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? (1 Viewer)

timschochet said:
DW, here’s a fact sheet on the connection between domestic violence misdemeanors and mass shootings: 

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/who-can-have-a-gun/domestic-violence-firearms/

I’ll try to address your questions about juveniles later on. 
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link.  Apparently it links through to a study by Everytown For Gun Safety.  I was unaware of that group.  Apparently they are an advocacy group, funded by Michael Bloomberg, and are not immune to some controversy.  I am not familiar enough with them, yet, to opine one way or another on their premise as to mass shootings.  Now certainly preventing those convicted of violence against spouses or domestic partners makes sense standing on its own, regardless of a relationship to mass shootings.  I have, hundreds of times early in my prosecutorial career, back when I prosecuted misdemeanors, asked the judge to order weapons forfeit, and have had that motion granted. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
common sense gun laws

we have them already .... but better background checks can be had IMO, including juvenile records and all mental health records too. We can put armed guards at school so that in the rare case that a wacko breaks all our laws and is intent on evil, someone can hopefully stop him last resort at the school. We could have campuses that are not open - some people hate the school compound idea but if you're looking for some solutions they're being proposed. This Cruz would have had to go through a gated entry with a guard ..... he likely couldn't ever have done that. I'm ok with the suggestion of anyone expelled from school be unable to buy guns for a certain period. 5 years maybe more.  intervention by authorities ..... it walks the line of breaking citizens Rights to data mine, profile, make visits to homes without warrants or hard evidence but if people are hell bent on tossing the 2nd Amendment, surely we can toss a few other ones too ?

none of the above affect law abiding gun owners - and we are never the problem. The problems are criminals, and in school shooting they're more often than not students with troubles

 
It's a complete waste of time to debate this here as the right (NRA) won't even allow the discussion to take place.  They have effectively made this their Alamo and they should pay for it at the ballot box.

 
Stealthycat said:
studies show mentally ill not the problem - that was in that article you linked
Click to expand...
The article I linked showed that research show that mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence than to start the violence themselves.  I'd say that's true of anyone.  I am more likely to be a victim of violence than I am to start violence.  You probably are too.  One of the main reasons the ACLU took exception with the law as it was proposed was because of the WAY it was approached and the way it was written.  They didn't like the premise.  It made assumptions it probably shouldn't have.  All their opposition stems from there.  The only thing you and the ACLU and/or NRA have in common is the net end...don't ban the guns.  The reasons are very different.  Craft the legislation differently and it doesn't seem the ACLU has an issue at all with the concept of banning guns or restricting gun ownership.

 
leftcoastguy7 said:
People are so tired of this. 

I see a big victory for Democrats come the mid-term elections. 
Click to expand...
You sure?  Depends on what they run on and hopefully all candidates are held to a position on fixing the mass shooting problem.

77% of Americans think something can be done with metal health monitoring and treatment

58% think something can be done with some sort of gun control.

Only 50-50 on weather assault rifles should be banned.

42% think arming teachers with guns would help.

 
Matthias said:
There's been 30 mass shootings in the US so far this year. We're in mid-February if you forgot.

And you think the solution to this problem, and the glaring deficiency, is in failure to keep 1 American under surveillance after someone reporting something about him. And then ignore the circumstances of the other 29 mass shootings. Rather than look to see what went wrong in all 30.

Honey, I maybe solved 3% of our problem!!!
Click to expand...
That 3% should be a no-brainer. 

Are you expecting the NRA to do something to help too?

 
Stealthycat said:
The Commish said:
The article I linked showed that research show that mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence than to start the violence themselves.
Click to expand...
I disagree

I'd say anyone wanting to kill kids in a school is mentally ill
Click to expand...
Again...another reason I suspect you don't really like our judicial system or how it works.  You don't get to make these judgments so it doesn't really matter what your opinion is on something like this.  Until you are willing to engage this conversation from the position of reality instead of your own personal ideology, your comments aren't going to matter at all :shrug:  

ETA:  But again....the article shows and states exactly what I said it does.  The glaringly funny thing is in one breath you say "see the study shows the mentally ill aren't the problem" and in the very next breath you say "Anyone wanting to kill kids in school is mentally ill"  So which is it?  :lol:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Again...another reason I suspect you don't really like our judicial system or how it works.  You don't get to make these judgments so it doesn't really matter what your opinion is on something like this.  Until you are willing to engage this conversation from the position of reality instead of your own personal ideology, your comments aren't going to matter at all :shrug:  

ETA:  But again....the article shows and states exactly what I said it does.
Click to expand...
I think the point he was trying to make is that nobody of sound mind wakes up one day and says, hey I am going to kill a bunch of people today.  There are signs, history, decisions, comments, etc that show these people are not mentally stable.  They may not meet the classic legal definition of "mentally ill" but they do have issues and warning signs before it escalates to the mass shooting.  Stating very few mass shooters are mentally ill is not really staying in reality either.

