Jump to content
snowflake

#Never Again

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, snowflake said:

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FPP/FAQs2.aspx

Here are the requirements in the state of Florida for purchasing a firearm.

Here are a few requirements:
 

  • Felony conviction
  • Active warrant (felony or misdemeanor)
  • Unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance
  • Adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily committed by a judge
  • Illegal alien status
  • Dishonorable discharge from US Armed Forces
  • Renounced United States citizenship
  • Active protection order (injunction for protection, restraining order, etc.)
  • Convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
  • Under indictment or information for a crime punishable by a term exceeding one year in prison.
  • Adjudicated delinquent or received adjudication withheld as a juvenile for a felony charge and person is under the age of 24
  • Adjudication withheld for any felony or a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and three years has not yet lapsed since the completion of sentencing provisions

Any of these will disqualify you for purchase of a firearm in Florida....a very gun friendly state.

And here is the ATF form you have to fill out to purchase a firearm.

ATF for 4473

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions

When you say tougher, what would you suggest? 

And yet, the shooter had no problem getting an assault rifle. Let's start by banning assault rifles and limiting ammo capacity. Raise the age for gun ownership.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Gray said:

Making things illegal makes it harder to use them. Obviously.

Except it doesn't necessarily.  Remember prohibition?  How about polygamy?

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

And what common sense law should we pass?
What exactly should the law be changed to say that would prevent these things from happening?
The real bottom line is that you will never get rid of guns in America.  You ban assault weapons, and the next school shooting will be with a handgun or a hunting rifle.
You ban the sale of guns, people will find another way to kill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_related_to_secondary_schools#2010s

School attacks just in the 2010s have included:
- stabbing in Australia
- stabbing in Germany
- stabbing in Denmark
- stabbing in Canada
- attack with steel toe boots in Colorado
- stabbing in England
- stabbing in China
- stabbing in South Africa

If someone wants to kill, they fill find a weapon.  Not saying we should make it easier, but banning guns changes methodology, it doesn't stop the attacks.

image.gif

Do you think we should make it easier or harder for shooters to kill many victims quickly? If the shooter had a 22, fewer people would have died.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I agree, but the fact remains gang members, drug dealers, and criminals have all kinds of weapons and they aren't buying them in stores with background checks.

Even in Canada there are plenty of armed criminals.  And they aren't packing hunting rifles.  Just go for a midnight stroll through certain neighborhoods in Toronto and Vancouver.  

Remember the Montreal shooting? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimveer_Gill

Making guns illegal didn't stop him getting them.  He shot 20 people despite Canada's enlightened gun policy and was stopped when he was shot in the arm by a good guy gun.

but cops can get rid of them when they arrest them and put better locks on where they store them. Where I live if there is a whiff of a gun the cops are all over that scene. 

more guns and more upset, delusional people like Kimveer Gill aren't the answer, closing the barn door after the horse gets sick doesn't stop the sickness. Better mental health resources, less guns or no guns would help. He killed one person and wounded 16 and he bought the gun legally, which I say it shouldn't be available to the public. Quebec has it's own version of a gun registry

"The new registry, set to be in place in 2018, will require all firearms in the province to have a serial number, which will be recorded in a database. Gun sales will also have to be signalled to authorities. "

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Gray said:

Do you think we should make it easier or harder for shooters to kill many victims quickly? If the shooter had a 22, fewer people would have died.

Well harder of course.

That's why if that hero who died in the shooting shielding some kids and who was also a security guard at the school had been armed we would've made it MUCH harder and saved lives.

Share this post


Link to post

How about we get serious about enforcing the laws already on the books? Any one of the visits to the Cruz home could have resulted in a felony charge which would have prevented the legal purchase of said rifle. Had the FBI followed through with ANY investigation for the tip given them, this tragedy could have been prevented. Heavens , if the conspiracy theories are correct , there is probably an NSA file with the name of the killer because they monitor for key words like " shooter " in their hunt for terrorists. But I digress.

