A Common Sense Approach to Middle East Refugees.

[RoyalShock]

FWIW: 3 U.S. Refugee Laws Everyone Forgets

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

FWIW: 3 U.S. Refugee Laws Everyone Forgets

that is a pretty good read.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

It's way past time for our society to say enough is enough and to work together to take the lessons from past shootings in order to try to prevent this from becoming a normal routine. That would mean trying to prevent these occurrences while balancing the right to own a gun without being overly intrusive.

Is it possible that we already have worked together, taken lessons from past shootings, and put many, many, many laws on the books to try and prevent these occurrences.

Is it possible that we already have pushed the restrictions on gun purchases and ownership right up to the point where any further would be "overly intrusive"?

Is it possible that we don't all get caught up in emotion watching the evening news, and instead find comfort that the national murder rate is at an all time low?

Is it possible that in the last 20 years, prevention of gun crime has actually been very successful?

[shocka khan]

Is it possible that we already have worked together, taken lessons from past shootings, and put many, many, many laws on the books to try and prevent these occurrences.

Is it possible that we already have pushed the restrictions on gun purchases and ownership right up to the point where any further would be "overly intrusive"?

Is it possible that we don't all get caught up in emotion watching the evening news, and instead find comfort that the national murder rate is at an all time low?

Is it possible that in the last 20 years, prevention of gun crime has actually been very successful?

Are you intellectually lazy? You dispute my assertions, yet bring no arguments to the table. Only a picture.

First and foremost, we had the Brady bill, but it was allowed to expire. That was the last federal gun law we had passed. I can't say whether any laws have been passed in Kansas that would restrict your right to own a gun. I'd be surprised if there have been any passed since Brady.

Second, any person on the no-fly list (terrorist watch list) can buy all the ammo and guns they want to.

Third, state laws are all over the map and a hodgepodge, so how can you say that restrictions on your right to own or purchase guns are 'overly intrusive'. Virginia, for instance, is known for their lax gun laws. I have never heard Kansas getting called out for lax gun laws, but we're pretty lenient here in Texas. It's pretty easy to know about Virginia, Mayors in New York City and a number of other metro areas along the Northeast Corridor are always kvetching about how easy it is to buy a gun in Virginia, bring it back to New York (or Philly or Boston) and commit a crime. The number of people getting their hands on guns in Chicago is also totally out of control. I don't know where the guns there are coming from, but Google is your friend. Note we have already had a post from a SN'er in Chicago kvetching about how easy it is for a criminal to get their hands on a gun there.

Fourth, you conflate prevention of gun crime with mass shootings. Crime in general is down. Why? I would attribute that to stricter sentencing and better policing. That has nothing to do with guns.

Fifth, the number and regularity of mass shootings is actually going up. And most of the mass shooters have something wrong with them mentally (Dylan Roof, the PP shooter, the kid at Newtown, the Virginia Tech shooter, the Naval Shipyard shootings) had mental problems. The Virginia Tech shooter got his guns in Virginia, even though he was known to have psychiatric issues. The Naval Shipyard shooter slipped through the cracks because the military (IIRC Navy) just wanted him out, so they never took his classified clearance away nor did they report him to mental health authorities, even though he was having fits of delusion (i.e. having halucinations) while still in the military. He received a less-than-honorable discharge from the military and was having halucinations up to the day of the attack (IIRC, again, I believe this was reported to authorities who never followed up). I believe he bought his guns in Virginia as well. The terrorist shooters in San Bernardino got their high-capacity ammo clips via mail from an mail-order gun store (shades of Lee Harvey Oswald) even though it is illegal to own them in California. How can an out-of-state gun store ship items that are illegal to own in a state into a state if the regulations aren't lax or at least some of the gun dealers are not policing themselves.

Please note I'm not against gun ownership. My 94 year old dad has 19 guns. My sister has guns. Many of my friends have guns. I'd just like to see a little more consistency and enforcement, combined with some no-brainer tweaks.

Again, you're arguments are intellectually lazy. Look at all the information I was able to put together with out any research at all.

Try thinking a little next time. You might be able to answer some of your own questions.

[MoValley John]

Are you intellectually lazy? You dispute my assertions, yet bring no arguments to the table. Only a picture.

First and foremost, we had the Brady bill, but it was allowed to expire. That was the last federal gun law we had passed. I can't say whether any laws have been passed in Kansas that would restrict your right to own a gun. I'd be surprised if there have been any passed since Brady.

Second, any person on the no-fly list (terrorist watch list) can buy all the ammo and guns they want to.

Third, state laws are all over the map and a hodgepodge, so how can you say that restrictions on your right to own or purchase guns are 'overly intrusive'. Virginia, for instance, is known for their lax gun laws. I have never heard Kansas getting called out for lax gun laws, but we're pretty lenient here in Texas. It's pretty easy to know about Virginia, Mayors in New York City and a number of other metro areas along the Northeast Corridor are always kvetching about how easy it is to buy a gun in Virginia, bring it back to New York (or Philly or Boston) and commit a crime. The number of people getting their hands on guns in Chicago is also totally out of control. I don't know where the guns there are coming from, but Google is your friend. Note we have already had a post from a SN'er in Chicago kvetching about how easy it is for a criminal to get their hands on a gun there.

Fourth, you conflate prevention of gun crime with mass shootings. Crime in general is down. Why? I would attribute that to stricter sentencing and better policing. That has nothing to do with guns.