 
The Commish said:
Again...another reason I suspect you don't really like our judicial system or how it works.  You don't get to make these judgments so it doesn't really matter what your opinion is on something like this.  Until you are willing to engage this conversation from the position of reality instead of your own personal ideology, your comments aren't going to matter at all :shrug:  

ETA:  But again....the article shows and states exactly what I said it does.  The glaringly funny thing is in one breath you say "see the study shows the mentally ill aren't the problem" and in the very next breath you say "Anyone wanting to kill kids in school is mentally ill"  So which is it?  :lol:  
Click to expand...
so do you want mentally ill people to get guns or don't you ?

ACLU seems to say on one hand they're not a threat to anyone.

yes - I disagree with anyone who says people walking into schools and killing kids doesn't have a mental issue. They're not right, that's not normal behavior for a normal person. How anyone can claim differently baffles me.

So no, I don't buy what the ACLU said in that case at all.

 
Gally said:
I think the point he was trying to make is that nobody of sound mind wakes up one day and says, hey I am going to kill a bunch of people today.  There are signs, history, decisions, comments, etc that show these people are not mentally stable.  They may not meet the classic legal definition of "mentally ill" but they do have issues and warning signs before it escalates to the mass shooting.  Stating very few mass shooters are mentally ill is not really staying in reality either.
Click to expand...
And this is a fine position to take in the court of public opinion, but that doesn't do much for us in any practical terms.  We can't flip from our judicial system to some other standard just because we feel like it.  As a result, laws have to be changed, give more leeway to do these sorts of things.  

 
Stealthycat said:
So no, I don't buy what the ACLU said in that case at all.
Click to expand...
wait, what?!  You've used them over and over as evidence of groups NOT the NRA that don't want to see bans on guns.  You've brought them up dozens of times as evidence and you don't buy their argument?  :oldunsure:  

 
tonydead said:
Now your just being obtuse.  You mean this front door?  Where he would have to walk through the gate first, and then presumably quite a distance inside the gate to encounter anybody when classes were in session?  I mean that's the perfect scenario for the FBI to catch him within the campus limits, a third degree felony.  
Click to expand...
No. That's the main entrance to the campus. He went in the front door of the freshman building on the north side of the campus. It was open because school was being dismissed. 

 
Stealthycat said:
so do you want mentally ill people to get guns or don't you ?
Click to expand...
I think this is a case by case basis.  That's why I think a screening should be done.  A person with ADHA is considered mentally ill in this country.  So is a bi polar schizophrenic.  There need to be more specific guidelines.  "Mentally ill" is too general a term to be used here....that's what the ACLU argued in their retort to the legislation passed.  It's not as black/white as you want it to be.

 
Politician Spock said:
No. That's the main entrance to the campus. He went in the front door of the freshman building on the north side of the campus. It was open because school was being dismissed. 
Click to expand...
And by all reports he pulled the fire alarm, like he had done many time before, to get people to come out of class.  He was dropped off at 2:19.  Ending class bell doesn't ring until 2:40.  Do you just make this stuff up as you go?

 
tonydead said:
And by all reports he pulled the fire alarm, like he had done many time before, to get people to come out of class.  He was dropped off at 2:19.  Ending class bell doesn't ring until 2:40.  Do you just make this stuff up as you go?
Click to expand...
From: https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/17/minute-minute-how-parkland-school-shooting-unfolded/345817002/

Since classes were set to end soon, the gates to the parking lots of the sprawling campus of more than 3,000 students were open to allow buses and cars to enter.

Normally, a visitor would need to go through the school's main entrance on Coral Springs Drive.

Within two minutes of Cruz emerging from the car, the shooting started.
Click to expand...

 
Stealthycat said:
so do you want mentally ill people to get guns or don't you ?

