|
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1536013602846560256?s=20&t=HgBgshsmuVIQxFCSPiEuQw This seems pretty good but does this get around the gun show loophole too?
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:This seems pretty good but does this get around the gun show loophole too? Unclear without a draft.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1536013602846560256?s=20&t=HgBgshsmuVIQxFCSPiEuQw There's no practicalities on the 'Actually getting a gun' side of things. Even at the most extreme it wouldn't have stopped....any mass shooting. Still a lot of good things in there, hope it gets passed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 22:37
|
|
|
Yep, lot of good stuff there, but absolutely none of it is likely to have major effects on shootings. Maybe the delay on purchases in the 18-24 crowd, but not much of a barrier to someone pulling a Rittenhouse and handing a weapon over since it only affects purchase from FFLs, not posession.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
The Red Flag law may prevent mass shooting. Along with increased buyer scrutiny with waiting periods. In the long run, it's a drop in the bucket but still a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
I'm going to want to read the actual wording on the red flag stuff before I call it positive. I'm a big fan of prohibited purchasers actually being prohibited, but don't want to get another 'what's due process precious' situation like the no-fly list. If it's based on actual convictions in a court of law i see few having issue with it, as long as it applies to cops equally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 02:08
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:as long as it applies to cops equally. The entire status of "cop" entails "above the law".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 02:52
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:The entire status of "cop" entails "above the law". True, but it would still be a real get if that law disqualified people convicted of domestic abuse from being cops. It would be a pleasant surprise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 02:53
|
|
|
Yep. If a DV conviction is disqualifying to purchase arms, it should also be disqualifying for a professional permit to carry and thus working as a police officer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
Are there any studies or news investigations that actually dive into different policies and see what type of effect those could (in the best possible circumstances) have on shootings, or even just mass shootings? Something like "X number of shootings were conducted with weapons bought at gun shows/through private parties," "Y number of shootings were conducted by individuals with a disqualifying DV conviction," etc. It'd be useful if such a thing existed to see exactly how toothless the regulation will be.Liquid Communism posted:I'm a big fan of prohibited purchasers actually being prohibited, but don't want to get another 'what's due process precious' situation like the no-fly list.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Are there any studies or news investigations that actually dive into different policies and see what type of effect those could (in the best possible circumstances) have on shootings, or even just mass shootings? Something like "X number of shootings were conducted with weapons bought at gun shows/through private parties," "Y number of shootings were conducted by individuals with a disqualifying DV conviction," etc. It'd be useful if such a thing existed to see exactly how toothless the regulation will be. Not exactly what you’re looking for, but if you didn’t see it, LT2012 just posted a broad brush policy-related study in the USCE thread: Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:
But I think it’ll take a while for what you’re specifically asking about. The reason I think this is it has to be a long term study to be able to attempt to isolate it outside of the broader context of our overall societal/economic impact. And due to CDC finally getting allotted funding for gun violence, they’re basically starting from square one Kalit fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Jun 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 16:32
|
|
Summarizing study (in LT2012’s words)
|
Baronash posted:Are there any studies or news investigations that actually dive into different policies and see what type of effect those could (in the best possible circumstances) have on shootings, or even just mass shootings? Something like "X number of shootings were conducted with weapons bought at gun shows/through private parties," "Y number of shootings were conducted by individuals with a disqualifying DV conviction," etc. It'd be useful if such a thing existed to see exactly how toothless the regulation will be. There's a lot out there; the Trace site I linked earlier has some resources. This site from Harvard has a few comparative policy studies: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/policy-evaluation/ Of particular note, an article on how some of the studies claiming no effect of gun control interventions appear to be fraudulent: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fjphp.2009.26.pdf Here's a full text comparative interstate study. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1661390 Here's a Rand review of policy outcomes: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy.html It provides fairly specifically what you're looking for. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jun 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Are there any studies or news investigations that actually dive into different policies and see what type of effect those could (in the best possible circumstances) have on shootings, or even just mass shootings? Something like "X number of shootings were conducted with weapons bought at gun shows/through private parties," "Y number of shootings were conducted by individuals with a disqualifying DV conviction," etc. It'd be useful if such a thing existed to see exactly how toothless the regulation will be. Here is a good article on how mass shooters are created. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762 As far as the "too crazy to own a gun list," considering that homosexuality was listed as a mental illness until fairly recently, such a law could be used to keep LGBTQ people from owning a firearm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 01:31
|
|
|
Something like 1 in 10 mass shooters have a history of mental illness. Sure we should get people help with mental health, but also it's mainly a distraction from gun laws, which would do much more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 01:43