We have quite strict laws against impaired driving and yet due to human nature and flawed enforcement, of the 30,000+ auto deaths per year , a significant percentage involve the use of alcohol or drugs by those involved. Even if only 10% of those 30,000 are impaired ( and I think it is well higher) that is 3000 deaths ,or more than 10 times those killed in mass shootings. \

 If we really want to affect the number of preventable deaths in the US , why not start with medical errors . Even the more conservative estimates suggest that 25000 die in hospital because of medical errors. That's about 5 per hospital per year. That's also about 100 times more than are killed in mass shootings .

Even one death that was preventable is too many, yes. Could the computer power available be put to use to follow gun purchases and records from State to State? Could the various law enforcement agencies find a better way to talk to each other about individuals  who shouldn't be allowed guns? When all is said and done, will much more be said than done?

In case I get a CFR. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170213125617.htm

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, snowflake said:

I'm looking for honest, ideas or solutions as how to prevent this tragedy from happening again or is this going to be the new norm?

First one has to start out with the understanding that one can't prevent this from happening again.  Bad people will always be around and they will do bad things.  One can reduce the risks some but murder has been around for a long time and will be around for a while longer.

Second, it perhaps is the new norm.  It is not a gun issue.  Easy access to guns has been around for a long time.  Anyone in my high school class in the 80s could have brought a few guns in a backpack to school and killed 20 people.  That did not happen because society has changed.  The internet, 24 hour news,  more intense video games and movies have been the big change in my view on what this is happening.  Most kids can handle this stuff but some of them can't and are using these tools to become famous, get ideas, and are being raised by their cellphones rather than parents.  I think this will only get worse as time goes on.

Edited by carbon dioxide

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

First one has to start out with the understanding that one can't prevent this from happening again.  Bad people will always be around and they will do bad things.  One can reduce the risks some but murder has been around for a long time and will be around for a while longer.

Second, it perhaps is the new norm.  It is not a gun issue.  Easy access to guns has been around for a long time.  Anyone in my high school class in the 80s could have brought a few guns in a backpack to school and killed 20 people.  That did not happen because society has changed.  The internet, 24 hour news,  more intense video games and movies have been the big change in my view on what this is happening.  Most kids can handle this stuff but some of them can't and are using these tools to become famous, get ideas, and are being raised by their cellphones rather than parents.  I think this will only get worse as time goes on.

but easy access to guns aren't helping the situation any

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The irony is nobody complains that we have security and armed guards protecting our money, our gold, our politicians, our government offices, military bases, and our prisions (both to keep people in and out).

But even suggesting protecting our schools and churches - well, make them no gun zones with some having maybe one cop.  That should keep our children safe.

I want more protection for my kids than my money and way more than for my senator.

Compare the number of people willing to acquire money illicitly and how many are willing to kill a lot of kids.

 

And I am sure will be well-adjusted when they spend their entire early lives surrounded by armed people and having to walk through metal detectors and submit to regular searches at school. We are already at work militarizing our police. Soon we will look like Soviet Russia. Or we could, you know, stymie the ease with which the disturbed can acquire weapons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Brilliant, can I use this? I have a brother in law and nephew that really need to hear this, but I want to duck and take cover if I say it. 

Definitely.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I agree, but the fact remains gang members, drug dealers, and criminals have all kinds of weapons and they aren't buying them in stores with background checks.

Even in Canada there are plenty of armed criminals.  And they aren't packing hunting rifles.  Just go for a midnight stroll through certain neighborhoods in Toronto and Vancouver.  

Remember the Montreal shooting? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimveer_Gill

Making guns illegal didn't stop him getting them.  He shot 20 people despite Canada's enlightened gun policy and was stopped when he was shot in the arm by a good guy gun.

Yes, but how often does Canada have such situations compared to the United States?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Except it doesn't necessarily.  Remember prohibition?  How about polygamy?

