Gun Control Debate -  Common sense gun laws 2 (373 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host9/9/19 5:43 AM 
To: All  (1 of 18) 

Related discussion: Common sense gun laws



‘Solutions to Disarm Criminals Must Safeguard 2A,’ Says Texas Governor
by Dave Workman
4 Sep 19

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott cautioned reporters that solutions to violent crime must protect the Second Amendment.

News agencies are reporting — to their credit — that the man who went on a shooting rampage in West Texas over Labor Day weekend “had previously failed a background check” but had a gun, anyway, yet gun control proponents, rather than admit their agenda has failed again, are reflexively calling for more gun control laws, the New York Times reported.

But while the national media is focused on Saturday’s shooting spree in Texas, by comparison there is little attention being paid to the bloody Labor Day weekend in Chicago that produced a slightly higher body count and left more people wounded, as reported by WLS News.

The shooting, in Midland and Odessa, left seven people dead and 22 wounded, according to published reports.

In Chicago, eight people are dead and at least 34 more were wounded over the three-day holiday weekend.

Texas authorities are investigating the spree killing by the 36-year-old suspect, who was fatally shot by responding police officers Saturday. The dead man reportedly had a criminal history with the state Department of Public Safety, according to the Austin American-Statesman. His name is not being used here.

The Caller Times reported that Texas State Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler) declared, “I am NOT going to use the evil acts of a handful of people to diminish the God-given rights of my fellow Texans. Period. None of these so-called gun-control solutions will work to stop a person with evil intent.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott told reporters that the gunman hadn’t gone through a background check to obtain what has been described as “an AR-type rifle.” The killer had just been fired from his job, and when a state trooper reportedly tried to pull him over for failing to signal a left turn along Interstate 20, he aimed a rifle out the rear window and opened fire, the Statesman said.

In a press conference, Gov. Abbott stated, “We need solutions that will keep guns out of the hands of criminals like the killer here in Odessa, while also insuring that we safeguard Second Amendment rights.”

When Congress returns to Capitol Hill Sept. 9, lawmakers are expected to quickly take up gun control proposals.

It was the second mass shooting in less than a month for the Lone Star State. Twenty-two people were killed Aug. 3 in El Paso at a Walmart. The suspect in those slayings is in custody.

It’s not clear how many, if any suspects are in custody in Chicago. According to WLS, the violent Windy City weekend wrapped up with the shooting of four men at a Chicago Transit Authority Green Line station Monday night. All four are expected to recover.

But it is the violence in Texas, not Chicago, that seems to be fueling the current push for additional gun restrictions. The New York Times reported that President Donald Trump “pledged to find a way to ‘substantially reduce’ mass shootings,” although it is not clear how he plans to accomplish this.

Texas officials have reportedly not explained when or why the alleged spree shooter failed a background check. CBS News reported that the killer had contacted police and the FBI shortly before the Saturday afternoon attack.

While all of these facts may explain his state of mind, none explains how the suspect obtained the rifle he used in the shooting. It is debatable whether a law requiring so-called “universal background checks” would have prevented the shooting, yet background checks on all firearm transfers is an idea that is enjoying increasing support.

It is even less certain whether a “universal background check” law would make any difference in the ongoing slaughter in Chicago. Much of that violence can be traced to gang and drug activity.

war of words erupted between Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) when the senator noted in a tweet that “gun control doesn’t work.” Lightfoot tried to blame Republicans for Chicago violence because they will not pass what she considers “commonsense gun legislation.”

She apparently did not define what such legislation might include, and in the past when lawmakers in Illinois passed gun control legislation, it was routinely defined as “commonsense.”

This raises the question, do anti-gun politicians honestly think they can prevent criminal misuse of firearms by adopting “more-of-the-same” types of laws, or do they just want it to appear they are “doing something?”



From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host9/29/19 6:25 PM 
To: All  (2 of 18) 
 2061.2 in reply to 2061.1 

Real Solutions
National Shooting Sports Foundation

The firearms industry is committed to the safe, legal, and responsible ownership and use of firearms, and works on a daily basis to stop their criminal misuse. As an industry we take seriously our responsibility to be a leading voice in the national conversation, to promote responsible actions among legal gun owners, to help prevent accidents and to help keep guns out of the wrong hands. All of those actions make our homes, neighborhoods and communities safer.

We share the concerns of all Americans, and we are working toward real solutions that help create safer communities. We are proud of our history of leadership in creating real solutions. We are taking action, and the firearms industry has developed genuine solutions that protect our communities while respecting the legal rights of gun owners.

