Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

3
BKinzey wrote: Thu Aug 22, 2019 6:05 am The devil may be in the details but the bullshit & lies are lain right out in the open with this plan.
That note was for those people that read the headline and nothing more. Usually these proposals get initial support because they have a good sounding but meaningless title but then the support fades when some people read and start sharing the details.

There may be a worthwhile nugget buried somewhere in this "plan" but it would be so deep in all the Bloomberg "make it so restrictive, difficult and expensive that no one can have a gun" regulations that it's not worth digging for. The ERPO might be such an item and has been gaining traction lately. The problem is that some of the proposals lack (or even violate) Constitutional legal due process. Other proposals allow the use of no knock warrants; you think something might go wrong when, without notice, a group of armed people show up at the door of a known gun owner at zero-dark-thirty to confiscate his guns? One person has already been killed! Almost none of the proposals include anything on Threat Assessment, Violence Assessment, or Intervention. And finally, many proposals do not have adequate protection for ownership rights.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

4
It saddens me to see that we are still seeking to solve this mass murder mentality by restricting peoples rights and flailing and tearing our hair. When will we admit that there is something about our Society and Lifestyle that seems to be driving more and more people to mass murder their neighbors? Being a professional troubleshooter and teaching advanced troubleshooting I always try to impart on those that I mentor that in order to solve any problem/systemic failure we must first accurately diagnose the failure and the specific component. We can SWAG at it, we can cry about it and flail and use conjecture or emotion to convince ourselves which component is defective but this rarely (never) leads to a successful repair.

Something we are doing in America is creating mass murderers and until we actually start looking for the cause of this (we haven't even figured out that our Society is broken yet!!) and keep blaming we will never solve this or fix it.

When are we going to start addressing this scientifically? When are we going to realize we are driving people nuts enough to murder their fellow citizens and start looking for how we can fix that?

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress.

I am sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

5
What a load of crap. Why didn't they just say "establish world peace". And there was a line in there about if you reduce gun violence by half, we'll save 200000 lives a year. There's only 37000 gun deaths a year now.
All religions united with government are more or less inimical to liberty. All, separated from government, are compatible with liberty.-Henry Clay
Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms.—Aristotle

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

7
VooDoo,
I agree! Throughout my career, I have always maintained that you must first identify the problem and then define the requirements for a solution to that problem before you can hope to begin to solve that problem. Instead, the Democrats immediately identify the "GUN" as the cause and don't even think about anything except making more gun laws. Meanwhile, the Republicans do nothing and then resist any Democratic "solutions" as trying to take away our guns!

That's why in my last response I specifically cited the lack of Threat Assessment Teams, Violence Assessment Teams, and Intervention (or Interrupter) Teams. These are all fairly well defined and have some evidence of there effectiveness, but I have not, as yet, come up with an implementation plan. My problem is that I don't trust the federal government to codify and direct a national implementation of a such a combined organization. I believe the implementation of these combined teams should be at the county (or county equivalent) level, of which there are 3,142 in the US. There would also have to be a national organization, focused on the research and general uniform procedures. My current main concern (other than funding) is who would this team be under the jurisdiction of? Putting it under: law enforcement, district attorneys, county courts, or county healthcare, I'm afraid, would limit the focus rather than maintain, as much as feasible, a very broad one, because each of these choices have a very specific focus on only parts of what I believe would have to be a comprehensive approach.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

8
A .pdf:
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.com/no ... a157ae.pdf

March For Our Lives Calls for Confiscating Guns, Investigating the NRA, and 'Reforming' the Supreme Court
Higher fees would be charged for bulk purchases of ammunition and firearms, which seems somewhat redundant given that people would be limited to one gun purchase a month. Online sales would be banned and a 10-day waiting period for gun sales would be imposed.

The types of firearms one could purchase would also be restricted. Both "assault weapons" and "high-capacity magazines" (two terms which go undefined in the March For Our Lives plan) would be banned. Products that fit those descriptions that are currently in private hands would be subject to confiscation through a mandatory gun buyback program.

