Gun Violence Tracker (2 Viewers)

I understand fully the gun show loop holes having purchased many guns at them throughout the years.

You either cant or wont say how many people need to be killed before you would embrace serious gun restrictions or even a compromise thereof and your solution is to arm everybody.

You sir are the epitome of why this issue and many others will never be solved.

You win. Good luck 'merica.
 
Meddler2 said:
With regard to the local media reports and police reports used by the gun tracker, prove ONE that is inaccurate. I guess those police reports are also deceitful?

Nonetheless you have still not answered the question.
Click to expand...

David Cross answers the question. Has a solution. @courage isn't gonna like it.

Spoiler alert, these are from his current special on Netflix.


And the final rebuttal to founding father intent.

 
Last edited:
Was there ever an answer for why gun deaths per capita are dramatically lower in other civilized European countries when compared to the US?
 
This is an absurd and absurdly interesting story about the workarounds required to keep records of gun ownership when laws and regulations controlling gun records are made by people determined to keep the government from keeping adequate records of gun ownership.

Inside the Federal Bureau of Way Too Many Guns

8jk9Grv.png
 
Perhaps we will find that cell phone meta data, credit/debit card records, banking records and various tracking systems in cars will allow a construction of a modern database of recent gun and ammo purchases. The police might not be able to track the serial numbers back to the original buyers, but they would know enough to know in most cases who has what types of firearms.

Anyone fearful of this would be well advised to buy their guns and ammo with cash, leave the cell phone at home and take a cab or mass transit to the store. Technology is not your friend in this matter.
 
Meddler2 said:
My speculation is that there is a higher gun ownership per capita here in the US than anywhere else in the universe.
Click to expand...


But gun ownership and gun violence correlate poorly within the US. NH is in the top 5 guns/person states and in the 5 lowest violent crimes/person in the US.

Poverty, desperation, etc. seem to be the drivers of violence everywhere.
 
Chicken Rob said:
But gun ownership and gun violence correlate poorly within the US. NH is in the top 5 guns/person states and in the 5 lowest violent crimes/person in the US.

Poverty, desperation, etc. seem to be the drivers of violence everywhere.
Click to expand...

So there is more poverty and desperation in the US than in most of the European countries combined?
 
bergs said:
So there is more poverty and desperation in the US than in most of the European countries combined?
Click to expand...

I don't know for sure, but my instinct is that most of Western Europe has better health care, education, social safety nets, and less disparity of wealth.

That said, Norway has the highest mass casualties per capita in mass shootings from 2003-2013, which was the last time I looked at the stats.

They have high social/financial equality and strict gun control. So obviously no one really has a simple answer to this complex question.
 
I have a theory.

It's weather related. Norway is awfully fucking cold. Chicago is awfully fucking cold. Miami and Compton are awfully fucking hot.

You never hear about shootings in San Diego. Everyone's happy in San Diego. Spain is nice and temperate. Lots of place in Europe are very nice from a weather perspective.

Somalia, most parts of Africa, really fucking hot.
 
If I recall correctly, Norway's numbers are driven by a single act by a lone gunman. If that is accurate, then trying to draw inferences about the relative merits of US society vs Norwegian society is pointless. Rare or unique events are not best data to build public policy around.

DrStrange
 
DrStrange said:
If I recall correctly, Norway's numbers are driven by a single act by a lone gunman. If that is accurate, then trying to draw inferences about the relative merits of US society vs Norwegian society is pointless. Rare or unique events are not best data to build public policy around.

DrStrange
Click to expand...

Yes you're right. And I agree. Yet we were trying to build public policy around mass shooting data in this country back when they were far less frequent. Anyway, that one shooting in Norway does illustrate that a lone gunman with a single weapon is not stopped by tight gun control we need to look at the other drivers if we want to really eliminate the problem.
 
Chicken Rob said:
Anyway, that one shooting in Norway does illustrate that a lone gunman with a single weapon is not stopped by tight gun control we need to look at the other drivers if we want to really eliminate the problem.
Click to expand...

Seems true enough. But even if gun violence is a mere symptom of the real problem, there's nothing wrong with trying to get the symptoms under control while we try to figure out the root cause.

The barrier is opposition to gun regulations and controls on a principled rather than a reasoned basis.
 
I would be happy to drop the focus from mass shooting events and pay attention to total gun deaths. I generally agree that most of the gun restrictions proposals driven by mass shootings are not likely to result in a great reduction in gun related deaths. Wide spread gun control is a misguided fantasy given the second amendment rights spelled out the Supreme court. There isn't any way to take a hundred million firearms out of the hands of the public - nor should we, such ownership is a fundamental right of citizenship.

