Why we need to control guns AND people.

[SarahD]

The NRA tells us it will.do no good to limit general public access to firearms. What we need to do, they say, is get a grip on mental health problems. This article makes it pretty evident we need to do both. Ordinary citizens have no need for military style assault rifles, and anyone with a history of violence or certain mental health problems should not have access to any firearm. We can go on insisting on the absolute right of anyone to own guns, and we can insist that people with severe emotional troubles cannot be dehumanized by restricting their activities, and it's all fine, as long as we don't mind mass shootings.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/14/us/lakewood-church-shooting-joel-osteen-texas/index.html

[TexasDem69]

1. The U.S. already largely prevents felons from owning guns

Yet felons still commit most violent crimes in the U.S.

[SarahD]

4. We have a spotty record.

For example, we are notoriously lax about keeping guns away from those involved with domestic abuse. Too many loopholes. I will give the NRA credit for saying they want to take guns away from criminals and disturbed people, but I'm not sure they're serious about it because it would cut into the customer base for firearms manufacturers.

[TexasDem69]

5. The NRA isn't serious about any gun control law

That actually results in restrictions. But serious people should ignore the NRA—it’s a shill for the gun lobby and far-right Republicans

[Irish_Dem]

2. Billionaire oligarchs gutted mental health 30 years ago.

They found a way to make sure that insurance companies didn't pay for mental health in illegal ways that politicians didn't care about. They found a way to make a profit and suck up all the mental health money for their deep corporate pockets and refuse to pay providers. Even though people had legally mandated mental health services as part of their insurance packages. Providers delivered those services.

This left providers going bankrupt or barely scraping by. This led to a lot of providers leaving the profession. And younger people didn't want to get a degree in a professional area where you are not going to get paid for services legally rendered and in compliance with insurance company rules and policies.

What the oligarchs did to mental health was the canary in the coal mine. It was the beginning of things to come.

[Marcus IM]

3. The rest of the nations of the OECD world have representative gov't as far as this is concerned.

Americans carry on endlessly about their gawd-given freedom of speech ... what good does clinging to that do when it falls on deaf ears, and our gov't doesn't take action to protect us?
According to the body count ... almost every other nation does a better job in this dept.

[TexasDem69]

6. I assume you know that the government can't do whatever it wants

Unlike countries like Cuba, for instance, there are limits on what the federal government can and cannot do.

[Marcus IM]

7. You think that parliamentary systems can just do what they want irrespective of their constituency? lol

If they did, they'd be booted out of office in a bi-annual citizen accountability vote.

See, Cuba is not what you might think it is.

It ain't the cold-war vision so many seem to hang onto.

As to your point ... why is it that most ALL other nations have regulated guns and have gun controls and near zero mass shootings?

Is it because you think the govt's "just do what they want"?

Ridiculous.

Representative democracy is how it gets done.

[TexasDem69]

8. And to be clear, Cuba is a dictatorship

Not a representative democracy. “Cuba remains the Western Hemisphere’s longest standing dictatorship. Cubans are isolated from other societies by sea and from one another by restrictions on freedom of movement, basic rights and opportunities.” https://www.iri.org/iri-around-the-world/latin-america-and-the-caribbean/cuba/.

And in the U.S. the Constitution serves as a check on government action. That’s the model we adopted and it’s worked so far.

[yagotme]

9. Your definition of this?

Ordinary citizens have no need for military style assault rifles,

Military style assault rifles, by definition, have been regulated since 1934. We're talking about full-auto weapons, which is what the military uses. Takes a $200 tax, filling out federal forms, extensive background checks, etc. The crime rate for these military type rifles is about as close to zero as you can get. The military does not use a semi-auto rifle (like the AR-15) as a general issue rifle. If you want to "control" an item, you need to accurately describe it, what it is, and what it does, or it will be a useless "control". See: 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

[SarahD]

10. "You said clip!"

I hope this isn't one of those responses involving technical details and the notion that anyone who doesn't have full command of all the tech specs is not qualified to offer an opinion. I realize an AR-15 is not capable of fully automatic operation. It doesn't have a bayonet mount, either. But it fires a military style bullet and has a big clip... Oh my God! I said clip. I am so ashamed! Of course I meant to say large capacity magazine. Can you ever forgive me?

[yagotme]

11. What is a military style bullet? nt

[SarahD]

12. I asked Steve.

I'm just a girl, so I don't know stuff like this. Steve says you are right, that there is no real distinction between a civilian and military round. Round. I like that term. Sounds more techie than bullet. Thanks, Steve.

[yagotme]

13. The bullet is the projectile, the part that flies through the air.

A round is the entire package, primer, brass, powder, and bullet. Being a "girl" has no bearing, some girls know about gun stuff. It's just not in your wheelhouse, sex has nothing to do with it. There are guys who don't know stuff about guns, either. I know, have had some spirited discussions here with them.

As far as military/civilian bullets, a full metal jacket (FMJ) bullet is primarily used by the military, as per the Hague convention, IIRC the governing body correctly. Soft point/hollow point bullets are not allowed, due do the excessive damage/suffering clause. The only HP bullet allowed to be used, is a match tipped bullet (sniper), as the hollow point is a result of the manufacturing process, not made to expand like a HP hunting round. The only "round" difference, is the civilian .223/5.56 military. The .223 actually runs at a lower pressure than the 5.56, even though exterior dimensions are identical. A rifle chambered in .223 is usually not recommended to fire 5.56, due to pressure concerns, but a 5.56 can fire either, no problem. (Has to do with the way the chamber in the barrel is cut.) Hope this wasn't a TMI post, but I feel people can make more informed decisions, well, if they have more info to decide on.

[Fla_Democrat]

14. Lena Miculek said.... "What the heck...?"

[Paladin]

16. Don't sweat the "clip" thing.

Contrary to what the 2nd Amendment Absolutists may tell you, "clip" is still a regularly and widely used term for "magazine." It's been that way for decades. The NRA types aren't losing any sleep over it, and neither should you.

[The Mouth]

15. The less control of either of these that any government has, the better.

Hopefully SCOTUS will overturn the horrific 1934 and 1968 gun control bills and enforce the right of all non-felon citizens to own and carry anything anywhere.