In addition to these direct limitations on gun ownership, the Peace plan would also beef up the federal bureaucracy's ability to go after gun owners. A new National Director of Gun Violence Prevention position would be created. This director would report directly to the president and coordinate a multi-agency response to halving gun deaths and injuries over 10 years.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

10
senorgrand wrote: Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:34 pm No one is coming for your guns...and there is no reason gun owners shouldn't vote for democrats...
No shit. When they are openly calling for confiscation/mandatory buy backs, it's time to say "no thanks, fuck you very much" to those particular candidates. Yeah, I know it is unlikely to pass. But the push is on and I'm not keen to be a part of it and won't vote for a candidate that is pushing it. There is a whole magnitude of difference between restriction and confiscation. My rights are no less valid than those of non gun owners and the restrictions chafe plenty already. :thumbsdown:

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

11
featureless wrote: Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:43 pm
senorgrand wrote: Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:34 pm No one is coming for your guns...and there is no reason gun owners shouldn't vote for democrats...
No shit. When they are openly calling for confiscation/mandatory buy backs, it's time to say "no thanks, fuck you very much" to those particular candidates. Yeah, I know it is unlikely to pass. But the push is on and I'm not keen to be a part of it and won't vote for a candidate that is pushing it. There is a whole magnitude of difference between restriction and confiscation. My rights are no less valid than those of non gun owners and the restrictions chafe plenty already. :thumbsdown:
haha... I understand the pain...

cries in Californian

The problem is that many of these proposed plans tend to have for any kind of mainstream approach that I have seen... is that they tend to be made by people that dont understand the first thing about firearms.

The problem can be better tackled through root cause mitigation. Why the hell are people getting so angry that they want to shoot innocent people? There will also always be angry non-sensible people, but it really feels like the anger and hate in America has been getting worse and worse.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

13
No thanks to retreaded bloomberg DNC propaganda BS. Nothing new here, no hidden gems just the same BS that refuses to address the root causes of violence. No interest in reading the “finer” details. They can get back in touch when they’ve actually heard what many of us here want and have been trying to get them to understand.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

14
I read the whole thing. They carefully avoided (IMO) their actual agenda, which is to make gun ownership extremely rare.

The real problem with their approach is that if you fully implemented these ownership rules (ignoring their AWB), then you may reduce the number of gun owners by a max of 20%.

That result would horrify them. They really want guns to just about disappear.

I also find it suspicious that yet again, someone conflates gun issues with gun suicide. The US suicide rate is within 1 standard deviation of the international averages. Yes we are on the high side of 1 sigma, but still, our difference in suicide rates is not significantly differentiated from the mean. This tells me that if we got rid of the guns, the suicides would likely shift to other means. And there are a lot of other means.
Image

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

15
max129 wrote: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:56 pm I read the whole thing. They carefully avoided (IMO) their actual agenda, which is to make gun ownership extremely rare.

The real problem with their approach is that if you fully implemented these ownership rules (ignoring their AWB), then you may reduce the number of gun owners by a max of 20%.

That result would horrify them. They really want guns to just about disappear. (emphasis added by Bobcat)

I also find it suspicious that yet again, someone conflates gun issues with gun suicide. The US suicide rate is within 1 standard deviation of the international averages. Yes we are on the high side of 1 sigma, but still, our difference in suicide rates is not significantly differentiated from the mean. This tells me that if we got rid of the guns, the suicides would likely shift to other means. And there are a lot of other means.
Absolutely right! The gun control people and the Democrats keep saying they are not coming for our guns, but they are and this proves it! After reading this one, try reading Elizabeth Warren's proposal. Be very careful though, because if you read it too fast, you will want to throw your computer across the room.

I think your max estimate of 20% is even high. The compliance with ASW is between 80% and 90%, and that is just registering. So, not ignoring their ASW, the overall compliance would be even less than 20%!