I much prefer to focus on irresponsible gun sellers and owners then trying to control access to firearms. I want gun owners/sellers to bear the fiscal and criminal consequences related to their decisions. I want national registration. I want mandatory training, testing, licensing and insurance. I am bone weary of irresponsible owners who treat their guns like some sort of adult toy - a game of let's pretend we are a cop or some sort of comic book vigilante.
 
DrStrange said:
I would be happy to drop the focus from mass shooting events and pay attention to total gun deaths. I generally agree that most of the gun restrictions proposals driven by mass shootings are not likely to result in a great reduction in gun related deaths. Wide spread gun control is a misguided fantasy given the second amendment rights spelled out the Supreme court. There isn't any way to take a hundred million firearms out of the hands of the public - nor should we, such ownership is a fundamental right of citizenship.

I much prefer to focus on irresponsible gun sellers and owners then trying to control access to firearms. I want gun owners/sellers to bear the fiscal and criminal consequences related to their decisions. I want national registration. I want mandatory training, testing, licensing and insurance. I am bone weary of irresponsible owners who treat their guns like some sort of adult toy - a game of let's pretend we are a cop or some sort of comic book vigilante.
Click to expand...

First, the agenda items you listed (registration, training, liability to owners/sellers) constitute gun control to most organizations advocating for (and against) it. If you mean that gun confiscation is a misguided fantasy I think we'll all agree, but gun control is a very reasonable goal and is within long term reach.

Second, enough with the nonsense about the Second Amendment. We know that the current restrictions purportedly imposed by the Second Amendment can be changed by the Court. We know this because they have been changed, most recently and most dramatically in Heller in 2008. The Court can do precisely the same thing in the opposite direction. It's a political body, just a more slowly moving one, but the shift has to begin somewhere. When the Court is stocked with more liberals than conservatives, there is the very real possibility that the Court will either limit significantly limit Heller or outright reverse it.
 
DrStrange said:
I much prefer to focus on irresponsible gun sellers and owners then trying to control access to firearms. I want gun owners/sellers to bear the fiscal and criminal consequences related to their decisions. I want national registration. I want mandatory training, testing, licensing and insurance. I am bone weary of irresponsible owners who treat their guns like some sort of adult toy - a game of let's pretend we are a cop or some sort of comic book vigilante.
Click to expand...

Being that almost ALL gun crime is committed by individuals not legally permitted to own a firearm, I fail to see the logic here.

On registration....it's a non starter and it's illegal. Since almost all gun crime is committed by fellons it has no utility and historically has not made any impact on crime in countries that implemented it....like Canada that got rid of it. It's a farce with the real aim of creating a list of guns for future confiscation. That has been the only way it has been used internationally.

Here is what was said about it in Canada:

"The Auditor General's report found that the program did not collect data to analyze the effectiveness of the gun registry in meeting its stated goal of improving public safety. The report states:

"The performance report focuses on activities such as issuing licences and registering firearms. The Centre does not show how these activities help minimize risks to public safety with evidence-based outcomes such as reduced deaths, injuries and threats from firearms.[16]"

Former Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino opposed the gun registry, stating in a press release in 2003:

"We have an ongoing gun crisis including firearms-related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered, although we believe that more than half of them were smuggled into Canada from the United States. The firearms registry is long on philosophy and short on practical results considering the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives."[17]
 
Until Heller is overturned, it is the applicable law. Hoping that someday soon a newly enlightened Supreme Court will renounce that decision is a stretch. The court doesn't do that sort of 180 degree U-turn very often. One can only imagine the uproar that would come from the public should the Court choose to do so.

However, Heller clearly left open the prospect of future gun related regulation and restrictions. It seems very likely that a liberal court is going to favorably view further legislation and administrative action to clarify gun rights in much the same way conservative courts have allowed restrictions on abortion rights and voting rights. Citizens do not have an unabridged right to own guns.

I offered a list of common sense gun safety rules that might be beneficially adopted by the various governments. Those sorts of things will be tested by various states and executives, a few will prove to go too far in the eyes of the court but most would survive under a liberal Supreme Court. Even so, the typical American citizen will remain able to own most of the firearms currently in circulation.
 
DrStrange said:
Until Heller is overturned, it is the applicable law. Hoping that someday soon a newly enlightened Supreme Court will renounce that decision is a stretch. The court doesn't do that sort of 180 degree U-turn very often. One can only imagine the uproar that would come from the public should the Court choose to do so.

However, Heller clearly left open the prospect of future gun related regulation and restrictions. It seems very likely that a liberal court is going to favorably view further legislation and administrative action to clarify gun rights in much the same way conservative courts have allowed restrictions on abortion rights and voting rights. Citizens do not have an unabridged right to own guns.

