales. Juvie records are typically sealed and nobody's allowed to look at them, but I think that if you were convicted of committing a violent crime at any point in your life, that should prevent you from being able to legally purchase guns for the rest of your life.

Anyone have a problem with this?

 
It's not the NRA's fault that the FBI didn't properly act on the reports.  You seem to be mixing up two different issues.  Badly.
If you don't see my point, not worth arguing,  Seems the kids getting shot at will get this straight and I doubt they are blaming the FBI solely for this --

 
You're asking the devil to do something righteous. That's what I meant by banging your head against a wall. 

Like it or not the this kid was reported to the FBI and they had an opportunity to stop it. Something is broken there. 
Nope.  The devil must go.

 
Like it or not the this kid was reported to the FBI and they had an opportunity to stop it. Something is broken there. 
How many times are people going to be allowed to repeat the bolded without it being challenged? There was nothing the FBI could have done. Local law enforcement was already aware of Cruz, they visited him 39 times. They could have arrested him for his social media threats, perhaps, but he would not have been in jail very long. They had no power to seize his guns or to stop him from purchasing more guns. There is nothing that they or the FBI could have done to stop this crime under the current laws of Florida that the NRA helped to set up.

 
It's not the NRA's fault that the FBI didn't properly act on the reports. 
Yes it is. Absolutely.

Without the NRA pushing through laws preventing it, the FBI could have seized Cruz's guns. And they could have prevented him from buying more guns. As it is, even if they hadn't screwed up they were helpless. There is no way they could have "properly acted."

 
Good luck., sincerely.  Whatever prevented the FBI from doing their job seems like an easier fix though. 
It isn't. And once again you can blame the NRA.

The FBI and other law enforcement has asked for years for the funds to study gun violence, including mass shooting, so to be able to combat it more efficiently. Money was allocated to the CDC explicitly for this purpose, with the information designed to go to the ATF and FBI. The NRA managed to block the funding. The NRA has managed to cut down the ATF's budget, and also to severely limit the FBI's budget dealing with gun violence. So if you're concerned about the FBI screwing these things up (not that they could have done anything anyhow) you know who to point the finger at. The NRA.

 
How many times are people going to be allowed to repeat the bolded without it being challenged? There was nothing the FBI could have done. Local law enforcement was already aware of Cruz, they visited him 39 times. They could have arrested him for his social media threats, perhaps, but he would not have been in jail very long. They had no power to seize his guns or to stop him from purchasing more guns. There is nothing that they or the FBI could have done to stop this crime under the current laws of Florida that the NRA helped to set up.
GTFOH, he was reported to the FBI for threatening school shootings AND had run ins with the police 39 times?  How was this guy not under surveillance?  

Holy cow what a major failure of our law enforcement.  

 
It isn't. And once again you can blame the NRA.

The FBI and other law enforcement has asked for years for the funds to study gun violence, including mass shooting, so to be able to combat it more efficiently. Money was allocated to the CDC explicitly for this purpose, with the information designed to go to the ATF and FBI. The NRA managed to block the funding. The NRA has managed to cut down the ATF's budget, and also to severely limit the FBI's budget dealing with gun violence. So if you're concerned about the FBI screwing these things up (not that they could have done anything anyhow) you know who to point the finger at. The NRA.
Don’t mention all the gun-related records that by law cannot be digitized or computerized.  Another roadblock built by NRA lobbying money.

 
Here are the facts for tonydead and others. From 2013:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/02/07/nra-interferes-with-atf-operations/1894355/

The National Rifle Association says proposals such as universal background checks for gun buyers won't work and the nation must enforce the laws it has. But lobbying records and interviews show the organization has worked steadily to weaken existing gun laws and the federal agency charged with enforcing them.

"I think the majority of the American public sees through this and want the current laws enforced," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said on Fox News Sunday of the current effort to implement more restrictions. "They don't want more laws imposed on what is only going to be the law-abiding."

A review of congressional legislative records, federal lobbying disclosure forms, as well as interviews with former ATF agents, shows how the NRA has repeatedly supported legislation to weaken several of the nation's gun laws and opposed any attempt to boost the ability of the Bureau of the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to enforce current laws, including:

The Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986. This law mandated that the ATF could only inspect firearms dealers once a year. It reduced record-keeping penalties from felonies to misdemeanors, prohibited the ATF from computerizing purchase records for firearms and required the government to prove that a gun dealer was "willful" if they sold a firearm to a prohibited person.

The Tiahrt amendments. Beginning in 2003, the amendments by then-representative Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., to the Justice Department's appropriation bill included requirements such as the same-day destruction of FBI background check documents and limits on the sharing of data from traces.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act. Most recently introduced in 2011, the bill proposed changing several regulations, including redefining the burden of proof for agents investigating firearms dealers accused of selling to prohibited individuals and capping fines for other violations.
 

 
GTFOH, he was reported to the FBI for threatening school shootings AND had run ins with the police 39 times?  How was this guy not under surveillance?  

