Oh completely agree. I keep forgetting that Americans don't have licenses for guns. Long guns(riffles/shotguns) is a week course, and for pistols/black rifles is another 2days or a week course on top of the other course.
I can walk into any place that sells guns and as long as im not a felon, walk out with whatever gun I want within about 15 minutes. While I enjoy the ease of gun buying in Texas, it also makes me uneasy just how easy it is.
I hate this fallacy that all politicians are liars. The idea of compromise is completely lost and is a dirty word. Everyone forgets the second Obama opens his mouth about anything he has a tsunami of shit dumped down his back by a pack of media hungry pundits. Enforcing the existing legislation would be great. Why not do it? Police hours tied up in drug enforcement and traffic stops? Gun shop owners don't do their own job? Can you imagine the shitstorm that would be? "Obama going after small business." "Obama tells cops how to do their jobs." Once more, "Obama comes for legal gun owners," when it would be no such thing. Let's be realistic. Bringing in new legislation might actually address these issues, god help me, in a political way. Because the only mention of this in the public discourse is idiot liberal kids screaming about prohibition and the far right derp chamber photographing themselves locked and loaded. We could also address the abysmal state of public mental health, but how likely is that? Once more for the record: I am pro-second amendment, pro-concealed carry, pro-owning as many guns as you want, pro-more stringent training. I want to see at the very least a connection between the ATF/FBI/police databases and psyche holds and psychiatrist warnings logged with the APA, along with the existing exclusions like violent crime or felony arrest. It is not a perfect system, nor meant to be, but it is a start. Why is that so wrong to talk about? Funny enough, I don't particularly care about accidental gun deaths. While tragic, and easily avoidable, that's still personal choice for the gun owner and theirs to live with. I'm worried about spree shooters, not some idiot who didn't buy the trigger lock.
I have lived in Lafayette since 2007 and never expected something to happen here. I knew a few people at the theatre when the shooting happened, but didn't know anyone in the specific showing where it happened. Reading the news updates and hearing the sirens (living 10-15miles from where it took place) was heartbreaking. I was outside with my neighbor walking the dogs when her roommate came home and told us about the street being blocked and cops racing to the scene. The community has come together to show support for the families.
I imagine some law or provision that prevents this kind of thing from happening was what Obama meant when he said "common sense gun laws". However that might make you feel, the gun laws would be relatively powerless to prevent this kind of thing. There are millions of guns in circulation, it would be like trying to ban copies of 'Atlas Shrugged'. Any time a democratic president whispers the words "gun laws", sales spike and stockpiling begins. I can't imagine laws related to mental health (ie, if you have received a certain diagnosis, you can't own a gun) would restrict access either. If anything, that would be an even bigger disincentive to seek treatment: if you're sick, you lose constitutional rights? Never gonna happen. The only policy that makes sense to prevent this kind of thing is to expand mental health coverage and actively try and engage the US public in some debates about reducing the stigma surrounding mental illness. Attack the source of the issue (something makes them think it's ok to murder people), rather than the tools they use.
Ive already gone through some of the issues with tying mental health to background checks before. I honestly wouldn't throw a shit fit if private sales were required to got through an NICS check. A simple yes or no if the person is eligible. While training and safety courses are always a good idea having them as a requirement for to exercise constitutional right? You better be ready to compensate people for the training or offer it for free.
See now that's a compromise I'd love to see. Required gun safety and training but a federally funded school program implemented with it. I'd also be much more in favor of universal background checks if they took silencers off of the NFA list. Of course each suggestion would be a poison pill both ways if either were suggested.
I'm not sure that's actually true though. When it comes to issues like this the most passionate and most vocal often have the most extreme views. I remember a thread a couple years back where one of the board members (very pro guns) kept saying if you give gun control advocates an inch they'll take it a mile. Basically, one small compromise means that soon they'll start rounding up your guns and instituting sweeping bans. While I won't say it's non-partisan because every issue now is partisan to some degree, I don't think the gun debate is nearly as partisan as it's made out to be. However, the perception is generally between Americans who want guns going off in every direction everywhere all the time vs people who want them completely out of the public's hands. How many Americans are there that actually want guns banned? Moreover, I would like to believe it's possible to exact legislation without attaching all the shit that really is the most controversial (clip sizes, 'assault weapons' sales, etc). I would like to believe that's possible at least, not saying it's going to happen. I don't think putting forth something like a mandatory training class/license registration for citizens who want to own guns would be so controversial if you didn't have media alarmists talking about how next thing you know you'll have to fill out 50,000 pages of paperwork and pay sky rocket taxes to own one. Might be wrong there though.
Why should anyone be forced to take a gun class? We don't force people to vote or exercise other rights, we don't force kids to take sex education (at least, with a parental objection). Also take a look at sex ed and how fucking WRONG most schools get it. Also, the complete lack of civics in lots of schools. Shit, we can't even educate kids on the basics like reading and math properly. Personally, I find these more important than gun safety, especially when plenty of kids don't know anyone who even owns a gun. NY, DC, San Fran, lots of major cities have serious impediments to owning a firearm. Then there are questions about gun knowledge courses in schools. Who is doing the teaching, and at what fee? I can see precious resources being redirected to yet another private contractor. Are they going to be pushing NRA style membership and ideas? Who are the pupils? Who might be excluded? There is the issue of bringing a weapon onto school grounds. Whether the weapon is fake or not, unloaded or not, someone will shit puppies. Driver's Ed is disappearing because of the liability. How is weapons training going to work? I always get a giggle out of this numbnuts: Much like sex ed and religion, we should leave it up to the parents.
