Cont: Today's Mass Shooting (part 3)

[Nessie]

If they are criminals and gangs then "gun control" should consist of taking every last one they can find off them when they are arrested. Indeed, a gun-grab. You've been a bad person; you lose every darn weapon we can find; in, near or around you. Their arrest would be the justification. Unless the supposition is that when they get arrested the police just leave their guns behind neatly stacked in their hideouts and lairs?

I understand there's millions of guns about and they can easily get more. But at least there's those ones out of circulation.

The fighting and killing required for the authorities to get those guns off the unsuitable people, would likely be way worse than the present death rate from guns.

There are so many guns in circulation that the gangs and militias could go to war with the police, who I presume would be the ones tasked with fighting that war. I suspect many police officers would not be prepared to fight that war.

 

[Darat]

The fighting and killing required for the authorities to get those guns off the unsuitable people, would likely be way worse than the present death rate from guns.

There are so many guns in circulation that the gangs and militias could go to war with the police, who I presume would be the ones tasked with fighting that war. I suspect many police officers would not be prepared to fight that war.

What fighting and killing? You simply take the guns etc. when arresting people as part of the arrest process. It will take decades but the numbers will come down without any large scale violence.

 

[ZiprHead]

6 killed, 3 wounded in Austin Texas.

The killer had previously been bailed out by a Soros funded organization whose mission is to

Hopefully they can bail him out again to help curb the problem of over incarceration, at least temporarily.

So let me get this straight. You want the justice system to incarcerate people for crimes they might do in the future?

If your source is to be taken at face value, his previous crime was almost two years ago and would probably have been adjudicated and sentence completed anyway. Sounds like you are asking for some sort of Minority Report hell hole of a justice system.

 

[jt512]

What fighting and killing? You simply take the guns etc. when arresting people as part of the arrest process. It will take decades but the numbers will come down without any large scale violence.

I have yet to see an exception to the rule that what someone says to "simply" do a thing, the thing isn't simple.

 

[Darat]

I have yet to see an exception to the rule that what someone says to "simply" do a thing, the thing isn't simple.

Then you just have done.

After you are arrested, you will be taken into custody, the police take your property at that point, at least in the UK they do. If you have a gun on you it will be taken off you as part of that procedure.

From what I have seen from footage in the USA it seems that like the UK police you will in fact be searched at the point of arrest so any dangerous items such as potential or actual weapons are taken from you even before you reach the custody desk at the police station.

The police would continue to do the same practice as already happens, the difference would be not being given the gun back when you are released. It is simple to not give property back.

There is your exception.

 

[Bogative]

Nice to see what your sources are.

One of them is the organization itself, the other is The Daily Caller.

I assume your hangup is with the latter, what did they get wrong? Or is this just a passing potshot because you don't like their politics?

 

[Bogative]

So let me get this straight. You want the justice system to incarcerate people for crimes they might do in the future?

That's exactly what the argument for gun control/confiscation is. If we are going to go down the Minority Report type of Hellhole, I prefer we start with the people who have already committed crimes.

 

[Darat]

That's exactly what the argument for gun control/confiscation is. If we are going to go down the Minority Report type of Hellhole, I prefer we start with the people who have already committed crimes.

The phrase “gun control/confiscation” doesn’t make any kind of sense. Confiscation does not mean control, control doesn’t mean confiscation.They are different things, gun control may involve confiscation of weapons, confiscation could be part of gun control, but is also could not be.

 

[BrettM]

What fighting and killing? You simply take the guns etc. when arresting people as part of the arrest process. It will take decades but the numbers will come down without any large scale violence.

You can't rely on taking guns etc. when arresting people as a practical way of harvesting guns. For every gun you take away, ten more will appear to replace it. You need to interrupt the supply of guns at the source, and not the end user. How do you stop gun manufacturers and retailers in the USA from making and selling guns?

Guns are a tool of trade for career criminals. Much like you and I keep a spare wheel in our car in case of punctures, these guys will have one or more backup guns hidden away, or kept with trusted friends. When they are released after being arrested or incarcerated, it will be business as usual.

Taking guns away will result in a much bigger black market for guns. Gun nuts with 27 different legally registered 9mm handguns will be in danger of having their loved ones kidnapped, and used as bargaining chips to obtain guns. What fighting and killing, you say? The gun nuts will organize rescue missions, many of which are likely to end in bloody failure.

 

[Nessie]

What fighting and killing? You simply take the guns etc. when arresting people as part of the arrest process. It will take decades but the numbers will come down without any large scale violence.

Why do you think they will all go quietly, knowing they will lose their gun? Those people will just get new guns, there are so many about and they are so easy to get.

 

[Darat]

You can't rely on taking guns etc. when arresting people as a practical way of harvesting guns. For every gun you take away, ten more will appear to replace it. You need to interrupt the supply of guns at the source, and not the end user. How do you stop gun manufacturers and retailers in the USA from making and selling guns?

