How do we reduce mass-shootings?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

The only way to ban guns in the USA would be to first fight a civil war with everyone who believes that we have a right (even with good regulations) to own guns for home/self defense.

After that war is won we could remove the 2nd Amendment. And severely restrict or ban gun ownership.

No one is talking about banning guns, many countries allow all sorts of guns including hand guns and avoid the USA problem. It is about as a first stage regulating guns.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Darat

No one is talking about banning guns, many countries allow all sorts of guns including hand guns and avoid the USA problem. It is about as a first stage regulating guns.

Yes, and changing the culture.

AFAIK no other developed nations have a significant proportion of the population owning handguns for the purposes of personal protection (in part against home invasion). Instead they trust law enforcement to do this.

Unless this attitude changes (and of course in part that attitude is influenced by US law enforcement and their stated lack of a need to protect and serve) then there will be a large number of people with guns, on a hair trigger, prepared to use them at the drop of a hat.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Darat

No one is talking about banning guns, many countries allow all sorts of guns including hand guns and avoid the USA problem. It is about as a first stage regulating guns.

You sure about that?

[Armitage72]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Apparently this is from one of the guys who played Superman on TV.

It's been reported that one of the reasons his character on "Supergirl" was killed (off-screen) was the friction between him and the other cast and crew once their conflicting political and social views became evident. He also went went on FOX News saying that most cops are great and only a few are bad and that today Superman couldn’t use the slogan “truth, justice and the American way”.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

You sure about that?

Absolutely - until you start to regulate who can own guns your situation won't change. Obviously, there is not any single change nor policy that will solve your endemic issues - as The Don points out it is not only the physical gun ownership you need to address. It will also take decades and decades to get the USA to a position similar to its contemporaries even if everyone started to implement appropriate regulations and policies today.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Darat

Absolutely - until you start to regulate who can own guns your situation won't change. Obviously, there is not any single change nor policy that will solve your endemic issues - as The Don points out it is not only the physical gun ownership you need to address. It will also take decades and decades to get the USA to a position similar to its contemporaries even if everyone started to implement appropriate regulations and policies today.

Several folks here have alluded to banning most if nnot all guns as the best solution to our problem.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Several folks here have alluded to banning most if nnot all guns as the best solution to our problem.

That does not appear to follow from my post so I'll leave it to you to make your point clearer rather than assume wrongly.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Several folks here have alluded to banning most if nnot all guns as the best solution to our problem.

NZ Aus banned all but pest control style guns that farmers need.

[Garrison]

End the fetishization of guns in the USA and then move on to discussing reasonable measures like background checks, restrictions on certain classes of firearm and requirements on proper storage and security.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Samson

NZ Aus banned all but pest control style guns that farmers need.

Exactly. Banning all semi-auto firearms and heavily regulating the rest. Seize all existing semi-auto firearms. I agree that would be a great step to reducing mass shootings, but it could never happen in the USA without violating the second amendment.

[BrettM]

Originally Posted by Garrison

End the fetishization of guns in the USA ...

That means an end to Hollywood movies where guns are worshipped...

So long , Dirty Harry, nice knowing ya!

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Exactly. Banning all semi-auto firearms and heavily regulating the rest. Seize all existing semi-auto firearms. I agree that would be a great step to reducing mass shootings, but it could never happen in the USA without violating the second amendment.

Why not at least start small and work up to it? No?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Why not at least start small and work up to it? No?

That's my idea, but I have been attacked for it.

I agree the only way we can pass meaningful gun control in the USA is slow and incremental.

Unfortunately at a certain point new gun laws will fly in the face of the 2nd Amendment, and only Amending the Constitution can deal with that, and I fear such an act would trigger civil war. At least within my lifetime.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

That's my idea, but I have been attacked for it.

You were "attacked" for continually and dishonestly misrepresenting other people's arguments.

[The Great Zaganza]

Tax the **** out of bullets beyond the first single clip.
Unless they are bought and used at a licensed gun range.