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

17
I noticed David Hogg paying empty lip service to "root causes". It goes without saying that if that were the actual goal, the focus would be on a livable minimum wage, a mass program of public works to provide full employment, universal healthcare, eliminating institutionalized racism, etc. You know a party has a failed program when it has to resort to some sort of scapegoat to draw attention away from the pressing need for such things . As Gore Vidal once said, there is only one party in the United States: the Property Party. This party has two right-wings: Democrat and Republican. The "conversation" on gun violence also proves beyond all doubt that the Republican wing of the Property Party does not have a monopoly on "alternative facts"!
"I have been saying for some time now that America only has one party - the property party. It's the party of big corporations, the party of money. It has two right-wings; one is Democrat and the other is Republican."
-Gore Vidal

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

18
7N6Wolf wrote: Sat Aug 31, 2019 11:13 am I noticed David Hogg paying empty lip service to "root causes". It goes without saying that if that were the actual goal, the focus would be on a livable minimum wage, a mass program of public works to provide full employment, universal healthcare, eliminating institutionalized racism, etc. You know a party has a failed program when it has to resort to some sort of scapegoat to draw attention away from the pressing need for such things . As Gore Vidal once said, there is only one party in the United States: the Property Party. This party has two right-wings: Democrat and Republican. The "conversation" on gun violence also proves beyond all doubt that the Republican wing of the Property Party does not have a monopoly on "alternative facts"!
The March For Our lives campaign isn't focused on fixing problems, it's focused on fund raising.

That's the goal of all the Bloomberg-backed campaigns. They know that they won't get what they are asking for, but they know that a lot of people will respond to an emotional plea, just the same as the anti-abortion folks.

Neither of those Anti groups are interested in solving the problem, because it would mean their source of revenue would dry up.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

19
Neither is the NRA interested in solving the problem. As long as we have the anti gun groups the NRA is making money to buy Wayne a new suit. They are DoJ g nothing but fanning the flames on the extreme right and left to keep the cash cow running.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

20
The anti gun side thinks it’s a winnable fight. They don’t recognize that they do not represent a unified left. Yes, their actions do keep the NRA going and it keeps some of us opposed to their initiatives as well.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

21
sikacz wrote: Sun Sep 01, 2019 11:43 am The anti gun side thinks it’s a winnable fight. They don’t recognize that they do not represent a unified left. Yes, their actions do keep the NRA going and it keeps some of us opposed to their initiatives as well.
I think it’s a conspiracy between both of them to keep making money for themselves. It’s like the drug companies, they don’t really want to cure anything. They just want to alievate the symptoms so you have to keep buying their product.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

22
TrueTexan wrote: Sun Sep 01, 2019 1:41 pm
sikacz wrote: Sun Sep 01, 2019 11:43 am The anti gun side thinks it’s a winnable fight. They don’t recognize that they do not represent a unified left. Yes, their actions do keep the NRA going and it keeps some of us opposed to their initiatives as well.
I think it’s a conspiracy between both of them to keep making money for themselves. It’s like the drug companies, they don’t really want to cure anything. They just want to alievate the symptoms so you have to keep buying their product.
Finnish mythology has a name for such a device, “Sampo”.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

23
sikacz said:

The anti gun side thinks it’s a winnable fight.
Yes, they feel the momentum is on their side at this time.

Funny, the NRA has not had more than 5 million members for several years. That is 1.5% of the US population, and yet they seem to swing a big stick.

The same -could- be true of the anti-gun left as well. While not as organized as the NRA (was), if the anti-gun left came up with a real focus strategy, then it doesn't really matter what popular opinion wants.
Image

Re: A Peace Plan for Safer America

24
Not previously noted here, in their firearm ownership reduction plan:
A multi-step approval process, overseen by a law enforcement agency, that requires background checks, in-person interviews, personal references, rigorous gun safety training, and a waiting period of 10 days for each gun purchase. Licenses would be renewed every year upon successful completion of annually refreshed requirements in the above areas. In the process, a national registry of firearms sales would be created to make gun owners responsible for their weapons and hold them accountable when those weapons are used in a crime. Our licensing system would also include the ability to disarm individuals who become a danger to themselves or others.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests