Corona

[Dead Planet]

18 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

I agree in theory... but the problem is that gun laws, rules, and regulations only affect people that follow laws to begin with. Making laws more strict while not actually enforcing laws already on the books only serves to impact already law-abiding citizens.

The media and politicians are focused solely on the guns, as if the guns pull their own triggers, whereas in 100% of these mass shooting incidents, the perpetrator had SERIOUS mental issues, and in the vast majority of cases people and authorities knew about it, saw warning signs, yet did nothing.

Maybe the focus should be more on mental health treatment than confiscating guns.

When someone gets into a driving-while-intoxicated crash and people die, we get them sobriety assistance, take away THEIR vehicle, and incarcerate them. We don't immediately start banning cars and suing Ford and Chrysler.

We focus on the tools because it fits a political narrative; like race, no one is actually interested in solving the problem, just scoring political points and pushing their favorite agenda.

Bleagh.

I'm no expert on US law but I thought they were trying to change the law to prevent mentally ill people from getting guns and that the Reps were blocking those efforts....of course the Dems no doubt are trying to throw other shit onto any bill about gun reform but background checks and ensuring people are sane seems like a reasonable idea.....also if you can't get a beer until 21 then why should you be able to buy an AR15.....

[Dead Planet]

27 minutes ago, Glen said:

but that's the difference. no one in the UK, cares about guns, thinks about guns, or wants a gun. It's just a different culture and much better imo

 

Different doesn't mean better....it just means that you see the issue differently because you have never really been allowed to own guns and therefore don't miss what you never had....

[heavyharmonies]

21 minutes ago, Dead Planet said:

I'm no expert on US law but I thought they were trying to change the law to prevent mentally ill people from getting guns and that the Reps were blocking those efforts....of course the Dems no doubt are trying to throw other shit onto any bill about gun reform but background checks and ensuring people are sane seems like a reasonable idea.....also if you can't get a beer until 21 then why should you be able to buy an AR15.....

Yes, the "red flag laws". About half of the states have them. The problem with those laws is that they are based on the premise of confiscating someone's weapons based upon third-party reports and what someone MIGHT do in the future. The due process implications are murky. The thresholds and implementations vary greatly from state to state, and the burdens of evidence are frequently ignored under the premise of "better safe than sorry".

Also, like fake reports of rape, domestic violence, etc., they can be abused by someone with a grudge and it is darned near impossible for the accused to recover. They are put in a position of having to prove that they didn't or won't do something; you can't prove a negative. There are cases where falsely accused people who have had their guns confiscated fight for years to get them back. Technically, if someone has their guns confiscated based upon a false report, you've just violated their Second Amendment rights. Now what?

They also can be used by the state against people engaging in wrongthink, i.e., "extremists" if you post something on Reddit/Twitter/Instagram/etc. See the case of Lucas Gerhard in Michigan as an example of egregious governmental overreach; his life has been dstroyed.

As much as I favor state's rights, this is another are where I would prefer there to be a national standard rather than state by state.

However, all things considered, red flag laws are preferable to outright bans IMO. I don't agree with them, but they are the lesser of two evils. But at the end of the day, should there be a national red flag standard implemented, I don't believe that will stop the government from still trying to ban guns. It's the "nose under the camel's tent" concept: it's one thing if the limitations stop there, but we know they won't, so why agree to any proposed limitations knowing that they will just proceed further anyway?

 

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2019/09/04/red-flag-laws-spur-debate-over-due-process

Also, red flag laws are not a magic bullet (pardon the pun):

https://www.thetrace.org/2022/05/buffalo-shooting-red-flag-law-new-york/

As I mentioned earlier, it doesn't matter how strict the laws are if you're not going to bother enforcing them. Then all you're doing is restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens... which is IMO what the Left actually wants. It's outright ban/confiscation under the guise and illusion of public safety.

[Glen]

50 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

I agree in theory... but the problem is that gun laws, rules, and regulations only affect people that follow laws to begin with. Making laws more strict while not actually enforcing laws already on the books only serves to impact already law-abiding citizens.

The media and politicians are focused solely on the guns, as if the guns pull their own triggers, whereas in 100% of these mass shooting incidents, the perpetrator had SERIOUS mental issues, and in the vast majority of cases people and authorities knew about it, saw warning signs, yet did nothing.

Maybe the focus should be more on mental health treatment than confiscating guns.

When someone gets into a driving-while-intoxicated crash and people die, we get them sobriety assistance, take away THEIR vehicle, and incarcerate them. We don't immediately start banning cars and suing Ford and Chrysler.

We focus on the tools because it fits a political narrative; like race, no one is actually interested in solving the problem, just scoring political points and pushing their favorite agenda.

Bleagh.

yaaaaawn. age old argument, tired and worn out . Next. 

Every country has mental health issues, go figure eh. 