Ok, yet another shooting and yet more blind alley discussions about education and mental health. So let's start here. 'Education/training/etc.' has become one of several knee jerk responses to solving problems in America. I like education, but answer me this: How precisely is 'education' or 'training classes' going to prevent spree shootings? I ask, because people only talk about this idea in the wake of spree shootings. I'm not saying in general that education and training if you're going to own a firearm is a bad idea, but I need someone to take me step by step through how this will prevent any spree shootings. Maybe I'm uneducated and all of these spree shooters really didn't have the training and education to understand that a firearm is dangerous, and that when you point it at someone and pull the trigger it might kill them. Is anyone aware of spree shooters firing the weapon once and saying 'Holy fucking shit, I didn't know it would do that!!!!' Then immediately drop the weapon, surrender to police and show that 'hey, I didn't understand or have the training that the gun might do that?' Has that ever happened with a spree shooting? In other words, these people are very much aware of how a gun works and what a gun can do, and in fact intentionally use it for its intended purpose. What education are we talking about? 'Don't do that!' Don't we do that now?
Very very good article about gun violence. I love NIH! couple excerpts: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4318286/
Honestly, I wasn't talking about training in reference to spree killers. I'm not all that concerned about spree killers relative to the other gun problems in this country. I don't think there is a good answer to spree killings, but the best that I can see is reducing the excessive reporting on them, stop making them into anti-heros. That's not something that should be legislated, but something the media should consider for ethical reasons. No that that's going to happen... I think requiring some basic training for people who want to own a firearm, and then making them retake a written test once every 4 years or so could reduce gun accidents. At the least, I think it has a better shot at reducing death and injuries overall than things like changing clips from 12 to 8 bullets or banning assault weapons. This has a couple things to look at: One in particular jumps out to me. So it would seem some idiots really do need to be taught how to store their firearms. While I agree with CJ that a lot of accidental gun deaths are caused by idiots, you don't necessarily have to be an idiot to be on the receiving end. So yes, I don't think it would be a cure all, or necessarily have a major impact on the whole issue, but like requiring people to get a driver's license it would probably reduce accidents to some degree.
The backlash on the lion thing, while completely understandable, dwarfs any domestic issues we currently have. I've seen more collective internet mob justice on this than the Sandra Bland death and South Carolina church shooting combined. I think lion hunting is despicable because they aren't really fearful of humans. They don't appear to be difficult to get to. The fact that he left the lion injured for 40 hours before he killed it is even worse. And when he tried to destroy the tracking collar after, told me he knew what he did. But I mean, can you imagine if he refused to fill a gay man's cavity?(heh)
He lured it out of a protected sanctuary with bait, skinned and decapited it, left its body to rot and claimed ignorance despite the fact it wore a tracking collar and his "guides" had no permits. Fuck him. He's been busted for illegal hunting previously and paid a huge sum of money to his ex-secretary so she'd drop a sexual harassment charge against him. A shitbag extraordinaire.
From what I've read of African lion hunting, it varies considerably from place to place. You could be hunting a truly wild critter that didn't get old by sheer luck, or the equivalent of a big farm cat that was darted and put in a tall fenced enclosure a few hours before your hunt. It is purely trophy hunting but at the same time is very important for funding conservation efforts- when done legally and ethically. We don't know yet with certainty if he really knew his PH and guides were doing things illegally or not, and they also may not have been able to see his collar when they shot it, but given his history I'm doubtful and bottom line it all sounds shady. Shit can happen while hunting and the wounding followed by a 40 hour track is unfortunate but still lame and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The $55,000 he paid for the hunt should go directly to conservation in the area but I think that's questionable here too and it probably doesn't touch the revenue Cecil brought into Zimbabwe. He's an idiot with too much money at best and scum-of-the-earth poacher at worst.
I know that it helps local conservation efforts, but generally I just think big game hunting is a massively stupid endeavor that is engaged in primarily by men with microscopic wedding tackle, not to mention sufficient delusion in both their own importance and taste in interior decorating to believe that a stuffed lion head on the wall is either impressive or attractive. The vast majority of big game hunts consist of a few locals that know the habits of an animal who is not particularly afraid of humans. Big White Hunter pays money, shows up, is pointed in the direction of said animal and pulls a trigger. Most often any "tracking" that's done is the locals leading Big White Hunter from previously-known spot to spot. It's especially ridiculous when the animals in question are animals like elephants, rhinos, lions, etc. who have absolutely no reason to fear humans, and no natural reason to stay hidden or secluded. Where is the sport in that? Of course it's ridiculous that the outrage over this dwarfs the outrage over the latest police killing, but I'm not going to shed a tear over some douchebag who didn't do sufficient homework to figure out if his hunt was permitted, wasn't observant enough to notice a large black radio collar on his kill, wasn't skilled enough to take the animal down cleanly, and then tried to cover it up. Good luck with your future business, doc!
I just can't fathom how you can look at something as beautiful as this: ...and the first thing that crosses your mind is "I want to END that". You need fucking therapy if you think thrill-killing something so majestic is acceptable.
I'm not gonna argue over him being a douchebag, 'cause we certainly agree on that, but why is the sexism okay here? You're better than that. Also where did you get your info on the "vast majority of big game hunts"?
They just evacuated UC in Cincinnati and flooded it with state troopers in anticipation of this latest police killing.
I don't disagree. But I also think the internet warrior response is unacceptable. It's public, if he did anything wrong or illegal he's done. For the public to go after him online and threaten his life, his family, and his livelihood is completely insane and just as bad as what he has done. Worse, if it is proven that it was a legal hunt (not that I think that is likely). This mob mentality is dangerous and there is at least a few lunatics out there that will probably go all vigilante and think it's justified because of the "public" outrage. They kill a human, they are worse than someone who would kill an animal.