h a l f b a k e r y
Trying to contain nuts.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
Efforts to understand the people who go on shooting spree have identified certain common characteristics: 1: limited involvement with friends and authority figures. 2: Enjoyment of entertainment that others disapprove of, or which includes a lot of gore. Good job psychologists! You've identiffied half
the world!
While these two details are not enough to prove anyone is a potential shooter, they do represent a lonely, and often unhappy lifestyle. I suspect that a lot of these murder-suicides would have gone on to die of old age if they just had a few more friends.
When individuals are given driver's licenses, or radio operator licenses, they generally must have passed some basic training, and often must have the endorsement of one or more previously licensed individuals.
Some claim that the first part of the Second Ammendment in the U.S. "A well-regulated militia..." is actually a conditional clause for the second part about gun rights not being infringed. I tend to disagree, but I do think being in a "militia" would make owning a gun all the cooler.
All of these details point to the possibility of requiring one or more individuals to avow that a gun owner is of the trustworthy, and stable mental character society deems wortwhile in an individual granted the ability to use bullets for the purpose of smiting evildoers (or just tin cans) with extreme predjudice.
Some states have different gun laws, so that a license may be required to use any gun, specific types of guns, or may only be required for concealed carry. Votes of confidence could be applied to any of these situations.
A "Votes of Confidence" gun licensing process would require individuals to obtain some minimum number of other gun owners willing to attest to the mental stability of the prospective candidate before a gun license was issued to this individual. Should the undersigned individual engage in criminal acts with said gun, those who signed could be called in for questioning, and possible revocation of their licenses. As such, individuals who were no longer able to attest to the condition of their undersgined could withdraw their vote of confidence, an occurence which if done for normal reasons, could be easily corrected, but which if done anonymously, would be a big tip off to the police.
Since the signees have a vested interest in the continued safe, sane, and legal gun use of their pledge, they should have motivation to maintain an active interest in that person's life. Potential loner suicide-murderers might still get a gun, but a network of concerned individuals would come with it. Inexperienced clods could still buy guns, but a network of contual training partners would come with it. Gun owners would then be forced to maintain a network of mutual oversight upon each other, and an armed populace would be both a polite, and involved populace.
my inspiration
_22Vote_20of_20No_2..._20gun_20control_2e
credit where credit is due; the second highest form of flattery and all. [ye_river_xiv, Apr 19 2007]
"thrilling!"
http://news.bbc.co..../london/6579795.stm
[Ian Tindale, Apr 22 2007]
The second amendment
http://en.wikipedia...States_Constitution
Not so simple as it may first appear. [jhomrighaus, Apr 22 2007]
[link]
|
| |
This might bring up a new course in high school, 'Firearms Ed.', but it's a good idea. |
|
| |
So, given that the right to bear arms is predicated on individuals being part of a well-organised militia, guns shouldn't be sold to people who aren't part of a
well-organised militia? |
|
| |
//who will vow to the person's mental capacity to use guns responsibly//
So only psychiatrists/psychologists will be allowed to endorse a gun license then? |
|
| |
Where we agree : if you want to stop
gun tragedies, remove guns from the
hands of those likely to perpetrate such
horrible crimes. |
|
| |
Where we strongly disagree : how do
you identify those likely to use guns
criminally? A psychologist is not the
answer. In short, I can see the only
solution is an outright ban on guns,
except for those with a job need. Even
those who feel that shooting is an
acceptable hobby, must store them in
licensed, safe venues. |
|
| |
I'm sick of the National Rifle Association
and other gun lobbies spouting forth
the second amendment. As [ye_river]
points out, the 2ndA states that it's
your right to have a firearm as part of a
well organised militia. That would
outlaw individuals, yet why does the US
still insist it's a sensible law? |
|
| |
Madness, utter madness. You need gun
amnesties, strict laws against gun
ownership and tough sentences for
those that do. Until such time,
America's youth will continue to die
needlessly. |
|
| |
BrauBeaton: Your right, of course killers can kill without guns. But the fact is that less people die of bullet wounds in the UK than US per 1000, and that isn't just luck. |
|
| |