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:As far as the "too crazy to own a gun list," considering that homosexuality was listed as a mental illness until fairly recently, such a law could be used to keep LGBTQ people from owning a firearm. Consider also that gun suicide generally outnumbers gun homicide 2:1, and that people with MH issues are disproportionately more likely to be the victims of assault with a gun than the perpetrators. All of the discourse about whether mass shooters are mentally ill (they generally are not) obscures everyday suicide and homicide, which are much larger concerns even if they are less flashy ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 03:25
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Something like 1 in 10 mass shooters have a history of mental illness. Mental health resources aren't just for helping people with diagnosed mental illness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 04:51
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Consider also that gun suicide generally outnumbers gun homicide 2:1, and that people with MH issues are disproportionately more likely to be the victims of assault with a gun than the perpetrators. All of the discourse about whether mass shooters are mentally ill (they generally are not) obscures everyday suicide and homicide, which are much larger concerns even if they are less flashy ones. Seems like a good argument for a functioning mental health system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 04:51
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Seems like a good argument for a functioning mental health system. It is indeed. But the suggestion that we must fix literally everything about society before discussing guns is a common distraction argument against gun control. Suicidality, mental illness, and the urge to violence will still exist, and guns make all of them worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
Part of the problem with red flag MH laws is that they discourage people from seeing help for MH issues, for fear of losing access to their guns. But, conversely, the best intervention for someone at risk of suicide is to get guns out of their house immediately. But as long as gun culture is preaching the fantasy that owning a gun gives you a measure of control and safety, you have this trap, where people feel less in control and thus feel more need for something putting them in greater danger. Even left-leaning gun forums have people cheering each other on at "I'd never tell a doctor I have a gun in the house" and "I'd never tell a doctor I'm depressed." The ubiquity of guns is an obstacle to doing anything systemic about mental health. Ultimately, people care more about having guns than they care about their life, or the lives of their neighbors, or the lives of their children. What do you do in the face of that? Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Jun 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 06:26
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Mental health resources aren't just for helping people with diagnosed mental illness. True. Point is, other countries have mental health coverage issues but they don't have mass shootings. The focus on mental health stigmatizes mental illness and distracts from the actual issue, which is US gun policy and culture is ridiculous and unlikely to change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 07:48
|
|
|
Didn't see this posted. Here's a list of things that didn't pass muster in negotiations with Republicans: https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/1536450216722944005 (Cornyn is the seniormost Republican Senator.) Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 08:42 on Jun 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 08:40
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Didn't see this posted. Here's a list of things that didn't pass muster in negotiations with Republicans: Why is safe storage "unconstitutional" lol. And unsurprisingly all of these measures would be much more effective than the ones that made it into the bill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 09:07
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Why is safe storage "unconstitutional" lol. Bearing in mind that I think Heller's wrongly decided: He's correct that it's currently unconstitutional. This is specifically what the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in DC v Heller. In addition to broadly deciding that owning a gun for the purpose of defending your home is a constitutional right, it specifically struck down a DC law that guns in the home had to be kept unloaded and locked up. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 09:31 on Jun 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 09:27
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Didn't see this posted. Here's a list of things that didn't pass muster in negotiations with Republicans: This is pretty much a litmus test for how alien the gun control issue is in the US compared to the rest of the world, as those points would be pretty baffling for anyone in any other country that's not some kind of Somalian anarchy state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 09:59
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:This is pretty much a litmus test for how alien the gun control issue is in the US compared to the rest of the world, as those points would be pretty baffling for anyone in any other country that's not some kind of Somalian anarchy state. Those points are broadly popular among Americans in general. I don't know of any polling on the subject, but I don't even think most people know handgun bans and "you must keep your guns locked up" laws are unconstitutional, despite Heller being 14 years old now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 10:14
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Bearing in mind that I think Heller's wrongly decided: Cease to Hope posted:Those points are broadly popular among Americans in general. I don't know of any polling on the subject, but I don't even think most people know handgun bans and "you must keep your guns locked up" laws are unconstitutional, despite Heller being 14 years old now. I've seen some newer polls shared around recently but couldn't find them now so here's this:  I knew about handgun ban but not that safe storage was part of it lol. Just insane lol. ----------- e: 36 House Democrats roll out a bill to hit AR-15-style weapons with a 1,000% tax that could pass Congress without Republican support https://www.businessinsider.com/house-democrats-ar-15-tax-gun-control-reconciliation-2022-6 Might be one weird trick that the NRA hates. If it's broad enough to cover a lot of semi-auto stuff and high-capacity magazines it might even make a small dent in the shootings. mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Jun 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 10:23