Prohibition and banning polygamy made it harder and more dangerous to drink alcohol and multi-marry. There were difficulties of course but it is also different from gun ownership. Alcohol is pretty easy to make with basic materials. Try making an assault rifle in your bathtub. Polygamy is an activity that does not require materials or skills. It is not an item you can restrict.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Well harder of course.

That's why if that hero who died in the shooting shielding some kids and who was also a security guard at the school had been armed we would've made it MUCH harder and saved lives.

Really? Is this the gift of prophecy?

The idea that the "good guy with the gun" will always get the "bad guy with the gun" is a myth. Suppose he was armed and tried to shoot the shooter. Would he have been able to get to his weapon in time? Would the shooter have spotted him and gunned him down? Would he have still shielded the kids he saved if he was trying for his gun?

I don't know and neither do you. The situation might have been better or it might have been worse. Arming people is not a panacea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, strappinglad said:

How about we get serious about enforcing the laws already on the books? Any one of the visits to the Cruz home could have resulted in a felony charge which would have prevented the legal purchase of said rifle. Had the FBI followed through with ANY investigation for the tip given them, this tragedy could have been prevented. Heavens , if the conspiracy theories are correct , there is probably an NSA file with the name of the killer because they monitor for key words like " shooter " in their hunt for terrorists. But I digress.

We have quite strict laws against impaired driving and yet due to human nature and flawed enforcement, of the 30,000+ auto deaths per year , a significant percentage involve the use of alcohol or drugs by those involved. Even if only 10% of those 30,000 are impaired ( and I think it is well higher) that is 3000 deaths ,or more than 10 times those killed in mass shootings. \

 If we really want to affect the number of preventable deaths in the US , why not start with medical errors . Even the more conservative estimates suggest that 25000 die in hospital because of medical errors. That's about 5 per hospital per year. That's also about 100 times more than are killed in mass shootings .

Even one death that was preventable is too many, yes. Could the computer power available be put to use to follow gun purchases and records from State to State? Could the various law enforcement agencies find a better way to talk to each other about individuals  who shouldn't be allowed guns? When all is said and done, will much more be said than done?

In case I get a CFR. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170213125617.htm

One solution would be for states to turn over firearm tracking and enforcement more completely over to federal agencies in terms of firearm registration. If the Second Amendment is a federal law to protect the right to bear arms then federal agencies can enforce what they consider reasonable armament. Standardize weapon laws throughout the nation instead of the hodgepodge of state and local laws. Harshen penalties for having illegal weaponry.

We could provide the FBI with more funding to track weapons and follow up on leads like this along with a national database.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Gray said:

And yet, the shooter had no problem getting an assault rifle. Let's start by banning assault rifles and limiting ammo capacity. Raise the age for gun ownership.

Yet that wouldn't have stopped the shooting, he could have bought  a shotgun or hunting rifle legally. Or he could have gone to the black market and purchased a weapon there. Your solutions have never stopped a shooter yet you insist that they would work.  I agree with you that raising the age to 21 for rifles is a reasonable law that most of us would support. The problem is the 2nd amendment, the supreme court has ruled that owning firearms is a constitutional right. 

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Yet that wouldn't have stopped the shooting, he could have bought  a shotgun or hunting rifle legally. Or he could have gone to the black market and purchased a weapon there. Your solutions have never stopped a shooter yet you insist that they would work.  I agree with you that raising the age to 21 for rifles is a reasonable law that most of us would support. The problem is the 2nd amendment, the supreme court has ruled that owning firearms is a constitutional right. 

Back when they wrote up the constitution they didn't have the kind of guns they do now, big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

One solution would be for states to turn over firearm tracking and enforcement more completely over to federal agencies in terms of firearm registration. If the Second Amendment is a federal law to protect the right to bear arms then federal agencies can enforce what they consider reasonable armament. Standardize weapon laws throughout the nation instead of the hodgepodge of state and local laws. Harshen penalties for having illegal weaponry.