No one wants to stop the criminal and tragic misuse of our products more than we do. That’s why the firearms industry has led with initiatives to improve security at retail stores and prevent thefts, strengthen the background check system, deter illegal purchases and promote secure storage to help prevent accidents, thefts and misuse.

These Firearm Industry-led programs are working.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation® launched its REAL SOLUTIONSSM initiatives to promote responsible actions among lawful gun owners, promote firearms safety and responsibility, promote proper and responsible use, storage and ownership of firearms and to reduce criminal access to and misuse of firearms and firearms accidents. The REAL SOLUTIONS. SAFER COMMUNITIES.SM program was launched to educate the public about these initiatives.

Project ChildSafe®

NSSF launched Project ChildSafe® in 1999 as a nationwide effort to help prevent firearms accidents — especially among children. With a message of “Store Firearms Responsibly,” Project ChildSafe® provides free information and gun locks. To date, we’ve distributed 38 million gun locks through partnerships with 15,000 law enforcement agencies across the country. That’s in addition to the more than 70 million free gun locks manufacturers have provided with new firearms purchased.

Operation Secure Store®

A joint initiative to help Federal Firearms Licensees improve security and help prevent thefts. The program partners retailers with local law enforcement to assess security needs and options, and includes a “matching rewards” program that doubles the money offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for thefts from licensed retailers.

Don’t Lie for the Other Guy

In 2000, NSSF, together with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and the U.S. Department of Justice — Office of Justice Programs, launched “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy,” a national campaign to prevent illegal “straw” purchases of firearms.” The campaign publicizes that anyone attempting an illegal firearm purchase faces a federal penalty: Buy a gun for someone who can't and buy yourself 10 years in jail.


The firearms industry has led the way in improving the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and prevent anyone who cannot legally have a gun from getting one. A background check system is only as good as the records in it — through our FixNICS® initiative, we’ve helped improve laws at the federal level and in 16 states, the number of disqualifying mental health records in the system has increased by 220%, and the work is ongoing.

Suicide Prevention

NSSF and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention developed a Suicide Prevention toolkit to help firearms retailers, shooting range operators and customers understand risk factors and warning signs related to suicide, know where to find help and encourage secure firearms storage options. Retailers and ranges are encouraged to participate in this program in order to help save lives.

  • Edited September 29, 2019 6:36 pm  by  EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host10/13/19 3:16 PM 
To: All  (3 of 18) 
 2061.3 in reply to 2061.2 

Amy Swearer: These Are the Gun Laws Americans Should Demand


1. Repeal gun-free school zones

2. National concealed carry reciprocity needed

3. Allow 18-year-olds to buy handguns and other guns

4. Allow interstate gun sales

5. Remove suppressor restrictions


  • Edited October 13, 2019 3:23 pm  by  EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host10/17/19 6:45 AM 
To: All  (4 of 18) 
 2061.4 in reply to 2061.3 

Why Mobile, AL’s Arrest Under New Stolen Gun Law Is A Good Thing
by Tom Knighton
15 Oct 19

Throughout the country, communities and states are looking to penalize people for failing to report their guns as stolen. Never mind that it’s virtually impossible to enforce and that most people may not even retain the serial numbers for their guns so they can report it. No, they want to victimize the victims of gun theft a second time and charge them with a crime after they had their stuff stolen.

Alabama decided to go in a completely different direction on stolen guns and the city of Mobile just made their first arrest under the new law.

Possessing stolen weapons now carries a much stiffer penalty in Alabama, and MPD’s “Lock It Up” campaign creates a one-two punch they’re hoping will make a huge impact in curbing violent crime in our area.

20-year-old Damontray Mack was arrested last week off Dauphin Island Parkway, but this arrest was special. He became the first person in Mobile charged with a felony for possessing a stolen gun.

“I believe having the law changed will benefit us from a safety standpoint, and make our community safer,” said Mobile Police Chief Lawrence Battiste.

After years of beating on the doors of the state legislature Chief Battiste and Public Saftey Director James Barber saw their efforts pay off. House Bill 375 passed, creating much stiffer penalties for possessing a stolen firearm.

“This bill doesn’t just impact the city of Mobile. It impacts the entire state of Alabama. I think a couple years down the road, we’ll see the fruits of our labor to see this legislation passed to a Class C felony,” said Chief Battiste.

Now, just being found with a stolen firearm carries a harsher penalty, one which might dissuade some from even considering carrying such weapons.