[Glen]

52 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

Fixed it for you.

hardly. tomorrow I won't be thinking about guns unless you make another pointless reply

I defo don't want one 

[heavyharmonies]

3 minutes ago, Glen said:

yaaaaawn. age old argument, tired and worn out . Next. 

Every country has mental health issues, go figure eh. 

Ok, you've just proven what everyone is already thinking: you're an idiot and a troll that brings nothing of value to any of these discussions.

[Glen]

1 minute ago, heavyharmonies said:

Ok, you've just proven what everyone is already thinking: you're an idiot and a troll.

reason? 

[Dead Planet]

14 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

Yes, the "red flag laws". About half of the states have them. The problem with those laws is that they are based on the premise of confiscating someone's weapons based upon third-party reports and what someone MIGHT do in the future. The due process implications are murky. The thresholds and implementations vary greatly from state to state, and the burdens of evidence are frequently ignored under the premise of "better safe than sorry".

Also, like fake reports of rape, domestic violence, etc., they can be abused by someone with a grudge and it is darned near impossible for the accused to recover. They are put in a position of having to prove that they didn't or won't do something; you can't prove a negative. There are cases where falsely accused people who have had their guns confiscated fight for years to get them back. Technically, if someone has their guns confiscated based upon a false report, you've just violated their Second Amendment rights. Now what?

They also can be used by the state against people engaging in wrongthink, i.e., "extremists" if you post something on Reddit/Twitter/Instagram/etc. See the case of Lucas Gerhard in Michigan as an example of egregious governmental overreach; his life has been dstroyed.

As much as I favor state's rights, this is another are where I would prefer there to be a national standard rather than state by state.

However, all things considered, red flag laws are preferable to outright bans IMO. I don't agree with them, but they are the lesser of two evils. But at the end of the day, should there be a national red flag standard implemented, I don't believe that will stop the government from still trying to ban guns. It's the "nose under the camel's tent" concept: it's one thing if the limitations stop there, but we know they won't, so why agree to any proposed limitations knowing that they will just proceed further anyway?

 

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2019/09/04/red-flag-laws-spur-debate-over-due-process

Also, red flag laws are not a magic bullet (pardon the pun):

https://www.thetrace.org/2022/05/buffalo-shooting-red-flag-law-new-york/

As I mentioned earlier, it doesn't matter how strict the laws are if you're not going to bother enforcing them. Then all you're doing is restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens... which is IMO what the Left actually wants. It's outright ban/confiscation under the guise and illusion of public safety.

I guess the issue comes down to....are you willing to compromise in order to lower the amount of mass shootings....you'll never get rid of them completely as they happen everywhere but the number of mass shootings in the US is getting ridiculous and doing nothing doesn't seem to be the best policy imo....

[heavyharmonies]

Just now, Glen said:

reason? 

No nuance or logical reasoning in any of your posts. Just pithy one-liners intended only to provoke.

[Glen]

not trolling at all, I merely stated originally the gun culture doesn't enter into UK society's thinking.

how is that trolling.

 

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Glen

[heavyharmonies]

4 minutes ago, Dead Planet said:

I guess the issue comes down to....are you willing to compromise in order to lower the amount of mass shootings....you'll never get rid of them completely as they happen everywhere but the number of mass shootings in the US is getting ridiculous and doing nothing doesn't seem to be the best policy imo....

As I mentioned above, I prefer red flag laws to outright bans as a lesser of two evils, but I am very concerned about overreach and abuse on the part of local and federal government. The devil is in the details as to the exact legislation that gets proposed and voted on, and given how polarized Congress is and how they ram through legislation with middle-of-the night votes and tacked-on unrelated sections of bills, I don't have confidence that what comes out of it is what was originally intended or a reasonable/fair implementation.

Call me a cynic.

[Glen]

1 minute ago, heavyharmonies said:

No nuance or logical reasoning in any of your posts. Just pithy one-liners intended only to provoke.

not true, you roll out mental health everytime - it's bollox. every country has mental health issues as bad or worse than the US but no other country has the gun violence or issues that you have.

anyway bored now.

 

[heavyharmonies]

2 minutes ago, Glen said:

anyway bored now.

You're welcome to go away now. Door is on the left. Just proves that you were here to provoke for your own entertainment, nothing else.

[Dead Planet]

3 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

As I mentioned above, I prefer red flag laws to outright bans as a lesser of two evils, but I am very concerned about overreach and abuse on the part of local and federal government. The devil is in the details as to the exact legislation that gets proposed and voted on, and given how polarized Congress is and how they ram through legislation with middle-of-the night votes and tacked-on unrelated sections of bills, I don't have confidence that what comes out of it is what was originally intended or a reasonable/fair implementation.

Call me a cynic.

One issue I have with the right wing and GOP about these mass shootings is that they always blame it on mental health problems but they do little to nothing about dealing with mental health issues....Texas is a good example where they have cut back on mental health programs....if we have identified the main issue then deal with that issue ffs....offering thoughts and prayers isn't getting it done....

