Gun control and mass shootings

[ThunderCat98]

I consider myself an anomaly in some ways. I am a libertarian-leaning, conservative who believes the 2nd amendment does, in fact, give Americans an individual right to own and possess firearms. However, I also believe that reasonable restrictions, as enacted by Congress, are necessary when it comes to gun ownership.

I have no problem with most of the federal firearms laws currently on the book, with the sole exceptions being that I believe gun crime penalties should be increased (at least commensurate with those for drug offenses) and that some gun offenses should quality as RICO predicate crimes.

That being said, what further gun laws/ control can be implemented that would prevent something like the Vegas shooting from happening? To be honest, I don't see how any reasonable changes to the current laws would have any practical impact. Thoughts?

 

[i am herdman]

People like Hillary won't say it, but there is only one thing that would prevent it in their minds.. To take all the guns. And, that really still wouldn't prevent it. See France for example.

When people like Hillary Clinton spout off and what a dumb ass for her doing that the other day, that is what they mean. We would really love to take all the damn guns. they just won't say it.

 

[extragreen]

National permit - to - purchase.

 

[i am herdman]

National permit - to - purchase.

how would that have stopped the shootings in Vegas?

Didn't work in France either.

 

[ThunderCat98]

National permit - to - purchase.

Do you think that might have prevented this? If so, how?

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

There's not a damn thing that can be done. It's simple numbers. Pass some laws, ban semi auto rifles or big mags, make people feel good, and then the next guy does the same shit because there are millions of these things already out there. Then they will want all the guns. I'm not giving up mine. Who here is going to give up their guns? None of us.

 

[extragreen]

how would that have stopped the shootings in Vegas?

Didn't work in France either.

Nothing is guaranteed to stop all shootings, mass or otherwise. There ARE things that can be done to reduce the probability. Statistically, NPP has shown to help where implemented.

 

[extragreen]

Do you think that might have prevented this? If so, how?

From the limited information I have, I highly doubt it. But in other cases, yes.

 

[All4TheHerd]

This is one of those incidents where someone with a (for what know) good record and stable self, just killed people.

In no way would any more restrictions would have prevented him from his simple goal: Kill as many people as possible.

If he had less guns, he'd have bought more ammo. Semi-autos were converted, just like anyone can do with tools and youtube.

No guns? Use a car or build a bomb.

From what I know, this guy had determination and a will to kill, which history has certainly shown, the human condition and will to do things, good and evil, is damn near impossible to stop.

No gun laws would have changed this guy's goal...people would have died either way. More or less? We don't know, but we do know he clearly was determined to make it happen.

 

[ThunderCat98]

This is one of those incidents where someone with a (for what know) good record and stable self, just killed people.

In no way would any more restrictions would have prevented him from his simple goal: Kill as many people as possible.

If he had less guns, he'd have bought more ammo. Semi-autos were converted, just like anyone can do with tools and youtube.

No guns? Use a car or build a bomb.

From what I know, this guy had determination and a will to kill, which history has certainly shown, the human condition and will to do things, good and evil, is damn near impossible to stop.

No gun laws would have changed this guy's goal...people would have died either way. More or less? We don't know, but we do know he clearly was determined to make it happen.

I think this is accurate. The knee-jerk reaction is to enact more firearms legislation. I don't ever see that being a deterrent to someone that is intent on hiring others.

 

[ThunderCat98]

From the limited information I have, I highly doubt it. But in other cases, yes.

That's fair.

 

[i am herdman]

There's not a damn thing that can be done. It's simple numbers. Pass some laws, ban semi auto rifles or big mags, make people feel good, and then the next guy does the same shit because there are millions of these things already out there. Then they will want all the guns. I'm not giving up mine. Who here is going to give up their guns? None of us.

I will not give up mine. We are free men in a free society. I will not hand over my weapons.

 

[i am herdman]

From the limited information I have, I highly doubt it. But in other cases, yes.

Fair enough

 

[extragreen]

Got it. There's just nothing, absolutely nothing we can do to reduce the murders, mass or otherwise. So let's just continue to hold on to that thought until it happens again and then everyone can simply send thoughts and prayers to the victims families. Sounds reasonable.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Got it. There's just nothing, absolutely nothing we can do to reduce the murders, mass or otherwise. So let's just continue to hold on to that thought until it happens again and then everyone can simply send thoughts and prayers to the victims families. Sounds reasonable.

Mass murders, no there isn't. Evil will find a way. This guy was filthy rich, he could buy anything he wanted on the black market. You want to slow down, say, urban black violence, yeah there's a lot that can be done...but gun control has been proven to have zero effect on that.

 

[extragreen]

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/

 

[i am herdman]

Mass murders, no there isn't. Evil will find a way. This guy was filthy rich, he could buy anything he wanted on the black market. You want to slow down, say, urban black violence, yeah there's a lot that can be done...but gun control has been proven to have zero effect on that.

How did this guy make his money?

 

[i am herdman]

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/

what if he would have rented a Mack track(or stole it) and plowed people up and down the strip? Or made a bomb like Oklahoma City?

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/

Yeah, I am glad I had my permit to buy weed back in the day. Oh wait...

Things I would like to see: better access to mental health care AND the understanding that there's a lot of people who have been left to outpatient treatment that don't need to be on the street at all.

Zero tolerance for gun crimes.

Decriminalization of all drugs.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

How did this guy make his money?

Accounting, real estate development and management (apartment complexes).

 

[WV-FAN]

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/

i've personally purchased 1/2 a dozen firearms over the past year, a couple pistols, a couple assault firearms (one AR, one 9mm assault pistol), and a couple rifles. in all cases the dealer had to call my information in to register it. so, what's the difference?

on the flip side, i've been to a flea market in southern WV where anybody can walk in with cash and walk out with about any type of firearm they want with zero checks.

at the end of the day, the mentally deranged, including pill heads like RD, can pick up whatever they want without any type of legalized bullshit permit that's not going to do any more good than the current registration process in place.

 

[i am herdman]

Accounting, real estate development and management (apartment complexes).

Gotcha. I have not don a ton of research on this guy. I was wondering where he made all his money.

 

[extragreen]

i've personally purchased 1/2 a dozen firearms over the past year, a couple pistols, a couple assault firearms (one AR, one 9mm assault pistol), and a couple rifles. in all cases the dealer had to call my information in to register it. so, what's the difference?

"the PTP system the legislation seeks to create goes further than the standard background-check procedure in place in most parts of the country: Prospective gun purchasers have to apply for their permit in person at a local law enforcement office, have their fingerprints taken, and submit a photograph along with their paperwork."

" The key element of a discretionary PTP system is that local law enforcement has the authority to deny permits when a person who would pass a federal background check still poses a potential danger."

"A team led by David Hemenway, Ph.D., at the Harvard School of Public Health recently conducted a survey of Massachusetts police chiefs in order to understand their reasons for rejecting permit applications under the state’s discretionary system. “Local police chiefs typically know more about the people in their community than does a national computer,” Hemenway wrote. The police chiefs interviewed in the study were particularly cautious when a permit-seeker had a history of assault, domestic abuse, mental illness, or substance abuse. Under the existing federal background check system, persons with a pattern of drug or alcohol addiction or a record of violent misdemeanors are typically cleared for gun purchases, despite those risk factors. A discretionary PTP system allows local law enforcement to consider such warning signs and withhold permits when justified."

"the North Carolina Sheriffs Association argued that, “[t]he sheriff has access to significantly more information about the applicant’s criminal record, pending criminal charges, mental health record, and other relevant data than is contained in the federal NICS system."

"One study found that states with PTP laws allowing police discretion tallied a 76 percent reduction in the likelihood of guns winding up in criminals’ hands relative to comparable states without such laws."

To me this is a common sense law.

 

[i am herdman]

"the PTP system the legislation seeks to create goes further than the standard background-check procedure in place in most parts of the country: Prospective gun purchasers have to apply for their permit in person at a local law enforcement office, have their fingerprints taken, and submit a photograph along with their paperwork."

" The key element of a discretionary PTP system is that local law enforcement has the authority to deny permits when a person who would pass a federal background check still poses a potential danger."

"A team led by David Hemenway, Ph.D., at the Harvard School of Public Health recently conducted a survey of Massachusetts police chiefs in order to understand their reasons for rejecting permit applications under the state’s discretionary system. “Local police chiefs typically know more about the people in their community than does a national computer,” Hemenway wrote. The police chiefs interviewed in the study were particularly cautious when a permit-seeker had a history of assault, domestic abuse, mental illness, or substance abuse. Under the existing federal background check system, persons with a pattern of drug or alcohol addiction or a record of violent misdemeanors are typically cleared for gun purchases, despite those risk factors. A discretionary PTP system allows local law enforcement to consider such warning signs and withhold permits when justified."

"the North Carolina Sheriffs Association argued that, “[t]he sheriff has access to significantly more information about the applicant’s criminal record, pending criminal charges, mental health record, and other relevant data than is contained in the federal NICS system."

"One study found that states with PTP laws allowing police discretion tallied a 76 percent reduction in the likelihood of guns winding up in criminals’ hands relative to comparable states without such laws."

To me this is a common sense law.

You do realize the history behind the NC sheriffs and their gun permits don't you?

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

"the PTP system the legislation seeks to create goes further than the standard background-check procedure in place in most parts of the country: Prospective gun purchasers have to apply for their permit in person at a local law enforcement office, have their fingerprints taken, and submit a photograph along with their paperwork."

" The key element of a discretionary PTP system is that local law enforcement has the authority to deny permits when a person who would pass a federal background check still poses a potential danger."

"A team led by David Hemenway, Ph.D., at the Harvard School of Public Health recently conducted a survey of Massachusetts police chiefs in order to understand their reasons for rejecting permit applications under the state’s discretionary system. “Local police chiefs typically know more about the people in their community than does a national computer,” Hemenway wrote. The police chiefs interviewed in the study were particularly cautious when a permit-seeker had a history of assault, domestic abuse, mental illness, or substance abuse. Under the existing federal background check system, persons with a pattern of drug or alcohol addiction or a record of violent misdemeanors are typically cleared for gun purchases, despite those risk factors. A discretionary PTP system allows local law enforcement to consider such warning signs and withhold permits when justified."

"the North Carolina Sheriffs Association argued that, “[t]he sheriff has access to significantly more information about the applicant’s criminal record, pending criminal charges, mental health record, and other relevant data than is contained in the federal NICS system."

"One study found that states with PTP laws allowing police discretion tallied a 76 percent reduction in the likelihood of guns winding up in criminals’ hands relative to comparable states without such laws."

To me this is a common sense law.

So all of us that already have conceal permits signed off by our local sheriff can just skip this step?

And exactly how does this stop criminals? Or this son of a bitch in Vegas; the local cops said they didn't know him from Adam.

 

[extragreen]

So all of us that already have conceal permits signed off by our local sheriff can just skip this step?

Sounds reasonable.

And exactly how does this stop criminals? Or this son of a bitch in Vegas; the local cops said they didn't know him from Adam.

Read the article.

 

[i am herdman]

So all of us that already have conceal permits signed off by our local sheriff can just skip this step?

And exactly how does this stop criminals? Or this son of a bitch in Vegas; the local cops said they didn't know him from Adam.

Since he doesn't really know. I will tell you how it works in NC since he referenced the NC Sheriff's Association.

In NC to purchase a handgun you must purchase a handgun permit from the sheriff in the county in which you reside. You can't just go to the gun store and purchase a handgun. The gun shop or retailer will ask you for a handgun permit or have a conceal carry permit. This is on top of the federal background paper work. You are supposed to do this for private sales. The sheriff office issues the permit. You can get up to 5 of them at a time. If you go through the process of getting a conceal carry permit then you don't have to get the handgun purchase permit. There is a fee for each permit. Can't remember how much but not real expensive. You have to have the permit for each handgun you purchase. This does not apply to long guns. Conceal carry permit holders don't have to have the handgun permit.

This process goes back to the Jim Crow era because it was based on the local sheriff's office who got the permits. Back in the day, let's just say if you had a good tan you had a harder time getting a permit.

This law is still in place. Although being tan doesn't have much to do with it now. It is also a money maker for the local sheriff's office.

They are trying to do away with it in NC but the sheriff's association is of course against it. Each handgun purchase has to have this permit or a conceal carry permit.

The history of the thing goes back to discriminatory practices.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Read the article.

I did. Unless I have missed something that just came out in the news this son of a bitch passes that proposal. Local cops never had a run-in with him. His only record anywhere appears to be a citation.

 

[extragreen]

I did. Unless I have missed something that just came out in the news this son of a bitch passes that proposal. Local cops never had a run-in with him. His only record anywhere appears to be a citation.

I know that. I've already agreed twice in this thread that the PTP wouldn't have done anything to stop this guy. Read the thread.

 

[WV-FAN]

I know that. I've already agreed twice in this thread that the PTP wouldn't have done anything to stop this guy. Read the thread.

that's just it, the PTP wouldn't have done anything to stop him nor anything to stop any other criminal. there's a reason they're called criminals. RD's comparison to buying weed years ago is about as good as it gets. on the flip side, i have no issue with the PTP system . . . but, i'm a law abiding citizen, i wouldn't. on the other hand, and once again, it won't keep firearms out of the hands of those who aren't law abiding citizens. what are they gonna do, have a change of heart all the sudden and think, "oh my, stealing this gun is illegal, i better not do that!"

 

[extragreen]

that's just it, the PTP wouldn't have done anything to stop him nor anything to stop any other criminal. there's a reason they're called criminals. RD's comparison to buying weed years ago is about as good as it gets. on the flip side, i have no issue with the PTP system . . . but, i'm a law abiding citizen, i wouldn't. on the other hand, and once again, it won't keep firearms out of the hands of those who aren't law abiding citizens. what are they gonna do, have a change of heart all the sudden and think, "oh my, stealing this gun is illegal, i better not do that!"