In fairness, the worst of the worst won’t care. They’ll just figure they won’t get caught or, if they do, a little prison time will help their street cred. However, a lot of those same people aren’t smart enough to not be caught. They’ll be stopped for whatever reason, searched, and then arrested for carrying a stolen weapon.

Further, this will serve as an additional charge for those who have been arrested for other crimes that they may or may not have committed with those guns.

At the end of the day, though, a felony means prison time. That means more time behind bars and off the streets.

It also helps that a law like this doesn’t blame the gun for the actions of a person. It blames the tool using it rather than the tool itself. By locking those people up for longer, you’re taking the dangerous people off the streets for longer, thus making the streets just a bit safer. Do that enough and you make the streets much, much safer.

We already know that most guns used by criminals are obtained illegally. Most of those are stolen, to be precise, then sold on the black market. By making these arrests, they’re killing two birds with one stone.

Honestly, I don’t see it being much of a deterrence for most of the problem people, but it will result in harsher penalties and possibly lock some of them up before they can hurt anyone. That’s a big win in my book.


From: Greg_LC DelphiPlus Member Icon10/17/19 10:12 AM 
To: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon  (5 of 18) 
 2061.5 in reply to 2061.4 

EdGlaze said...

Most of those are stolen, to be precise, then sold on the black market.

You cannot call it that anymore...…  it's an Alternative retail source...   LOL

 Reply   Options 

From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host10/27/19 11:27 AM 
To: All  (6 of 18) 
 2061.6 in reply to 2061.4 

Indianapolis Is Doing Something Right To Fight Gang Violence
by Cam Edwards
24 Oct 19

If you’re a regular reader to Bearing Arms, you know that I’m a big supporter of Project Ceasefire, a program that works to dramatically reduce gang violence by targeting the most violent offenders with a two-pronged approach; a real offer to help them change their lives if they stop shooting, and a real promise that if they don’t, they’ll be going to prison for decades. The program has worked wonders in cities across the country beginning with Boston in the late 1990s, where juvenile homicide rates declined by more than 50% alongside the development of the program.

I’m a fan of the approach because it’s not just effective, it’s constitutional. It’s not about imposing blanket restrictions on the rights of legal gun owners in an attempt to target criminal behavior, it’s about targeting the most violent criminals in any given community. These are the guys known equally well by law enforcement and the residents of high-crime neighborhoods as a plague on their community. They’re in and out of jail and prison, with a hospital visit or two in between. Many of them will be dead by the time they’re 25. Many of them can be saved. Those that can’t can and should be locked away for as long as the law allows. No early release. No time-served slaps on the wrist. Twenty years in a federal prison means twenty years of your old neighborhood having to live with you trying to destroy it one life and one beef at a time.

The Indianapolis Star has a fantastic piece on the Operation Ceasefire model coming to the city. You should really read the entire thing, but there are a couple of paragraphs I want to highlight in particular. First, the call-in, where a dozen or so individuals on parole find themselves in an Indianapolis church, wondering why they’re even there, at least until the talking begins.

That’s where men like John Grice and women like [Delores] Fatherree come in.

The story of violence in Indianapolis is their story to tell. And when they spoke this month at one of the interventions, the 12 men in attendance fell into a hush.

They heard how Grice took a few bullets. How he shot a few himself. How the feds swept him into a drug conspiracy case.

“Everything y’all going through, I’ve been there,” Grice told the group. “The reason y’all here is because you’re on the radar. That’s the bad news.”

But someone must care about them, he said.

Because here’s their chance.

They also heard from Fatherree. The damage caused by growing gun violence has hit her about as hard as it’s hit anyone. She lost her son, 42-year-old Charles Reeves II, in May.

He was just a bystander walking to his car and looking through his cell phone late one night when the bullets hit, fired by a man who was aiming for someone else.

A community lost a good man. A 19-year-old girl lost her father. Fatherree lost her firstborn.

“We need our men. We need our men. We need you,” Fatherree told them. “Your whole generation is getting slaughtered.”

After hearing from Grice and Fatherlee, the young men hear from local non-profits about the help they can provide in turning their lives around; from job training, educational opportunities, to getting a job with a criminal record.

Then it’s time for the law to speak, in the form of Metropolitan Police Commander Michael Wolley.

At the front of the room stood a screen displaying a presentation. Soon Wolley paused as a slide revealed the names of every homicide victim killed this year.

Then came the next slide. There’s an Instagram post of someone trying to deal Percocets. A selfie of a man fanning a wad of cash. Photos of men pointing handguns toward the camera lens.