[Mike!]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Tax the **** out of bullets beyond the first single clip.
Unless they are bought and used at a licensed gun range.

Yep, I think using tax laws to control the supply of bullets would be an effective means of backdoor gun control.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Mike!

Yep, I think using tax laws to control the supply of bullets would be an effective means of backdoor gun control.

Lol. The only thing Republicans hate more than gun control is taxes.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Lol. The only thing Republicans hate more than gun control is taxes.

The problem with taxing bullets as a way to reduce their nationwide supply is that its effect will be only wealthy people are able to defend themselves with firearms.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

The problem with taxing bullets as a way to reduce their nationwide supply is that its effect will be only wealthy people are able to defend themselves with firearms.

Nope.

Your gun doesn't become better at self defense because you have a hundred bullets for it

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Nope.

Your gun doesn't become better at self defense because you have a hundred bullets for it

I guess you could tax bullets at 10,000% beyond the sale of say 10. Its an interesting idea. But sounds rather difficult to enforce and likely to be deemed arbitrary & capricious.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

I guess you could tax bullets at 10,000% beyond the sale of say 10. Its an interesting idea. But sounds rather difficult to enforce and likely to be deemed arbitrary & capricious.

No, it isn't.

You just tax at 10,000 unless you go to the effort of registering your gun in a database that tracks your bullet purchases. Then you can have a few bullets at no tax.
That way, bullet manufacturers and gun stores would have to track and pass along the taxes for every bullet they sell, making it incredibly unprofitable to circumvent the tax.


We do that all the time for financial Instruments.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Lol. The only thing Republicans hate more than gun control is taxes.

Tish and fipsy! They hate fair elections way more.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

No, it isn't.

You just tax at 10,000 unless you go to the effort of registering your gun in a database that tracks your bullet purchases. Then you can have a few bullets at no tax.
That way, bullet manufacturers and gun stores would have to track and pass along the taxes for every bullet they sell, making it incredibly unprofitable to circumvent the tax.


We do that all the time for financial Instruments.

No system exists anywhere in the USA to do background checks for ammo sales.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Exactly. Banning all semi-auto firearms and heavily regulating the rest. Seize all existing semi-auto firearms. I agree that would be a great step to reducing mass shootings, but it could never happen in the USA without violating the second amendment.

You do know that's not a natural law, plus there is even a hint in its popular title - hint it starts with an "a".

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Garrison

End the fetishization of guns in the USA and then move on to discussing reasonable measures like background checks, restrictions on certain classes of firearm and requirements on proper storage and security.

As you can see - that is going to be huge battle:

Originally Posted by Hercules56

The problem with taxing bullets as a way to reduce their nationwide supply is that its effect will be only wealthy people are able to defend themselves with firearms.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

The problem with taxing bullets as a way to reduce their nationwide supply is that its effect will be only wealthy people are able to defend themselves with firearms.

And it's only the wealthy people that can do a lot of things, why is it only a problem when it is guns?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Darat

You do know that's not a natural law, plus there is even a hint in its popular title - hint it starts with an "a".

It requires 38 states to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution, which means we can only have 12 say "nyet".

Currently 25 states have Constitutional Carry laws. You really think we can get 38 states to kill the 2nd Amendment and allow the banning of all semi-auto firearms???

Haaa!!! Not without a civil war.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

No system exists anywhere in the USA to do background checks for ammo sales.

At press time, residents of the only economically advanced nation in the world where roughly two mass shootings have occurred every month for the past eight years were referring to themselves and their situation as ‘helpless

That was in 2014 - the 2 per month has increased.

Your position seems quite clear - there is nothing that can be done.

ETA:

Originally Posted by Hercules56

It requires 38 states to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution, which means we can only have 12 say "nyet".

Currently 25 states have Constitutional Carry laws. You really think we can get 38 states to kill the 2nd Amendment and allow the banning of all semi-auto firearms???

Haaa!!! Not without a civil war.

