Grandpa's Spells wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 6:01 pm
The problem gun control supporters are trying to address (40,000 firearms death per year) is not relatively small, especially because they are quite preventable. I saw some imbeciles pointing at Abe's assassination like, "LOL gun laws don't work" and ignoring that Japan had 9 firearms deaths that year. Vs. tens of thousands.
It's simply their culture. If Japan had a ton of guns, they still would have a low firearm death homicide rate. The USA manages to have a higher non-firearm homicide rate than a ton of other countries. We're just more violent, how can we address that core aspect of the issue?
However, since you mentioned 40,000 firearm deaths per year, and 60% are suicide, somehow Japan manages to have a higher suicide rate than the USA, despite not having any guns. So fewer murders, but more suicides, and no guns.
I think Sandy Hook, Uvalde, etc. etc. etc. where you see a bunch of American children executed is something worth preventing even if, in the long run, we all die anyway.
A common criticism of legislation people don't like is, "This legislation will not entirely solve the problem all by itself," which is not how laws work. If you can make incremental improvements, that is a good thing.
No one wants active shootings or mass shootings to continue. But arbitrary or capricious laws which really can't be enforced are not a solution either.
You have to decide what you want to stop:
Want to stop the most firearm deaths?
Focus on suicide prevention and mental health reform. Gun Control groups will march to ban a weapon that they admit is involved in the smallest amount of firearm deaths, but they won't march for mental health reform. To them, despite what they say, it's not about saving lives, it's about the gun control.
Want to stop active shootings in churches?
Let the church have armed volunteer (or paid) security. There is already a cottage industry made to support church security teams. It very well could be one reason there are much fewer active shootings in churches than schools. FBI active shooter data at places of worship show that whenever an armed security team member intervened, lives were saved. I don't believe any of the church shootings where a security team intervened qualify to also be called a "mass shooting"
Want to stop active shootings in schools?
(1) Harden the schools, and follow the safety policies. Not locking the door, and letting a shooter in is like not wearing your seatbelt and getting injured in an auto accident, and then saying we need to make cars safer. Use the existing tool.
(2) Hold the govt paid employees responsible for their actions. Failures of the sheriff, school admins, fbi, etc allowed Parkland, Oxford and the carnage at Uvalde to happen
(3) Actually start using the methods the Secret Service made available to schools to identify threats. A lot of the same tactics they use to protect the President. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/us/p ... tings.html
(4) Allow those teachers/coaches/administrators/custodians willing to take the responsibility and training to conceal carry at school. Going back to the church example, FBI data supports places of worship with security teams have saved lives in active shootings. Why wouldn't it be the same in schools?
Want to stop Mass Shootings?
Most mass shootings are drug/gang/criminal activity related. Tackle the gang problem. Legalize drugs.
Second most mass shootings are domestic incidents. Access to better health care. Maybe some type of red flag could help, but so far, states that have implemented red flags are not showing an improvement in firearm deaths.
Want to stop accidental shootings?
Prior to Covid, accidental shooting deaths had been on a decline and were at the lowest level ever recorded. Go back and do more of what they were doing. More NRA Eddie Eagle programs, more gun safety, make every student take hunters safety education.
The stupid arbitrary shit politicians want to do won't move the needle should be discarded as nothing more than political theater.
Magazine limits - because it takes one second to swap a magazine.
Banning "assault weapons" - but they can't define that. So they allow one semi-automatic rifle with a wood stock and detachable magazine, but not the scary black semi-automatic rifle with the pistol grip or flash hider. It doesn't change the lethality of the weapon at all.
Trying to ban the 5.56 NATO round because it's so dangerous, and forgetting that the 7.62x51 NATO and 30-06 that we used quite successfully during two world wars, Korea, etc have double the energy.
One gun a month? Since the majority of crimes are done with firearms acquired illegally, what absolute difference would that make?