[Glen]

14 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

You're welcome to go away now. Door is on the left. Just proves that you were here to provoke for your own entertainment, nothing else.

translation : any opinion different to Dan's is trolling or just to provoke.

You don't have to reply to my posts you know or call me out on everything.

Edited June 5, 2022 by Glen

[Glen]

20 hours ago, Glen said:

so glad I already live in a country which has no guns whatsoever.

Strange thing is in all my 52 years on this planet I've never been threatened on a street, never felt unsafe in my home or burgled, and my kids have never felt unsafe at school or had to do silly shooter drills.

I therefore see no reason for any citizen to own a gun (except for recreation like hunting or shooting ranges, which basically no one does in the UK 🤣🤣)

Literally no one I know owns a gun, talks about guns or even thinks about guns.

Just seems like a much better society to live in imo. 🤷‍♂️

just to remind this was my original comment.

didn't even need a response, was just stating a difference between societies, and what we experience in the UK.

wasn't meant to provoke anyone or troll

 

[heavyharmonies]

12 minutes ago, Dead Planet said:

One issue I have with the right wing and GOP about these mass shootings is that they always blame it on mental health problems but they do little to nothing about dealing with mental health issues....Texas is a good example where they have cut back on mental health programs....if we have identified the main issue then deal with that issue ffs....offering thoughts and prayers isn't getting it done....

I agree that more should be done to fund and expand mental health programs rather than cutting them. It's similar to the "defund the police" argument: No, we need MORE funding for police, to get them better training and other resources, and to add counselors/psychiatric personnel to the reponse teams, not less funding.

10 minutes ago, Glen said:

translation : any opinion different to Dan's is trolling or just to provoke.

You don't have to reply to my posts you know or call me out on everything.

I thought you were bored and leaving...

[Glen]

4 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

I agree that more should be done to fund and expand mental health programs rather than cutting them. It's similar to the "defund the police" argument: No, we need MORE funding for police, to get them better training and other resources, and to add counselors/psychiatric personnel to the reponse teams, not less funding.

I thought you were bored and leaving...

and called out again 🙄

[Dead Planet]

10 minutes ago, heavyharmonies said:

I agree that more should be done to fund and expand mental health programs rather than cutting them. It's similar to the "defund the police" argument: No, we need MORE funding for police, to get them better training and other resources, and to add counselors/psychiatric personnel to the reponse teams, not less funding.

Every law abiding gun owning American should pray that something happens to slow down these mass shootings because eventually the majority of Americans are going to get to a tipping point where they will not only accept restrictions and bans but they will demand them....

And what happens in the US always affects what happens here in Canada....for example our idiot PM using the Texas massacre as an excuse to bring more gun restrictions.....

[Metal T]

Over 8 million abortions were preformed in the UK  (1967-2014)...Glen I assume is ok with that? 

But those d@mn guns gotta go...lol Ok !

In response to earlier comments,we have plenty of so called 'common sense' gun regulations in place and they haven't stopped any shooting..,and were expected to have more?  Good Luck!

[Glen]

7 minutes ago, Metal T said:

Over 8 million abortions were preformed in the UK  (1967-2014)...Glen I assume is ok with that? 

But those d@mn guns gotta go...lol Ok !

 

sorry mate, by Dan's definition this is trolling.

And you've obviously posted that for pure entertainment. 

[heavyharmonies]

7 minutes ago, Metal T said:

Over 8 million abortions were preformed in the UK  (1967-2014)...Glen I assume is ok with that? 

But those d@mn guns gotta go...lol Ok !

In response to earlier comments,we have plenty of so called 'common sense' gun regulations in place and they haven't stopped any shooting..,and were expected to have more?  Good Luck!

I really, REALLY, despise conflating abortion with gun rights as an issue. It's false equivalency IMO. This is one area where I actually am strongly opposed to the stance of the farthest right elements of the GOP.

[Metal T]

Those who see that as flawed and counterproductive argument can have fun cherry-picking which lives are 'IMPORTANT' and which are not...

[heavyharmonies]

1 minute ago, Metal T said:

Those who see that as flawed and counterproductive argument can have fun cherry-picking which lives are 'IMPORTANT' and which are not...

Only if you are firmly in the absolutist camp, that it is an all-or-nothing proposition on either issue.

If that's your stance, that's your right, although I disagree with it.

As a non-religious person and someone that is primarily pro-choice, I believe there are areas for compromise in both cases.

Others will disagree.

[Dead Planet]

1 minute ago, heavyharmonies said:

Only if you are firmly in the absolutist camp, that it is an all-or-nothing proposition on either issue.

If that's your stance, that's your right, although I disagree with it.

As a non-religious person and someone that is primarily pro-choice, I believe there are areas for compromise in both cases.

Others will disagree.

I've always thought it ironic that those who are vehemently anti-abortion because it's all about saving lives are the same people who would never consider any kind of gun restrictions which might save lives...