Yep your position is quite clear there is nothing that can be done.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Darat

At press time, residents of the only economically advanced nation in the world where roughly two mass shootings have occurred every month for the past eight years were referring to themselves and their situation as ‘helpless

That was in 2014 - the 2 per month has increased.

You position seems quite clear - there is nothing that can be done.

On the contrary, I have suggested slow & incremental new gun laws. Very hard to pass but still possible.

[erwinl]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

On the contrary, I have suggested slow & incremental new gun laws. Very hard to pass but still possible.

Alright.
Let's suppose that they are passed, no matter how hard.
How incremental and where would you suggest the end situation to be?

Total banning? Something else, less extreme?
And how long would that incremental path take? 5 years? 10? 100? 200 years?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by erwinl

Alright.
Let's suppose that they are passed, no matter how hard.
How incremental and where would you suggest the end situation to be?

Total banning? Something else, less extreme?
And how long would that incremental path take? 5 years? 10? 100? 200 years?

As long as we have the 2nd Amendment, the most we can do is say limit gun sales to one per month, tax gun sales excessively, perhaps even register AWs under the NFA. But we cannot outright ban any semi-auto guns nationwide or seize them. I already expect the Supreme Court to kill existing AW bans next term or the term after.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

As long as we have the 2nd Amendment, the most we can do is say limit gun sales to one per month, tax gun sales excessively, perhaps even register AWs under the NFA. But we cannot outright ban any semi-auto guns nationwide or seize them. I already expect the Supreme Court to kill existing AW bans next term or the term after.

Yep: At press time, residents of the only economically advanced nation in the world where roughly two mass shootings have occurred every month for the past eight years were referring to themselves and their situation as ‘helpless

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

No system exists anywhere in the USA to do background checks for ammo sales.

But it would be incredibly easy to institute.
But I guess your point is that the problem is unsolvable, because if there was anything we could do about it, we would have do it already.

Notice the title of the thread.

[erwinl]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

As long as we have the 2nd Amendment, the most we can do is say limit gun sales to one per month, tax gun sales excessively, perhaps even register AWs under the NFA. But we cannot outright ban any semi-auto guns nationwide or seize them. I already expect the Supreme Court to kill existing AW bans next term or the term after.

What you're suggesting really looks like pretending to do something, while in reality doing nothing at all.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

But it would be incredibly easy to institute.
But I guess your point is that the problem is unsolvable, because if there was anything we could do aniu

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

As long as we have the 2nd Amendment, the most we can do is say limit gun sales to one per month, tax gun sales excessively, perhaps even register AWs under the NFA. But we cannot outright ban any semi-auto guns nationwide or seize them. I already expect the Supreme Court to kill existing AW bans next term or the term after.

2nd amendment says nothing about bullets.
And taxation is not infringement.

[JoeMorgue]

Man I wish I was as good at ANYTHING as Republicans are at excuses why children getting gunned down daily not being a thing is such an unreasonable request.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

2nd amendment says nothing about bullets.
And taxation is not infringement.

Ok, so let's try it.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Ok, so let's try it.

"Nice way to actually improve society you get there. Be shame if something were to happen to it."

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

No system exists anywhere in the USA to do background checks for ammo sales.

Well yeah, that's what we are talking about.

All the guns in the world aren't mass killing. You need a mess of bullets. There's your control point. And it could be implemented in matter of hours. The biggest problem is funding an existing bullet buyback, which isn't insurmountable. Then make possession of more than say 10 rounds total of any ammunition a major felony, equivalent to terrorism. Introduce a simple purchasing card to regulate future sales. Bullets would still be available at secure gun ranges at normal prices, but you must present your spent shells before leaving.

Not a perfect system,and there would be exceptions made and of course the occasional system gamer who abuses it. But the Nicolas Cruz and other disorganized mass shooters would be stopped pretty much dead in their tracks. Legit owners would still have their home defense comfort bullets, barring a Mad Max fantasy mass shootout scenario. It's a legit approach that has teeth.