I offered a list of common sense gun safety rules that might be beneficially adopted by the various governments. Those sorts of things will be tested by various states and executives, a few will prove to go too far in the eyes of the court but most would survive under a liberal Supreme Court. Even so, the typical American citizen will remain able to own most of the firearms currently in circulation.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a stretch to hope to move the Court to take action resulting in less dramatic a change than the action already taken in Heller. Certainly a 180 degree turn isn't necessary. The Court isn't required to overturn the decision entirely to restrict that holding to the degree that it is essentially a platitude.
 
Guns need to be registered in much the same way and for many of the same reasons that vehicles are registered. Public safety is only a part of the value of registration. There are other valuable benefits to a comprehensive registry of firearms.

We need proper legal authority to effectively accomplish this. I fully admit getting the Congress of the United States to do anything is asking for the impossible.

How can we understand the mechanics of the flow of guns from legal manufacturing, through the chain of commerce into lawful public ownership but then into the hands of criminals without tracking via registration? I want to try and stem the flow of guns into criminal channels, especially focusing on the profit seeking suppliers of guns to criminals. Right now we have limited information at best.

How can owners gain proper insurance coverage for their guns without registration? The insurance companies are going to need to know what guns the citizen holds to properly price the insurance and to limit coverage only to the firearms registered to the insured party.

How can a gun owner expect to recover stolen property without some proof of ownership? A nation-wide registration would help reunite legitimate owners with their missing property.

Registration is one of the ways we separate law abiding citizens from criminals. If you have an unregistered gun in your possession, then you are open to criminal sanctions. Right now, that is a lot harder to prove especially in state will expansive gun laws. That puts extra burdens on law enforcement, something we could remedy with a comprehensive nationwide gun registry.

I advocate that accessories to gun related destruction and death to be held civilly and criminally liable. Negligent owners need to held to account but that is hard to do when we don't have a good way to prove who owned a gun in the first place. Registration is as much about fiscal responsibility as anything else. If one of the guns registered in your name ends up in the hands of a criminal or even an unauthorized user and damage results, then the registered owner would be expected to show their police report for the stolen weapon or expect to be subject to civil and/or criminal sanctions.

Registration is needed to facilitate mandatory training and licensing. Gun permits need to be matched to the weapons the citizen is qualified to own. A citizen needs to have a license for each gun they own. Law enforcement can not effectively do their role in this type of regulation without a proper registration.

Commonsense gun safety and public safety benefit from good gun tracking. We need this data to make better informed decisions, to effectively enforce the laws of the nation and to facilitate fiscal responsibility.
 
-All my firearms are insured as is the case with millions of other people....some with massive collections of rare and extremely expensive guns. This is a non issue with insurers. I had a flood and lost about $3000 worth of books...some rare. Insurance paid for them without prior documentation of the items. I guy at my club was compensated for destroyed firearms after a fire without issue. I have photos of all my firearms showing serial numbers just in case.

-We don't have a problem in this country with "negligent gun owners". There are millions of guns on the black market and the almost of those used in crime are from this supply

-Despite the unsupportable revisionist history being discussed here, one of the several reasons for the right to bear arms is protection from the State. Having the State maintain a list of every gun and who owns it is contrary to this. Again, almost every gun registry in history has resulted in confiscation. This is exactly what was done in GB and Austrailia. That is why it is illegal in the US (for non NFA weapons)
 
jbutler said:
More Than 80 Percent of Guns Used in Mass Shootings Obtained Legally
Click to expand...

Seriously?

"Eighty-two percent of weapons involved in mass shootings over the last three decades have been bought legally, according to a database compiled by Mother Jones magazine "

Found this University of Chicago study in 10 seconds. A little more credible than a FAR left wing blog

https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.net/sharedmedia/1508093/ccjstudy.pdf


"Among our principal findings:
*Our respondents (adult offenders living in Chicago or nearby) obtain most of their guns from their social network of personal connections. Rarely is the proximate source either direct purchase from a gun store, or theft. "
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

ReallyGoodUsername
  • Locked
SOLD Charity Auction - 400 HHR Hotstamp Monogrammed (12/26 End Date)
Ends 12-26-21 at 9:00 PM Eastern Time
Replies
14
Views
1K
ReallyGoodUsername
ReallyGoodUsername
Machine
  • Sticky
New Members start here!
3 4 5
Replies
139
Views
22K
MJM
M
pltrgyst
The Future
Replies
28
Views
3K
Budha
Budha
Zmasterben
WSOP Chip Usage - Binion's Horseshoe
Replies
19
Views
9K
Zmasterben
Zmasterben
ski_ex5
  • Sticky
Ultrasonic Chip Cleaning
49 50 51
Replies
2K
Views
183K
NotRealNameNoSir
NotRealNameNoSir
Back
Top Bottom