PTP has been shown in studies to reduce guns getting into the hands of criminals. Do you deny that?

 

[i am herdman]

PTP has been shown in studies to reduce guns getting into the hands of criminals. Do you deny that?

Other that eliminating every gun from the world , what would have stopped this nut freak from doing this?

Reality is he had every constitutional right to buy and own a firearm. He was on zero radar screens. He was a silent assassin. Maybe a parking or speeding violation? He fit zero profiles. Usually 64 year olds with money and a good life don't go commit mass murder.

 

[extragreen]

Other that eliminating every gun from the world , what would have stopped this nut freak from doing this?

Reality is he had every constitutional right to buy and own a firearm. He was on zero radar screens. He was a silent assassin. Maybe a parking or speeding violation? He fit zero profiles. Usually 64 year olds with money and a good life don't go commit mass murder.

No one has offered a promise that any legislation would prevent all gun crimes. You and the others cannot come up with a justification for doing nothing. Pitiful excuses, you're full of them.

 

[herdfan429]

No one has offered a promise that any legislation would prevent all gun crimes. You and the others cannot come up with a justification for doing nothing. Pitiful excuses, you're full of them.

And you can’t offer solutions that would stop events like this from happening

 

[extragreen]

And you can’t offer solutions that would stop events like this from happening

I haven't attempted to do so. I don't know anyone else who has. I've suggested an action that would likely reduce the possibility. But you go ahead and advocate doing nothing.

 

[herdfan429]

I haven't attempted to do so. I don't know anyone else who has. I've suggested an action that would likely reduce the possibility. But you go ahead and advocate doing nothing.

No you are just advocating doing something for the sake of doing something.

 

[WV-FAN]

PTP has been shown in studies to reduce guns getting into the hands of criminals. Do you deny that?

again, i have no problem with PTP. i actually believe something should be done for one reason and one reason only, to shut idiots like you the fvck up. however, where will it stop? you pansie nutjobs won't stop at that, you won't stop until you get rid of the 2nd amendment.

that said, do i deny a study was completed? why would i? do i question the study's results? don't know, haven't read the study. who was the study performed by? could it be possible it was completed by a bunch of left wing sissies who want to abolish 2nd amendment rights and would slant the results of the study to agree with their position.

 

[MARSHALL77]

The shooter passed every check / state and federal - you are not going to legislate someone from accomplishing what he did. He could have accomplished basically the same thing with only one altered fire arm ( as long as it did not heat up too much) and multiple magazines.

All in all this was one hell of a set up ( not condoning by any means what he did) but from an elevated position with multiple lines of fire , automatic weapons , massive amount of ammo. A well planned and orchestrated attack.

You want to blame someone for this add the hotel to the list as they apparently did not think one person with 10 suitcases was unusual , housekeeping reported nothing , room service reported nothing ( sure he may not have utilized housekeeping or room service but none the less I would imagine multiple and massive law suits will be pending against the hotel.

 

[All4TheHerd]

Eveyone is spewing about common sense laws that would somehow have prevented this. It wouldn't.
Idiots on TV and the media saying that "we need to better our laws" and spewing the mindset that because they oppose guns, they somehow "care" more than those who support them.
Nobody can present any case for what would reduce gun crime. Instead they just point at someone and become critical.
Thing is, crime displaces. If you try to reduce gun ownership, criminals will just use other methods...robbery, stabbings, etc. Crime never really goes away, it just moves to a different spot and takes on a new identity.
Plus, this guy wasn't a criminal to begin with. Not enough of one to raise a red flag for concern.

So, what gun laws (besides an outright ban) would have prevented this?

 

[All4TheHerd]

The shooter passed every check / state and federal - you are not going to legislate someone from accomplishing what he did. He could have accomplished basically the same thing with only one altered fire arm ( as long as it did not heat up too much) and multiple magazines.

All in all this was one hell of a set up ( not condoning by any means what he did) but from an elevated position with multiple lines of fire , automatic weapons , massive amount of ammo. A well planned and orchestrated attack.

You want to blame someone for this add the hotel to the list as they apparently did not think one person with 10 suitcases was unusual , housekeeping reported nothing , room service reported nothing ( sure he may not have utilized housekeeping or room service but none the less I would imagine multiple and massive law suits will be pending against the hotel.

No doubt. I hate to say it but we may never know the true motive of the guy. It still remains a mystery.

As I've said before, and as it will be repeated, nothing was gonna stop this guy.