ACLU seems to say on one hand they're not a threat to anyone.

yes - I disagree with anyone who says people walking into schools and killing kids doesn't have a mental issue. They're not right, that's not normal behavior for a normal person. How anyone can claim differently baffles me.

So no, I don't buy what the ACLU said in that case at all.
Click to expand...
:no:

No, the ACLU has not seemed to say anything like that.

 
The Commish said:
I think this is a case by case basis.  That's why I think a screening should be done.  A person with ADHA is considered mentally ill in this country.  So is a bi polar schizophrenic.  There need to be more specific guidelines.  "Mentally ill" is too general a term to be used here....that's what the ACLU argued in their retort to the legislation passed.  It's not as black/white as you want it to be.
Click to expand...
and that's why the ACLU and NRA and other groups fight hard when laws are proposed that impact people's Rights

how many here agree that the Rights to a fair trial, a lengthy trial, appeals etc should be taken from Cruz? Anyone ?  Anyone at all ?

 
Matthias said:
It is a no-brainer. You apparently think the federal intelligence agencies should spend all of their time keeping tabs on whoever gets called in by their neighbors to be suspicious. So you make big government intrusive, keep them from investigating all sorts of other crimes, expect them what, arrest someone who hasn't broken a law? to not solve 97% of the problem.

Big expenses. Big intrusion onto the lives of American citizens. Do almost nothing result-wise. And use it to avoid something that 68% of Americans want.

Yup. Sounds like a GOP proposal.
Click to expand...
Suspicious?   Reported to the FBI twice, had altercations with the police 39 times, was expelled 3 times, et. al.  I'd be surprised if this guy didn't check every box on the FBI profile list.

 
Matthias said:
No. Continually shadowing every nutjob.
Click to expand...
In order to stop a shooting that took less than 2 minutes to start from the moment he exited the vehicle, shadowing would require they be there already. 

 
More obtuseness. 

The guy was reported to the FBI multiple times as a threat.  Had they checked him out he would have fit the profile of a school shooter.  One guy following him could have prevented this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
No, the ACLU has not seemed to say anything like that.
Click to expand...
kinda yes, they have

what they said, along with the NRA, was that those targeted in that suggested law - the one Trump didn't agree with either, focused on the people who were NOT the problem

yet the left has grilled Trump and the NRA as standing by and doing more harm than good - and it isn't like that at all, kinda like "18 shootings this year" ..... tell the lie, tell it often, people believe it over the truth

 
I have an idea.  We assign a person to follow another person 24 hours daily, 7 days per week.  The person being followed can also follow the person following the original person.  This way everyone has at least one set of eyes on them at all times.  Give them guns too.  Any funny business happens?  POW.  Crisis averted.

 
tonydead said:
Perfect.  The door to that building is well within the campus.  The FBI could have stopped him as soon as he exited the vehicle.
Click to expand...
this

also, had there been a fence surrounding the campus - one way in, two ways, checkpoints etc   .... how easy is it to drive up, and in 2 minutes be inside a school

can you do that in ANY building that has any value at all in this country? no - not really, companies take security pretty seriously as far as people just walking onto the properties and into buildings

this HAS to be examined and paid attention to - its a huge flaw in school seceurity

 
Matthias said:
Oh, there's huge flaws in this post alright.
Click to expand...
not really no

armed security is going to be instituted and essential in the coming years for school safety. more privacy/security fences will too IMO

open campuses will end, you will not be able to just waltz onto any campus anytime you want

those things will significantly decrease school shooting - now, the left will not get their gun control passed, but schools and kids will be safer

which is more important to the left? we'll find out

 
Matthias said:
Let's do anything other than what 68% of the country wants and ban assault rifles
Click to expand...
a very very low % of school shootings are assault weapons and the kids that would have used them will use other guns ... you've essentially done nothing to stop criminals

congrats - feel better ?

 
Stealthycat said:
The Commish said:
I think this is a case by case basis.  That's why I think a screening should be done.  A person with ADHA is considered mentally ill in this country.  So is a bi polar schizophrenic.  There need to be more specific guidelines.  "Mentally ill" is too general a term to be used here....that's what the ACLU argued in their retort to the legislation passed.  It's not as black/white as you want it to be.
Click to expand...
and that's why the ACLU and NRA and other groups fight hard when laws are proposed that impact people's Rights

how many here agree that the Rights to a fair trial, a lengthy trial, appeals etc should be taken from Cruz? Anyone ?  Anyone at all ?
Click to expand...
You JUST said you disagreed with the ACLU on the case I linked.  Are you aware of how you're contradicting yourself?  And I am pretty sure you have said here, if it were left up to you he'd be executed within the week, so as to the bold...you?  But I confess...I have no idea what your position is anymore.  It would help a great deal for you to recap your position BEYOND "guns good...don't take my guns".