The slide lingers there for a moment as the men stared ahead, seeing their faces and their social media posts reflected on the screen.

Wolley’s tone changed, subtly.

“We know where you hang. We know your ‘hoods. We know your girlfriends. We know your side pieces,” Wolley told the men. “We want to help you if you let us.

“But we’ll stop you if you make us.”

The Indianapolis Star reports there have been three call-ins held to date, and while it’s still early, so far none of the men in attendance have been picked up for any parole violations or new charges. At some point that will change and then prosecutors are going to have to bring the hammer down on the offender, but when Operation Ceasefire and similar programs are successfully implemented, most of the gang members targeted with intervention choose to take advantage of the opportunity to change their life.

This is a much better approach for Indianapolis than Mayor Joe Hogsett’s support for new gun control laws. I hope the folks like Delores Fatherlee, John Grice and Commander Wolley can reach these young men. I hope a better life awaits them, that they decide to bury their old ways before they’re buried themselves. And I hope that those who don’t avail themselves of this gift and continue to inflict misery and murder in their own neighborhoods see the inside of a prison cell for decades to come.



From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host11/1/19 5:02 AM 
To: All  (7 of 18) 
 2061.7 in reply to 2061.6 

What Would Real Gun Reform Look Like?
by Harold Hutchison
29 Oct 19

Recently, anti-Second Amendment extremists have taken to using the phrase “gun reform” when it comes to their agenda. But the term, as was the case when they tried to hijack the term “gun safety,” is clearly misapplied by them. What they are proposing is not reform.

Why is that? Well, the American Heritage Dictionary defines reform as “to improve by alteration, correction of error, or removal of defects; put into a better form or condition.” So, it is fair to ask what would constitute true reform in terms of our Second Amendment rights. It should go without saying that while Eric Swalwell said he was for reform during his campaign, his gun ban agenda is anything but that.

Because wrongfully punishing millions of Americans who had nothing to do with shootings like Parkland, Las Vegas, the Tree of Life Synagogue, or Newtown by infringing on their Second Amendment rights is not reform. Instead, the proper word for what these infringements are is injustice. Those who carry out those horrific acts are the ones who should be penalized — those who have not misused their Second Amendment rights ought to keep them.

If you look down the line at those whose campaigns have lasted longer than Swalwell’s, like Joe BidenElizabeth WarrenBeto O’RourkeKamala Harris, and Cory Booker, among others, while some call for “reform,” they’re just trying to convince our fellow Americans to go along with the injustices they intend to inflict on law-abiding Americans. So, we have a sense that when anti-Second Amendment extremists call for reform, it’s really about stripping away our rights.

So, what would real reform look like? In this case, we should look towards the “correction of error” and “removal of defects” portions of the definition of “reform.” And the errors that need corrected and the defects that must be removed are quite plentiful. Furthermore, we can sell this reform to our fellow Americans in conjunction with the right approach to defending our rights.

For instance, in an era where cops can handle an average traffic stop in 20 minutes, to include checking for warrants, there is no reason that the National Instant Check System shouldn’t have an answer in the same time frame. Furthermore, if there is a system to instantly determine if a person is disqualified from even touching a firearm, then it is pretty clear that waiting periods (like California’s) and licensing schemes (like those in New York and New Jersey) have no legitimate purpose. Reform, in this case, is eliminating waiting periods and licensing schemes, not imposing them, which was supported by the likes of Booker and John Hickenlooper.

In one sense, the same can also be said of items covered under the National Firearms Act. If a person’s prohibited status can be quickly ascertained, do we need the convoluted transfer process that is currently the law? Incidentally, since the real “weapons of war” that are so often demonized by anti-Second Amendment extremists are arguably protected by U.S. v. Miller. After all, the select-fire M4 carbine is currently standard issue for the United States military. So the 1986 Hughes Amendment can go, and anti-Second Amendment extremists have a choice: It can go via legislation, or it can go when the Supreme Court hears the case.

When it come to the carrying of firearms, there is room for reform there. In this case, it will be in the sense of abolishing “abuse or malpractice” in the carry laws of some states. “May issue” jurisdictions are in particular need of this type of reform, since they allow the arbitrary denial of the right to bear arms. And national reciprocity should also be included as well — after all, a driver's license is valid in all 50 states, why shouldn't a carry permit be valid?

The fact of the matter is, when it comes to “gun reform,” anti-Second Amendment extremists are gaslighting the American people. When it comes down to it, Second Amendment supporters are the ones who are pushing the real “gun reform” in America.