//But the fact is that less people die of bullet wounds in the UK than US per 1000, and that isn't just luck.// |
|
| |
I bet (based on absolutely nothing [stat anyone?]) more people die from knife wounds or violent blunt trauma in the UK. Crazy people are everywhere, and they use what they got. |
|
| |
So we should make it easier for them? |
|
| |
what about other projectile weapons? Crossbows, bows and arrows, spears. If I really wanted to go on a spree, and didnt have guns, or want to go the explosive route, I'd just get a crossbow and a boatload of bolts. Guns arent the problem, people are. |
|
| |
When was the last time you saw a self-loading crossbow that'll fit down your trousers? |
|
| |
As long as the system doesn't include excessive fees and such, I think this is the most reasonable system I've heard of. |
|
| |
One thing I'm a little confused about is what type of license you are referring to, though. Concealed carry permit, or gun ownership permit? As far as I know (and this may be a state-by-state thing) you don't need a permit to buy a gun, only a background check with the FBI. A concealed carry permit is much more involved, and has a mandatory training class, and requires you to pass the background check in addition to submitting your fingerprints to the authorities, both to check them in the system for possible cold crimes and keep them on file for any trouble later. |
|
| |
I don't believe that the concealed carry permit requires much alteration, since very few crimes are committed by CCL holders, but for new gun owners, this system seems fairly reasonable. |
|
| |
Just don't make us go through all of this crap every time we buy a gun. Once for the first one, and once a decade or so after that (for any new guns purchased) would be sufficient. |
|
| |
I just don't understand why Americans
need all these guns. Is it because other
Americans have guns and they're inclined
to use them? What a strange society. |
|
| |
I should also say that I like this idea, I had
a very similar one when I read the vote of
no confidence gun control. [+]. I'm just
saying that outlawing all guns is futile and
silly. |
|
| |
thanks for the stat [bigsleep]. interesting
stuff. |
|
| |
I can't speak for all other gun owners, but all of the ones I know have them for either hunting (and yes, we eat what we hunt. You won't find many avid hunters who approve of anyone hunting merely for sport) or for recreational shooting. Only one person that I know has a gun only for self defense, and he has his concealed carry permit and a clean record. |
|
| |
In a recent news story I read, it said that gun crimes have been decreasing for the last 5 years in all states, regardless of how strict their gun laws were. Also, one of, if not the, highest crime rates is in Washington D.C. where there has been a ban on handguns for 30 years. |
|
| |
// I'm just saying that outlawing all
guns is futile and silly // |
|
| |
Is it futile or silly to suggest that no
guns equals no gun crime? Is it silly to
suggest that criminalising guns means
that those that have them clearly have
them for non-peaceful reasons and are
therefore dangerous. |
|
| |
However, Americans need to look into
their psyche here. I agree with Charlton
Heston and the rest of the mad gun
lobby on one point only. "Guns don't
kill, people do". The highest per capita
gun ownership is in Switzerland, a
country with one of the lowest gun
crime rates. |
|
| |
So, that suggests to me that there's just
something in the way that Americans
think, use, own and secure guns that
make it a dangerous place. |
|
| |
It'll take a huge number of
psychologists to examine the entire
nation. Worth a go though huh? Nah,
madness. Fish. |
|
| |
[jtg] I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments, but although I have no figures to hand, I'm not sure Switzerland is a good example. Only last week, some bloke walked into a cafe with his service rifle and opened fire on some diners and killed an old boy at the bar. There have been several high profile family killings in recent years and let's not forget the nutter who killed 14 in Zug's parliament building in 2001. |
|
| |
From talking to Swiss men of national service age, they get to take their gun home but don't get a strong box to keep it in. Looking after it is their responsibility. Bloody silly idea if you ask me - especially when the beer's so cheap. |
|
| |
permits for guns only keep them out of the hands of the lawabiding |
|
| |
"Firearm's Ed" I would definitely have signed up for that elective... |
|
| |
As for what kind of license I am talking about... Well, I'm no gun owner, but here in CA I believe you are supposed to have a gun license before you own any weapon. If not... then maybe that would be a good idea. I could strain the car analogy a little, and point out that even to buy a car, you must have both a license and insurance in every state I've been to. |
|
| |
Hmm... shooter's insurance... Nah. |
|
| |
