Is it time for Red Flag laws?

[Rob C]

Gun licensing or registration don't prevent mass shootings. Armed deputies don't seem to help either. And it is very questionable that the clear backpacks in the schools will achieve anything.
However, what seems to propagate these shootings in USA is the prevailing gun culture and the wide availability of all kinds of guns and ammunition.

+ 100%!

[pegelli]

I don't understand your point. 

Sorry this was over your head, but my point wasn't about mass killings/shootings (this thread is about Red Flag laws, not about mass shootings/killings). My point was that with better training and some form of competency testing (how to use and store guns safely) less gun related accidents would happen and less guns would be accessible to underage kids.

[pegelli]

It's obvious that the government would come up with some bureaucratic reason to require training and then use that requirement to seize your guns. The NRA isn't stupid.   

If the majority doesn't want that they will be voted out soon enough, isn't that how democracy should work?
I never said the NRA was stupid, they're only too rich, powerful and wicked at the same time.

[PeterAit]

If you don't want police to shoot you, don't resist arrest. 

But many of the unarmed people who were killed by police were not resisting arrest.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

But many of the unarmed people who were killed by police were not resisting arrest.

In which case it was an unfortunate accident, where it was determined only after the fact that they were unarmed.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Your constitution needs rewriting, urgently.

So, why hasn't that been done the last 200+ years? Corrupt politicians? Evil NRA? Or the majority of people simply do not want guns taken?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... what seems to propagate these shootings in USA is the prevailing gun culture and the wide availability of all kinds of guns and ammunition.

Or knife culture in the UK? Or truck culture in Germany?

What propagate those shootings or other mass murders are sick individuals (apart from those with clear political/terrorist motives) and celebrity culture.

[James Clark]

In which case it was an unfortunate accident, where it was determined only after the fact that they were unarmed.

Oh.  Oops.  Yep, that's too bad.  Kind of like this morning when the guy at the grocery store forgot to bag the chicken I bought.   Oh well.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Oh.  Oops.  Yep, that's too bad.  Kind of like this morning when the guy at the grocery store forgot to bag the chicken I bought.   Oh well.

Stuff happens.

[James Clark]

The American Constitution prevents the government from infringing on the right to keep and bear arms.  There's no requirement to be trained.  If you want to store a gun on your mantle waiting for the next revolution, the government can't take it away saying you're not qualified to use it.  Or insisting that you take semi-annual exams to prove you know how to use it.  It's obvious that the government would come up with some bureaucratic reason to require training and then use that requirement to seize your guns. 

This isn't quite right, Alan.  Even in Heller, Scalia specifically wrote that the majority ruling should NOT be construed to be interpreted as an absolute unfettered right to gun ownership.

[Alan Klein]

This isn't quite right, Alan.  Even in Heller, Scalia specifically wrote that the majority ruling should NOT be construed to be interpreted as an absolute unfettered right to gun ownership.

I never said it was. If you're nuts as determined by a court or a convicted felon, then you can legally be prevented from buying a gun.  What I said isn't Constitutionally required is training in the use, storage or maintenance of a gun before you can buy one.

Of course, most gun owners do train and practice using their weapons and handle and store them safely.  Do some gun owners still handle their guns recklessly?  Of course.  Just like some car owners drive recklessly and kill people even though they've been taught to drive in a safe manner.   Did you ever speed?

[pegelli]

If you're nuts as determined by a court or a convicted felon, then you can legally be prevented from buying a gun. 

Or if you don't like that you go to a gun show where you can still buy a gun without any checks whatsoever.

[LesPalenik]

Or knife culture in the UK? Or truck culture in Germany?

What propagate those shootings or other mass murders are sick individuals (apart from those with clear political/terrorist motives) and celebrity culture.

I mentioned it myself about the choice of weapons in different countries in post #57. However, when it comes to total murders in UK and Germany, both countries combined (and also per capita) don't come even close to the USA numbers. Even more alarming is the fact (but that's another subject) that worldwide many more people die from obesity than from violent crimes. 

[Rob C]

So, why hasn't that been done the last 200+ years? Corrupt politicians? Evil NRA? Or the majority of people simply do not want guns taken?

Inertia.

It is one of the most powerful non-forces in the world.

Combined with rich business interests, the average, sane guy has no chance. When your only reprentatives are already bought by those powers, what are you gonna do? Maybe blow up gun shops?