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Bearing in mind that I think Heller's wrongly decided: Also on a practical level, it'll run into two issues. Firstly, it's yet another level of making what is still considered a constitutional right accessible only to the rich. But secondly, and more importantly, safe storage laws are only as worthwhile as their enforcement. Any level of enforcement that isn't just a tack-on charge after the fact requires creating a situation where owning a firearm strips the 4th Amendment's protections, as enforcement of safe storage laws requires enforcement officials (likely the police) to be granted access to your home at any time to verify weapons are being stored safely, while also creating an explicit registry of firearms. We're all well aware how eager the police are to use any excuse to go on a fishing expedition, like the good old 'I smelled weed' at a traffic stop, and a cop who wants to find an excuse to charge someone with something will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:16
|
|
|
Suspicion of having a weapon is already probable cause.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:17
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Suspicion of having a weapon is already probable cause. Tell that to Amadou Diallo. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:21
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Tell that to Amadou Diallo. who was famously unarmed and dead? i don't take your meaning. i already said i think the supposed right to bear arms is fake because anything the police can execute you for isn't a right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:30
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:who was famously unarmed and dead? i don't take your meaning. There ya go, you think it's alright that the police use "Suspicion of having a weapon" as probable cause. You're in favor of the police violating someone's rights as long as it's a right you disagree with. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 05:56
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:There ya go, you think it's alright that the police use "Suspicion of having a weapon" as probable cause. stating a fact is not endorsement of that fact. all gun control exists in a context where the de facto law of the land is that police can execute people for the suspicion of being armed, and do so in a racist way. (also bigoted along other lines: ableist and cissexist in particular.) guns-at-will and the increasing trend towards stand-and-fight self defense upholds white supremacy as a result. to suggest that gun control is racist requires you to at least consider the ways the existing guns-at-will status quo is racist. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 09:53 on Jun 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 09:43
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkJv3_dzGH8
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 13:39
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:stating a fact is not endorsement of that fact. I don't think anyone has yet argued that the status quo isn't racist. Gun laws in America are, have been, and likely always will be racist, classist, and sexist on many levels as they seek to reinforce social strata and establish who can be trusted to be armed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:45
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I don't think anyone has yet argued that the status quo isn't racist. Gun laws in America are, have been, and likely always will be racist, classist, and sexist on many levels as they seek to reinforce social strata and establish who can be trusted to be armed. Not explicitly, but "we can't do gun control because it will hurt minorities" implies that banning guns would be more racist than not banning them. When this is far from obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:50
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I don't think anyone has yet argued that the status quo isn't racist. Gun laws in America are, have been, and likely always will be racist, classist, and sexist on many levels as they seek to reinforce social strata and establish who can be trusted to be armed. You’re correct that gun laws, especially the 2nd amendment and its origin, are racist/sexist/classist. But I’m confused on what you’re advocating for. You seem to be saying like this makes these laws bad, but then the end of your last statement sounds like it’s pro-2A…. Kalit fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jun 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Also on a practical level, it'll run into two issues. Firstly, it's yet another level of making what is still considered a constitutional right accessible only to the rich. conversely, i'd say poor children simply don't have the same protections as rich children when it comes to finding loose and improperly stored weapons and shooting each other or themselves the constitutional right a five year old has to blast holes in their little sibling. car seats are also a classist regulation designed to burden the poor with oppressive safety requirements
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I don't think anyone has yet argued that the status quo isn't racist. Gun laws in America are, have been, and likely always will be racist, classist, and sexist on many levels as they seek to reinforce social strata and establish who can be trusted to be armed. This includes the current guns-at-will regime that you've been arguing cannot be changed for fear of racism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 18:15
|
|
|
Under the current structure, African Americans are disproportionately the victims of gun homicides by an enormous margin. Most gun homicide victims are black, even though they are only 13% of the population. The status quo is not, in any way, helping them "defend" themselves from actual, real, not-imagined gun violence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
Xombie posted:Under the current structure, African Americans are disproportionately the victims of gun homicides by an enormous margin. Most gun homicide victims are black, even though they are only 13% of the population. The status quo is not, in any way, helping them "defend" themselves from actual, real, not-imagined gun violence. They are also disproportionately the perpetrators of gun homicides. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/09/29/fact-check-meme-shows-incorrect-homicide-stats-race/5739522002/ USA Today posted:Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims were killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 18:33
|
|