Senatorjam is right of course. Illegal gun owners and users will not be deterred by such a law. I believe I mentioned that, and that when it comes to the solution of gun issues, laws are far from perfect. This idea is aimed at reducing (not completely solving) the issue of lone shooters. Since many of them buy their guns legally, and then kill themselves before we can question them, other solutions will be harder to implement. |
|
| |
If politicians start making louder and louder calls for more gun legislation, I seriously hope that you will consider sending this in to your congressman and ask him to consider it. This really is the most sensible piece of legislation I've heard of (other than actually enforcing the laws that already exist), and this is coming from a staunch gun rights supporter. |
|
| |
// permits for guns only keep them out of the hands of the lawabiding |
|
| |
This is like saying "alcohol only makes your mouth and stomach drunk." Allow for osmosis and the picture changes. |
|
| |
If criminals mainly get their guns from law-abiding people (by theft, or by comitting their first crime, e.g. assault on a spouse in anger), and if criminals destroy guns (after commission of a crime to avoid identification), then reducing the number of guns held by law-abiding people eventually reduces the number of guns available to criminals. |
|
| |
Situations where this doesn't work, and the quote is true, are when there's no transfer or when there's a plentiful source outside the system. But I don't think these are the case. |
|
| |
A lot of guns used in street crime by drug-involved multi-purpose gangs [L. Yablonsky , 1997] are paramilitary in origin. Although this kind of weapon might not be related to the kind that the ordinary American probably carries around, it still makes sense to reduce the amount of 'legitimate' weapons in circulation. It's not rocket science. |
|
| |
I like the idea of endorsements. Like
filling out a job application, you need
references to vouch for your (hopefully)
good name. It is a good way to ensure
that guns are being kept in not only
good hands, but responsible hands. |
|
| |
I also support the idea of manditory
training before being able to purchase a
gun. We need to be taught how to
properly drive so we don't run people
over or run into other cars, and it
should be like this for firearms. People
should not only be taught about proper
use and care of guns, but hiding them
properly from thieves and children, and
other responsible measures of which
will save lives. |
|
| |
I admit though, guns are thrilling! my
first gun experience was with a muzzle-
loaded musket, then the AR 15, then a
12-guage. Although my BEST GUN
THRILL was shooting a 6-guage
shotgun when I weighed less than 100
pounds. |
|
| |
I bet that left a bruise...
I shot a 20 gauge as one of my first guns bigger than a .22 and it just about knocked me over. In my defense, I'm a lot bigger now, and that gun still kicks worse than most 12 gauges. |
|
| |
see the links for a very thorough discussion of the second amendment which is no where near as simple as many would like to imply. |
|
| |
//If politicians start making louder and louder calls for more gun legislation, I seriously hope that you will consider sending this in to your congressman and ask him to consider it. This really is the most sensible piece of legislation I've heard of (other than actually enforcing the laws that already exist), and this is coming from a staunch gun rights supporter.// |
|
| |
I'll keep that in mind. Rumor is they won't do much legislating anyway, and I'd rather not get my name on any kind of gun restriction. I also I live in CA, along with certain gun toting halfbakers. I don't want to send any gun restriction up the chain till my local experts chime in. |
|
| |
maybe myspace could do a plugin to facilitate this? |
|
| |
Could you win a free cell phone ringtone? |
|
| |
Why not? Myspace did a plugin to facilitate terminally crashing my computer. It didn't come with any ringtones though. |
|
| |
...Invisioning a world where "Firearms Ed" is taught in high schools, and gun ownership is dependant upon the voters of Myspace.... |
|
| |
EUGH! Talk about a dystopian nightmare... |
|
| |
This is advocacy. This should be [marked-for-deletion] Advocacy. |
|
| |
they did a background check on the guy before he got the guns and he turned up clean. you cannot blame this on the government they did their job. |
|
| |
//This should be [marked-for-deletion] Advocacy.// |
|
| |
No, it shouldn't. Read the help page. |
|
| |
No, they didn't. They failed to teach you to use capitalization. |
|
| |
Ouch. A slap in the face from nomocrow.
That was a good one. This isn't advocacy,
it's a good idea that I am sure has been
implemented in other places. |
|
| |
[I agree that this isn't advocacy, and am ignoring the marked-for-deletion tag. --Jutta] |
|
| |
This would make for an interesting study of local or regional nuttiness, congealing places like Flint Michigan or Texas where everyone has a gun. |
|
| |