Guns are a tool of trade for career criminals. Much like you and I keep a spare wheel in our car in case of punctures, these guys will have one or more backup guns hidden away, or kept with trusted friends. When they are released after being arrested or incarcerated, it will be business as usual.

Taking guns away will result in a much bigger black market for guns. Gun nuts with 27 different legally registered 9mm handguns will be in danger of having their loved ones kidnapped, and used as bargaining chips to obtain guns. What fighting and killing, you say? The gun nuts will organize rescue missions, many of which are likely to end in bloody failure.

Why do you think they will all go quietly, knowing they will lose their gun? Those people will just get new guns, there are so many about and they are so easy to get.

The problem has taken decades to get to where it is today, it will take decades to solve the problem. All the steps will be small steps, incrementally attacking the problem. Consider it like the old canard about the frog being boiled.

 

[arthwollipot]

If they are criminals and gangs then "gun control" should consist of taking every last one they can find off them when they are arrested. Indeed, a gun-grab. You've been a bad person; you lose every darn weapon we can find; in, near or around you. Their arrest would be the justification. Unless the supposition is that when they get arrested the police just leave their guns behind neatly stacked in their hideouts and lairs?

I understand there's millions of guns about and they can easily get more. But at least there's those ones out of circulation.

What fighting and killing? You simply take the guns etc. when arresting people as part of the arrest process. It will take decades but the numbers will come down without any large scale violence.

The important part of this is that when a gun is confiscated as part of the arrest process, that gun is then destroyed, and not put back into circulation.

One of them is the organization itself, the other is The Daily Caller.

I assume your hangup is with the latter, what did they get wrong? Or is this just a passing potshot because you don't like their politics?

The Daily Caller is Tucker Carlson's mouthpiece. Media Bias Fact Check marks them as strongly right-biased and of mixed accuracy, routinely publishing misleading or false stories:

Overall, we rate the Daily Caller as strongly right-biased based on story selection that almost always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks. The Daily Caller is a source that needs to be fact-checked on a per-article basis.

Yes, its politics are problematic. But its casual and somewhat antagonistic relationship to truth is the bigger problem.

 

[BrettM]

The problem has taken decades to get to where it is today, it will take decades to solve the problem. All the steps will be small steps, incrementally attacking the problem. Consider it like the old canard about the frog being boiled.

The point of no return has come and gone. American gun manufacturers and retailers can produce and sell guns ten times faster than the American authorities can confiscate and destroy them. It is like an unstoppable avalanche!

 

[BrettM]

The important part of this is that when a gun is confiscated as part of the arrest process, that gun is then destroyed,

Gun manufacturers and retailers would relish the opportunity presented by confiscated guns being destroyed. Instead of guns being capital expenditures, they become consumables, like ball point pens and disposable razor blades!

 

[Nessie]

The problem has taken decades to get to where it is today, it will take decades to solve the problem. All the steps will be small steps, incrementally attacking the problem. Consider it like the old canard about the frog being boiled.

How do you eat an elephant, that does not want to be eaten and will fight back?

I say that the cure will be worse than the disease and the US should just live with its high rate of gun deaths.

 

[Norman Alexander]

The point of no return has come and gone. American gun manufacturers and retailers can produce and sell guns ten times faster than the American authorities can confiscate and destroy them. It is like an unstoppable avalanche!

That's not the problem. The problem is regulating who has the guns and how they use them. Criminals and gangsters would not seem to be good candidates...

 

[Norman Alexander]

How do you eat an elephant, that does not want to be eaten and will fight back?

I say that the cure will be worse than the disease and the US should just live with its high rate of gun deaths.

So you are saying that criminals and gangsters should be allowed have guns because there are too many in circulation? Does that even logically follow?

 

[Nessie]

So you are saying that criminals and gangsters should be allowed have guns because there are too many in circulation? Does that even logically follow?

I am not saying that. I am saying that even with all the criminals and gangsters having their illegal guns taken from them, there are so many guns in the US that are so easy to get, the criminals and gangsters can easily replace them.

That problem has arisen, because the US is far too lenient on those who illegally possess guns, it is far too willing to let clearly unsuitable people get guns, both legally and illegally and far too reluctant to introduce sensible gun controls.

 

[Norman Alexander]

I am not saying that. I am saying that even with all the criminals and gangsters having their illegal guns taken from them, there are so many guns in the US that are so easy to get, the criminals and gangsters can easily replace them.

When they get out of jail over a decade later, possibly. Should be a minimum of 10 years added to sentence if a gun is involved., or even present.

That problem has arisen, because the US is far too lenient on those who illegally possess guns, it is far too willing to let clearly unsuitable people get guns, both legally and illegally and far too reluctant to introduce sensible gun controls.

All true.

 

[BrettM]

That's not the problem. The problem is regulating who has the guns and how they use them. Criminals and gangsters would not seem to be good candidates...

Most of the mass shootings in the USA are committed by criminals and gangsters. So you want to regulate a class of gun owners who are less likely to commit mass shootings, and exclude criminals and gangsters, because they are not good candidates for regulation? The words "double standard" spring to mind...