Fifth, the number and regularity of mass shootings is actually going up. And most of the mass shooters have something wrong with them mentally (Dylan Roof, the PP shooter, the kid at Newtown, the Virginia Tech shooter, the Naval Shipyard shootings) had mental problems. The Virginia Tech shooter got his guns in Virginia, even though he was known to have psychiatric issues. The Naval Shipyard shooter slipped through the cracks because the military (IIRC Navy) just wanted him out, so they never took his classified clearance away nor did they report him to mental health authorities, even though he was having fits of delusion (i.e. having halucinations) while still in the military. He received a less-than-honorable discharge from the military and was having halucinations up to the day of the attack (IIRC, again, I believe this was reported to authorities who never followed up). I believe he bought his guns in Virginia as well. The terrorist shooters in San Bernardino got their high-capacity ammo clips via mail from an mail-order gun store (shades of Lee Harvey Oswald) even though it is illegal to own them in California. How can an out-of-state gun store ship items that are illegal to own in a state into a state if the regulations aren't lax or at least some of the gun dealers are not policing themselves.

Please note I'm not against gun ownership. My 94 year old dad has 19 guns. My sister has guns. Many of my friends have guns. I'd just like to see a little more consistency and enforcement, combined with some no-brainer tweaks.

Again, you're arguments are intellectually lazy. Look at all the information I was able to put together with out any research at all.

Try thinking a little next time. You might be able to answer some of your own questions.

You bring up the no fly list again... Why? Do you really think a standard that has zero due process should be expanded? To any other issue? I would say that is pretty intellectually lazy. Very lazy.

And since you've peppered the term in this post, I'll ask you to define what qualifies as a mass shooting. I know the answer, I just want you to quantify the emotionally charged term, "mass shooting" you have freely used.

[MoValley John]

Bob Schwertley

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Please please please please please tell me how we should use arbitrary lists the government just gets to create on a whim to restrict people's rights without any due process. That sounds like a wonderful idea that is fully constitutional and could never be misused or abused.

When I'm president, I'll make a list of people too dumb to vote. Then I'll say, "Are my political opponents really in favor of putting votes in the hands of dumb people?!?! Currently, dumb people can vote in as many elections as they want. This must stop!!"

My goodness.

[MoValley John]

Please please please please please tell me how we should use arbitrary lists the government just gets to create on a whim to restrict people's rights without any due process. That sounds like a wonderful idea that is fully constitutional and could never be misused or abused.

When I'm president, I'll make a list of people too dumb to vote. Then I'll say, "Are my political opponents really in favor of putting votes in the hands of dumb people?!?! Currently, dumb people can vote in as many elections as they want. This must stop!!"

My goodness.

That idea has been floated.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Fourth, you conflate prevention of gun crime with mass shootings. Crime in general is down. Why? I would attribute that to stricter sentencing and better policing. That has nothing to do with guns.

Maybe things that have "nothing to do with guns", such as sentencing and policing, are a better way to go than making new laws that put burdens on millions of people in order to maybe, possibly, we aren't sure but we are hopeful, let's just try it, who knows, just might save a couple lives, maybe.

I weigh the pros and cons of decisions. If you present me with something that has definitive cons, you better have some decent, provable pros to go with it if you want to convince me to go along.

[Kung Wu]

Very interesting. Any way you could superimpose gun sales over that graph to see if there is a correlation between the number of guns sold and the amount of murders? I mean as gun sales go up, so should the murder rate, if what we're being told is correct, right? So we should expect to see a strong correlation.

[wufan]

I don't understand why a graph pointing out that things are better than some would let on is intellectually lazy.

If I think I need more people in my lab, I have to put numbers behind it that makes sense. How much more work will be accomplished? How much money will be saved? What's the collateral cost?

If someone is interested in initiating a gun control law, how many lives will be saved? What's the cost to liberty?

[Kung Wu]

I don't understand why a graph pointing out that things are better than some would let on is intellectually lazy.

If I think I need more people in my lab, I have to put numbers behind it that makes sense. How much more work will be accomplished? How much money will be saved? What's the collateral cost?

If someone is interested in initiating a gun control law, how many lives will be saved? What's the cost to liberty?

How bad is the problem we are trying to solve?

[shocka khan]

Maybe things that have "nothing to do with guns", such as sentencing and policing, are a better way to go than making new laws that put burdens on millions of people in order to maybe, possibly, we aren't sure but we are hopeful, let's just try it, who knows, just might save a couple lives, maybe.

I weigh the pros and cons of decisions. If you present me with something that has definitive cons, you better have some decent, provable pros to go with it if you want to convince me to go along.

Why do I have to have the perfect solution for someone who only asks questions but has no answers. Are you not capable of thinking for yourself?

To me it should be a back and forth between politicians. I am not a politician. I do think that a collaborative approach can get us an answer.

[shocka khan]

You bring up the no fly list again... Why? Do you really think a standard that has zero due process should be expanded? To any other issue? I would say that is pretty intellectually lazy. Very lazy.

And since you've peppered the term in this post, I'll ask you to define what qualifies as a mass shooting. I know the answer, I just want you to quantify the emotionally charged term, "mass shooting" you have freely used.

Yes, I'm back on this again. I think this can be done and protect people's constitutional rights. The current approach to the no fly list does not protect constitutional rights.

I don't think today's political grandstanding by senate democrats fixed anything, either. It is as much political grandstanding as we see from Trump and Cruz. T divides us and solves little.

[MoValley John]

Yes, I'm back on this again. I think this can be done and protect people's constitutional rights. The current approach to the no fly list does not protect constitutional rights.

I don't think today's political grandstanding by senate democrats fixed anything, either. It is as much political grandstanding as we see from Trump and Cruz. T divides us and solves little.

It can't be done without violating rights. Period. It's a stupid, poorly thought, lazy idea.

You want something that might work, I'll give you something. Let all of the potheads out of prison. Use that newly found prison capacity to house felons convicted of gun crimes. Tie the hands of prosecutors and don't allow plea bargains for gun crimes. First offense of a gun crime, 20 years, no good time. Conviction of gun trafficking, life, no parole.