Enough

[daytripper]

What ideas do you have towards gun control that have a realistic chance of happening?

What if, like driving, you had to have a license to own / carry a firearm? To obtain the license, you had to demonstrate your competent with the firearm and also able to pass a test on the laws governing the same. This license would have to be renewed periodically.

I just don't see any chance of a bill like that passing. NY recently had a law like that ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court for concealed carry.

[easyrider16]

But realistically, what else could have been done?

What ideas do you have towards gun control that have a realistic chance of happening?

Two very different questions, here. There are no shortage of ideas on how to mitigate this kind of incident, but none of them would actually be allowed in this country by either the electorate or the current Supreme Court. In this case, as XJ suggested, stringent license requirements that would require people to get regularly screened for mental health issues could possibly have prevented this tragedy. I believe Japan has that type of law in place currently. Such a law would never happen here, even though it has apparently been very effective in Japan.

The thinking here needs to change before anything real can happen on this issue. The second amendment needs to be amended to take the power away from activist judges who would strike down sensible gun regulation, and then new legislation with effective gun regulation needs to be passed.

[deadheadskier]

I'd be all for Japanese style laws on guns in this country

Of course the argument against such is that there are too many guns already to implement such change; that the cats out of the bag. To me that just means a longer runway to implement would be needed.

[easyrider16]

Of course the argument against such is that there are too many guns already to implement such change; that the cats out of the bag. To me that just means a longer runway to implement would be needed.

Agreed, there would need to be a buyback program like what they did in Australia. It would take a lot of time but it could be done. Of course it won't be because "they're coming for yer guns!" is one of the rallying cries of the right wing. Those guys seem to love their guns more than they care about innocent people dying due to gun violence.

[XtremeJibber2001]

You have to wonder why this man in New York and the other man in Missouri felt so compelled to kill another human so quickly (easily?). Why did these men feel so threatened that they chose to kill?

I realize the Missouri man didn't kill Yarl, but if you raise/point your gun you're making a decision to kill IMHO.

[daytripper]

Of course the argument against such is that there are too many guns already to implement such change; that the cats out of the bag. To me that just means a longer runway to implement would be needed.

Agreed, there would need to be a buyback program like what they did in Australia. It would take a lot of time but it could be done. Of course it won't be because "they're coming for yer guns!" is one of the rallying cries of the right wing. Those guys seem to love their guns more than they care about innocent people dying due to gun violence.

I own a gun but don't shoot people that ring my doorbell or turn around in my driveway. I would say that over 99.9% of gun owners are responsible gun owners. Why should I have to give back my gun because of an extreme minority?

[deadheadskier]

Of course the argument against such is that there are too many guns already to implement such change; that the cats out of the bag. To me that just means a longer runway to implement would be needed.

Agreed, there would need to be a buyback program like what they did in Australia. It would take a lot of time but it could be done. Of course it won't be because "they're coming for yer guns!" is one of the rallying cries of the right wing. Those guys seem to love their guns more than they care about innocent people dying due to gun violence.

I own a gun but don't shoot people that ring my doorbell or turn around in my driveway. I would say that over 99.9% of gun owners are responsible gun owners. Why should I have to give back my gun because of an extreme minority?

If you pass the necessary background checks, licensing requirements, provide proof of proper storage and are in possession of an approved gun type, you won't have to.

I don't put bombs in my shoes. Why do I need them X-rayed when I get on a plane?

How do I know you don't have a screw loose and would never shoot someone who rings your doorbell? Where's your proof other than your word? Do you have evidence of a mental evaluation that concludes within a reasonable doubt that you are fit to carry?

[daytripper]

I'm all for better background checks. A license is not required. I could get behind needing a license but that isn't realistically going to happen. I properly store them in my closet, I have no children so I have no need to keep it locked up. My guns are bolt action and semi auto which are both approved. I am ok with mental evaluations but they don't seem to be very effective currently, and good luck getting a more invasive check that would be effective into law.

[Stormchaser]

I'm all for better background checks. A license is not required. I could get behind needing a license but that isn't realistically going to happen. I properly store them in my closet, I have no children so I have no need to keep it locked up. My guns are bolt action and semi auto which are both approved. I am ok with mental evaluations but they don't seem to be very effective currently, and good luck getting a more invasive check that would be effective into law.

Without a renewable permit, how would one check recent/current mental status? Do you just have to be sane at the time of purchase?

[deadheadskier]

https://www.wmtw.com/article/texas-chee ... -autopilot

[skidogg]

it's not the gun
it's the person
with the gun

[easyrider16]

I'm all for better background checks. A license is not required. I could get behind needing a license but that isn't realistically going to happen. I properly store them in my closet, I have no children so I have no need to keep it locked up. My guns are bolt action and semi auto which are both approved. I am ok with mental evaluations but they don't seem to be very effective currently, and good luck getting a more invasive check that would be effective into law.

Sounds like you're okay with all of the regulations I proposed. As for mental health evaluations, what do you mean they aren't effective currently? They're not required currently, at least in the U.S. They are required in Japan, where they have proven to be effective.

I agree none of this is going to happen. I'm not sure why you keep raising that point. There are lots of feel-good laws we can pass that will do next to nothing, and that's all we're likely to see. Bottom line is until the thinking here dramatically changes, you're going to keep seeing this kind of gun violence here.

[XtremeJibber2001]

it's not the gun
it's the person
with the gun

The person plays a role, but my Winchester 1890 is not the same as my XM15. The gun makes a material difference.

[deadheadskier]

Why do have an XM15?

[XtremeJibber2001]

Why do have an XM15?

I don’t. Was just an hypothetical example. I only have firearms for hunting.