Just like the drug problem: why isn't it fixed? Because too many people enjoy the drugs, depend on them, make a lot of money by selling them and preventing their supply from getting stopped.

Just this week, here in Mallorca, a 28-year-old woman already with record of using and dealing, stoned, drove her car into a group of cyclists putting one into a coffin and several others on critical lists. This out in the sticks in Capdepera, near Arta and Cala Ratjada. Ask yourself: how come she was still free, able to drive her wheels instead of being in some prison or mental hospital?

Regarding the knife and acid attacks: yes, there are crazies out there, congenital idiots who must never be called idiots, but simply "disadvantaged young people" with no blame or responsibility for themselves and their actions at all. It's obviously the fault of the "government" for failing to give them a free pass to a great life.

Instead of bulding new highways in the north, to service non-extant industries, they should save a lot of money and time by building new jails.

[Alan Klein]

Or if you don't like that you go to a gun show where you can still buy a gun without any checks whatsoever.

Only six states (California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island) require universal background checks on all firearm sales at gun shows, including sales by unlicensed dealers (private individuals). Three more states (Connecticut, Maryland and Pennsylvania) require background checks on all handgun sales made at gun shows.  So 41 States have no requirements at gun shows that they could easily enact if they desired to do so.  The Constitution is not stopping checks in these other states.


In any case, all Federally licensed gun dealers must do background checks.  Most of the guns sold at gun shows are by these licensed dealers.  So background checks are done at gun shows most of the time as well.  The issue is that private individuals sometimes sell their guns at gun shows.  Private sellers don't have to do background checks at gun shows.  That goes for just selling hand to hand.  If you want to sell your gun to neighbor Sven, no checks have to be done.  But States can implement checks even with private individuals at gun shows as the 6 mentioned above.  So most states have chosen not too because of political pressure not too.

Finally, why not implement a Federal regulation for background checks at gun shows?  I'm not a Constitutional lawyer, but I think such a law might be in conflict with the Constitution since a rule like that has to be implemented in each State since the guns don't cross from State to State.  The Federal government has no jurisdiction.  Only individual States do.  For the same reason that some states have anti-carry laws and other states let you carry your weapons.  These are individual State decisions on how the people in their state want to live.  It's called Democracy and Freedom.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Or if you don't like that you go to a gun show where you can still buy a gun without any checks whatsoever.

You can get a gun without background checks, and legally so, in many other ways. A study by the Justice Department found that only 2% of guns used in crime were obtained at gun shows.

Clinton’s claim about “gun show loophole” received three Pinocchios from the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/16/clintons-claim-that-40-percent-of-guns-are-sold-at-gun-shows-and-over-the-internet/?utm_term=.6a5138df181b

[pegelli]

You can get a gun without background checks, and legally so, in many other ways. A study by the Justice Department found that only 2% of guns used in crime were obtained at gun shows.

Still 2% too many and why these other ways to get guns without a background check?

[pegelli]

These are individual State decisions on how the people in their state want to live.  It's called Democracy and Freedom.

Are you sure it's not the NRA lining the pockets of weak politicians for their reelection slush fund?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Most definitely, when you look at the last two months.
However, the year to date numbers show 50 killings in New York, and 47 in London. In 2017, New York had more than twice as many murders (290) than London (116).
So either London is getting worse by the day, or the last two months were an exception. There is also a possibility that the bad apples from the Big Apple are moving to UK.

Now, this is VERY interesting (sorry, Manoli) as it compares apples to apples (or is it Big Apple to Big Curry?). At the same time, it debunks the often-used statistical trick of comparing the US murders by gun to murders by gun in other counties. Well, as I already said: duh! If a country’s main mode of transportation is, say, ox and cart, it will definitely have less deaths with cars involved than, say, the US. By the same token, in countries where guns are banned, they will obviously have less murders by gun.

But what the above example shows is that the human urge to commit a crime and kill is the same in similar environments (and even if only for two months). If not guns, then knives or whatever. It is us, humans, not guns or knives, to blame.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Still 2% too many and why these other ways to get guns without a background check?

Because the starting point is “without a background check.” The Constitution does not say “The right of people with background checks to bear arms...” It has later been modified, but with reasonable exceptions. When a father gifts his gun to his son, for instance.