Holy cow what a major failure of our law enforcement.  
No its a major failure of the NRA. They are the ones who have weakened law enforcement deliberately on this issue. Please see my last post.

 
It isn't. And once again you can blame the NRA.

The FBI and other law enforcement has asked for years for the funds to study gun violence, including mass shooting, so to be able to combat it more efficiently. Money was allocated to the CDC explicitly for this purpose, with the information designed to go to the ATF and FBI. The NRA managed to block the funding. The NRA has managed to cut down the ATF's budget, and also to severely limit the FBI's budget dealing with gun violence. So if you're concerned about the FBI screwing these things up (not that they could have done anything anyhow) you know who to point the finger at. The NRA.
Study?  Sounds like this guy fell in their lap.  I'm all for more funding but good grief this is keystone cops bad. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Study?  Sounds like this guy fell in there lap.  I'm all for more funding but good grief this is keystone cops bad. 
You're still not getting it. Thanks to the NRA, funding has been cut for EVERY aspect of law enforcement when it comes to crazies with guns. Of course they're going to screw up. What do you expect?

 
Fixing this problem doesn't mean that we can't fix other problems. 
Never said that.  In fact, I said up above that some of these weapons should move into the Class 3 category.

Under the heading of "never let a crisis go to waste" it would be a shame to not at least to attempt to address bigger problems.  The chances of multiple cracks at this legislatively are small.

 
You're still not getting it. Thanks to the NRA, funding has been cut for EVERY aspect of law enforcement when it comes to crazies with guns. Of course they're going to screw up. What do you expect?
Sorry no amount of funding issues or gun laws explain why this guy wasn't under surveillance. You are right, they screwed up bad. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're still not getting it. Thanks to the NRA, funding has been cut for EVERY aspect of law enforcement when it comes to crazies with guns. Of course they're going to screw up. What do you expect?
More importantly, the NRA and current admin has made sure the guns will be available and in hands of 18 year olds and mentally ill... then let the keystone cops deal with it later

 
Sorry no amount of funding issues or gun laws explain why this guy wasn't under surveillance. You are right, they screwed up bad. 
All right, we disagree on that. But let's get to the second part of it. Suppose the FBI did place this guy under surveillance? Then what? They can't seize his guns. They can't keep him from buying new guns. They might be able to arrest him, perhaps, but they could never detain him. What could they reasonably have done?

 
How many times are people going to be allowed to repeat the bolded without it being challenged? There was nothing the FBI could have done. Local law enforcement was already aware of Cruz, they visited him 39 times. They could have arrested him for his social media threats, perhaps, but he would not have been in jail very long. They had no power to seize his guns or to stop him from purchasing more guns. There is nothing that they or the FBI could have done to stop this crime under the current laws of Florida that the NRA helped to set up.
The argument that the FBI didn't do anything will be brought up again and again and again, just like the banning cars argument, the turning our schools into prisons argument, and the instead of focusing on guns we should be focusing on our social problems that are so big to solve that we don't know how to solve them argument. 

It's a good thing I like playing whack a mole. Do you?

 
The argument that the FBI didn't do anything will be brought up again and again and again, just like the banning cars argument, the turning our schools into prisons argument, and the instead of focusing on guns we should be focusing on our social problems that are so big to solve that we don't know how to solve them argument. 

It's a good thing I like playing whack a mole. Do you?
Gets annoying after a while.

 
All right, we disagree on that. But let's get to the second part of it. Suppose the FBI did place this guy under surveillance? Then what? They can't seize his guns. They can't keep him from buying new guns. They might be able to arrest him, perhaps, but they could never detain him. What could they reasonably have done?
:o

 
The argument that the FBI didn't do anything will be brought up again and again and again, just like the banning cars argument, the turning our schools into prisons argument, and the instead of focusing on guns we should be focusing on our social problems that are so big to solve that we don't know how to solve them argument. 

It's a good thing I like playing whack a mole. Do you?
Focus on guns. Great, I'd vote on an assault rifle ban today. Doesn't mean we can't fix whatever caused law enforcement to miss ALL the warning signs. 

 
Yep. That's the limit of what they could do. Just sit there and look shocked at him.

Thanks to the NRA. 
They wouldn't stop a guy that is under surveillance from walking onto campus with a gun and a bag full of ammo?  After he posted on social media what he planned to do. 

 
Focus on guns. Great, I'd vote on an assault rifle ban today. Doesn't mean we can't fix whatever caused law enforcement to miss ALL the warning signs. 
These guys are arguing with people that agree with them but cannot look beyond one and only one solution.

 
They wouldn't stop a guy that is under surveillance from walking onto campus with a gun and a bag full of ammo?  After he posted on social media what he planned to do. 
And when they stop him, then what? It's legal to carry an AR15 in public as long as it's visible. He simply waits until he's no longer detained. 

Until he pulls the trigger illegally, they can't lock him up. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top