  • Edited November 1, 2019 5:03 am  by  EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by host11/1/19 5:03 AM 
To: All  (8 of 18) 
 2061.8 in reply to 2061.7 

From the comments:

Bill said:

A great question was asked as the title of this article, “What Would Real Gun Reform Look Like?”, and, as usual, this question was not remotely answered. The fact of the matter is that the answer was already thought out, at least to a large degree, and written into the Second Amendment. There is no way to oppose evil except with ready and superior force. The only ones that can provide this powerful and ready opposition, and the only ones who rightly control it, are the good citizens themselves. The whole idea that only government should provide that opposing force, or that it can, or even that it will do so, are entirely at odds with the principle of a free people defending their own interests.

The only reason that we buy into the garbage idea of gun control as a form of “gun reform” is that uninformed and idealistically naive people continue to want to put their trust in a non-existent “benevolent government” that cannot, ultimately will not, and therefore should not, have the role of protecting the citizens and supposedly fixing whatever is wrong in their lives. This is where government-designed “gun reform” is an existential threat to liberty. As an adjunct to citizen readiness and self determination, well reined-in government is fine and good. As the master, government is far more of a danger than a solution.

As much as we may wish that there were something more ideal (human nature leading all people to love each other and never again need to defend themselves from each other), the freedom of America, and indeed all free peoples in the world, lies most heavily and realistically in the ability of people to defend their own rights, and not in the (unfortunately) misguided absurdity that any government, even a most honorably established one, is genuinely and permanently interested in defending the liberty of the people.

The ability of the people to defend their own rights, unavoidably, lies in the ability of a moral people, in support of the principles of law, order, and justice, to oppose evil first hand, and not through some imagined ability and devotion of government agents, either as law enforcement agencies or the “justice system” to do so. What the government does for the people must always flow from the will of the people, and not become a control and a substitute upon the will of the people.

Absolutely, both citizens and agencies need to try to get justice right, but there is no greater injustice than for criminals to be free to disobey the law and have power against good citizens, while good citizens, in their respect and fear of even terrible laws, cannot defend themselves. Therefore, gun reform is entirely definable as the removal of government restraints on the freedom of the citizenry in general to defend themselves as they see fit. The answer to the question of gun reform, then, is that the balance of this physical power must remain weighted well in favor of the average, good citizen, so that readiness and power may be immediately directed against threats to the interests of good citizens. There is no way to improve upon this ability of a free people to defend its own interests, as the Second Amendment directly states.

The historic problem, of course, is that citizens who enjoy the freedom to defend their own liberty typically do not want the job. They would rather pay someone else to do this job for them. So, as useful idiots, they hand over their sacred rights and powers to someone else, a “public servant” who will supposedly keep them safe, and, ultimately, take care of them in every way that the lazy citizen can manage to achieve, and ultimately, this capable and experienced servant will take over all the ropes that the citizen has neglected, obtaining full power over the citizen’s life. As long as the citizen feels taken care of, he will allow this usurpation to continue, as American today can well attest. Thus, the dis-empowered citizen is continually caught at a disadvantage by criminals, against whom the public servant cannot quickly enough respond, and the citizen himself may even be persecuted by his servant-master if he should dare to attempt to defend himself.

This is the fruit of free citizens becoming eventually prosperous, then lazy, dis-empowered, naive, and subjugated: they beg for government to protect them and, so as not to be inconvenienced by anything “bad”, to take all the naughty guns away from them and all other law abiding citizens. People don’t learn very well, and at the extreme end of their leisure and self-centeredness, they prefer the power of trusted tyrants over them rather than good control and management in their own lives. When the transition is complete, of course, they find that their trust was very poorly placed, but by then it is too late to defend their own interests

  • Edited November 1, 2019 5:05 am  by  EdGlaze

From: Marypickford DelphiPlus Member Icon11/18/19 5:02 PM 
To: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon  (9 of 18) 
 2061.9 in reply to 2061.1 

Have they checked the many gun shows that sell weapons to people without issuing checks, or private sales- which are still legal?

Closing the gun show gap is the next huge step.

So is quadrupling the budget for enforcing the law on sellers that ignore the law. Right now the first time they ignore the law, and sell without checking, they just get a polite letter.


From: Marypickford DelphiPlus Member Icon11/18/19 5:04 PM 
To: EdGlaze DelphiPlus Member Icon  (10 of 18) 
 2061.10 in reply to 2061.3 

Wow- how do noise suppresors keep anyone safer? Please tell me. This list is riduculous. Is there a right to kill more silently or something?


Navigate this discussion: 1-10 11-18
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.