 
Matthias said:
It's great when the right proposes things that don't make an ### lick's of sense as the obvious thing which should have been done.
Click to expand...
It's true that paying for four FBI agents to keep him under 24/7 (168 hours per week, 42 hours per agent) closely followed surveillance would have made it harder for Cruz to do what he did. But that solution would require a ####load more FBI agents given that kind of high level surveillance is currently only done for a fraction of people the FBI is currently monitoring. So yes it would make it harder for Cruz, but that's a TON of tax dollars for that solution.

Or we could simply just make it a lot harder to obtain the weapons he used. 

Either way, we've made it a lot harder. But when we could waste tax dollars to produce the same solution, be all means lets spend, spend, spend. 

 
Matthias said:
I'm going to guess that feds make $100,000/yr. And probably cost something more like $180,000/yr once you fully load their costs. So if they're doing 8 hour days, you got 3 guys. Each with a partner. Let's spend over $1mm/yr shadowing some guy in case he's the one crazy guy who ever does anything.
Click to expand...
We employ over a million security guards every year, full time, to guard things that are important to us.  What price are you putting on children's lives?  

 
Politician Spock said:
You want FBI stationed at every school?
Click to expand...
He wants them to have had 24/7 surveillance on Cruz so the moment he stepped on the campus they could have stopped him.

How ever many agents that would take, for however long time it would take

At least that is how I understand his line of argumentation

 
The Commish said:
You JUST said you disagreed with the ACLU on the case I linked.  Are you aware of how you're contradicting yourself?  And I am pretty sure you have said here, if it were left up to you he'd be executed within the week, so as to the bold...you?  But I confess...I have no idea what your position is anymore.  It would help a great deal for you to recap your position BEYOND "guns good...don't take my guns".
Click to expand...
I think mentally ill should be banned from owning guns - how do you define that? THAT is what the ACLU and NRA argued - the proposal was assign - targeting autistic people and such who is on welfare- those people don't commit mass murders !

 
Matthias said:
There's, "I forgot my wallet at home" dumb.

There's, "I walked into a closed door" dumb.

There's, "I wanted to see what the high from drinking wood alcohol was like" dumb.

There's, "I think Trump is an honest guy" dumb.

And then there's, "I'm going to repeat all the NRA gun control talking points" dumb.
Click to expand...
I'll vote to ban assault rifles today.  We need to fix whatever holes were in the FBI reporting and handling of this situation too.  IMO.

Which do you think is easier to do?  Which are less costly, since you're worried about spending money protecting children?

 
can anyone find a list of all the school shooting and their ages please ?

I suspect the vast amount of them are kids IN school or right out.

 
msommer said:
He wants them to have had 24/7 surveillance on Cruz so the moment he stepped on the campus they could have stopped him.

How ever many agents that would take, for however long time it would take

At least that is how I understand his line of argumentation
Click to expand...
It would be cheaper to just have an FBI agent stationed at every school when they're in session. And even that solution is ridiculously expensive. 

 
tonydead said:
I'll vote to ban assault rifles today. 
Click to expand...
and you've done nothing but keep law abiding citizens from buying them - you've literally reduced school shooting and criminal behavior not at all

so what's your next step to making schools safer, since this one literally will do nothing since assault weapons simply are not used often, and people hell bent on criminal behavior will just get handguns or other semi-auto rifle

do tell

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Operation Fast & Furious Scandal: Obama Administration's ATF Sent Guns To Drug Cartels (5/27/22 20:22 PST)
Replies
7
Views
550
Max Power
Max Power
GordonGekko
New York Enacts Ridiculous New Gun Laws: "I’m A NYC Liberal, And I Want A Gun" (7/3/22 20:29 PST)
Replies
28
Views
809
FairWarning
FairWarning
The Z Machine
Abortion - Where do we go from here? (Policy and politics, not law)
2 3
Replies
113
Views
3K
supermike80
supermike80

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top