We could provide the FBI with more funding to track weapons and follow up on leads like this along with a national database.

Please explain how this would help stop school shootings. You seem to think that the FBI would be able to prevent what happened when they had been tipped about this kid twice and still dropped the ball. 

The second amendment is not a federal law, it is a constitutional right as defined by the constitution and the supreme court. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Really? Is this the gift of prophecy?

The idea that the "good guy with the gun" will always get the "bad guy with the gun" is a myth. Suppose he was armed and tried to shoot the shooter. Would he have been able to get to his weapon in time? Would the shooter have spotted him and gunned him down? Would he have still shielded the kids he saved if he was trying for his gun?

I don't know and neither do you. The situation might have been better or it might have been worse. Arming people is not a panacea.

Good point, let's keep the schools  "gun free zones".....we know how well that deters shooters.......LOL. Shooting back is a myth!!!

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Back when they wrote up the constitution they didn't have the kind of guns they do now, big difference.

So what is your point....change the constitution?

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Please explain how this would help stop school shootings. You seem to think that the FBI would be able to prevent what happened when they had been tipped about this kid twice and still dropped the ball. 

The second amendment is not a federal law, it is a constitutional right as defined by the constitution and the supreme court. 

I do not think the FBI could have prevented this kid from going nuts. He had not committed any crime worth incarceration and involuntary commitment is hard to force. What would have happened if the FBI knocked on the kid’s door? Scared straight? The FBI might have been able to prevent this kid getting a weapon that would let him easily kill over a dozen people if the weapon was illegal and the FBI had quality enforcement powers to keep those weapons out of the hands of civilians or even if we had a better background check system.

The Constitution is federal law, the highest federal law.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Good point, let's keep the schools  "gun free zones".....we know how well that deters shooters.......LOL. Shooting back is a myth!!!

If you want to imagine that you are John Wayne or James Bond and that if you were there with a gun you could have stopped it then go ahead but power fantasies like that are not worth basing policy around. I am looking for real ways to mitigate these kinds of attacks like making harder to get this kind of weaponry.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, snowflake said:

So what is your point....change the constitution?

Gladly. If that is what it takes to keep civilian gun ownership down to hunting weapons and reasonable defense weapons. As written the Second Amendment is badly worded and very unclear. Fixing it would solve a lot of problems. The modern gun ownership of any gun is a fundamental right is a modern interpretation created by:

Hopefully we can shut down the NRA for their role as a Russian political money laundering operation to make passage easier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I do not think the FBI could have prevented this kid from going nuts. He had not committed any crime worth incarceration and involuntary commitment is hard to force. What would have happened if the FBI knocked on the kid’s door? Scared straight? The FBI might have been able to prevent this kid getting a weapon that would let him easily kill over a dozen people if the weapon was illegal and the FBI had quality enforcement powers to keep those weapons out of the hands of civilians or even if we had a better background check system.

The Constitution is federal law, the highest federal law.

I agree that you can't prevent people from going nuts. You do realize that not all guns are obtained legally at the local gun store right? There is an entire black market industry for everything on the planet, how do all the felons, drug dealers and people who can't purchase guns legally get them? You simply cannot prevent crazy people from obtaining a gun, no matter what the law is. 

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If you want to imagine that you are John Wayne or James Bond and that if you were there with a gun you could have stopped it then go ahead but power fantasies like that are not worth basing policy around. I am looking for real ways to mitigate these kinds of attacks like making harder to get this kind of weaponry.

You know down at the county courthouse they have armed security, same thing at the hockey arena.  How about armed security? 

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Gladly. If that is what it takes to keep civilian gun ownership down to hunting weapons and reasonable defense weapons. As written the Second Amendment is badly worded and very unclear. Fixing it would solve a lot of problems. The modern gun ownership of any gun is a fundamental right is a modern interpretation created by:

Hopefully we can shut down the NRA for their role as a Russian political money laundering operation to make passage easier.

I can't help you if don't understand plain English. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...