67% of Americans want to ban assault weapons

Why is it NRA drivel? Can you show me other sources of info? I just looked for what I could find.

There's so many problems in America that our focus is needed on, you don't hear much about the real problems cause there's no profit to be had in them and no media in them worth covering. It's all sad every bit of it.

Rob Roy said:

Murder is illegal, (unless you're Obama droning somebody, then it's "collateral damage" ) maybe it should be regulated on a super duper high level and that will prevent it from ever happening?

Click to expand...

Collateral damage happens in all forms of war what's worse about it when Obama does it?

I never said prevent it from happening either just simply a step in the right direction. Regulation meaning don't give people like Trump weapons or power over them lol.

907cannabis said:

Collateral damage happens in all forms of war what's worse about it when Obama does it?

I never said prevent it from happening either just simply a step in the right direction. Regulation meaning don't give people like Trump weapons or power over them lol.

Click to expand...

Reasonable question.

There's no such thing as "collateral damage" it's murder. The fact that most Presidents have been more than willing to authorize killing innocent people and dodging any blame is equally disturbing, they're all guilty.

I'm not a fan of Trump or any of the clowns from the other political circus tent. They are the ones who use threats of guns for every thing they order if you don't comply. People are trained to ignore that, by design.

Rob Roy said:

Except you are still confusing a right with a government granted privilege.

Also, when you speak of banning guns, you don't actually mean banning them, you mean only people in government and their selected friendlies would own them and "lesser" people would not.

Didn't you say you had relatives loaded on trains in Nazi Germany? Did they keep their guns or did they obediently hand them over to Hiltler and his minions?

So, you, being a Trump hater want everyone to hand their guns over to "authorities" like Trump and his minions eh? I sure hope you come to your senses before you get loaded onto a cattle car.

Slavery was once upheld in a court too, so your citation is a little lacking.

Click to expand...

sensible gin control does not lead to the holocaust. see england, or japan, or any other country with gin control.

hatred from klanmen like you leads to things like the holocaust.

now please stop spamming my thread with your white nationalist nonsense.

Aw Jeez Buck you dont have to pull the racist card all the time, some people believe things for reasons other than skin color. I love your outbursts though lol. Just try and keep it cool man we all have opinions ok you have passion, try to learn to debate without hating people who disagree.

You posted this for what? People just to see and agree with? Come on man you have good points and a lot of energy to put into your arguments. People would hear you out more if you calmed down a bit and just chill man. We are all Americans here lets show some respect lol.

Some good points. Something needs be done.

However at the moment im wondering how we would collect all these firearms without more than just a few honky rebels causing problems. Millions of people who are not only firm believers in whatever amendments suit them, but also they are armed and many of them organized.

And also Trump would have to give the nod. Kinda a waste hoping for such things atm.

907cannabis said:

Aw Jeez Buck you dont have to pull the racist card all the time, some people believe things for reasons other than skin color. I love your outbursts though lol. Just try and keep it cool man we all have opinions ok you have passion, try to learn to debate without hating people who disagree.

You posted this for what? People just to see and agree with? Come on man you have good points and a lot of energy to put into your arguments. People would hear you out more if you calmed down a bit and just chill man. We are all Americans here lets show some respect lol.

Click to expand...

Well said.

Ripped Farmer said:

Some good points. Something needs be done.

However at the moment im wondering how we would collect all these firearms without more than just a few honky rebels causing problems. Millions of people who are not only firm believers in whatever amendments suit them, but also they are armed and many of them organized.

And also Trump would have to give the nod. Kinda a waste hoping for such things atm.

Click to expand...

"we'll fight the government with our pea shooters" is a really stupid fucking argument to make. besides being a stupid fucking argument,it paints gun owners as a bunch of (mostly white) violent extremists. which they are, but there are better ways to portray the insecure gun huggers.

907cannabis said:

Top 10 causes of death in the USA

Heart disease
cancer
Chronic lower respiratory disease
accidents
stroke
Alzheimer's disease
diabetes
Flu/influenza
Kidney disease
Suicide ( this includes gun deaths)
Gun deaths normally rank about 33,000 or so per year, of those about 10,000 to 12,000 will be Homicide's, the rest accidents and suicide. in 2013, they accounted for 21,175 suicide, 11208 homicide, 505 accident. I would expect the percent breakdown to be roughly the same other years.

That being said toddlers kill more people than terrorists and so does a lot of things like second hand smoke and alcohol.

I would submit to a mental health test...or rather a social stability test I would call it.

I think there's enough data to see this shit coming and stop some of it, I don't think taking ar type guns away will help much.

Click to expand...

take a look at your list and strike off the ones that are preventable. Your list would look like this:

Suicide
Gun deaths

907cannabis said:

Aw Jeez Buck you dont have to pull the racist card all the time, some people believe things for reasons other than skin color. I love your outbursts though lol. Just try and keep it cool man we all have opinions ok you have passion, try to learn to debate without hating people who disagree.

You posted this for what? People just to see and agree with? Come on man you have good points and a lot of energy to put into your arguments. People would hear you out more if you calmed down a bit and just chill man. We are all Americans here lets show some respect lol.

Click to expand...

i am so sorry for calling rob roy a racist, even though he is a racist. if you were hurt by this let me know what i can do to atone

Fogdog said:

take a look at your list and strike off the ones that are preventable. Your list would look like this:

Suicide
Gun deaths

Click to expand...

Why didn't Obama do something about those unpreventable causes of death when he was in office? Sad.

907cannabis said:

I sold my bushmaster ar .308 and bought a bolt action rifle cause it's much more deadly in the field and puts more food on the table for less money. That being said i would always like my right to own either.

Guns are a bad topic for discussion really but the facts are there, a lot of shootings happen with ar type weapons but the majority of gun deaths are from handguns. Because the assault weapons are used more in "mass shootings" and mass shootings are more reported than singles or double murders and accidents, they end up taking a lot of the heat.

Roughly 33,000 people die each year in America from guns, 2/3 of that are suicide victims and a small percentage accidents.

Guns aren't the problem people with guns are, I agree that we could get some guns off the streets and it would help but by no means a full on weapons ban this will only create more criminals. I fear what we are witnessing here is a form political civil war happening systemically throughout our nation, it will never end and can only be fought from the inside, strict gun laws for sure but bans aren't the answer.

Click to expand...

I'm all for gun owners using them for suicide.

I'm all for studying the best ways to reduce gun deaths through homicides and implementing the most effective solutions. The GOP congress has made it illegal for our health agencies to study how to do this. As you say, there are social issues that go beyond gun ownership behind many of criminal homicides. Why not study and understand the issue? Restrictions on gun ownership might be part of the solution. I'd like to know before we act.

Given the mayhem they cause to communities, why shouldn't we remove from the general population the weapon most often used in mass killings -- the AR15 or analogues, let's call them "high powered rifles and hand guns that can quickly fire a lot of rounds from easily exchanged large clips in a short time".

As far as those "accidents" you gloss over. Most of those are completely preventable. I'm not going to ignore them just because they are a small number relative to deaths by dysentary. Most often they are somebody's kids or family members. Come to think of it, they all are.

Ripped Farmer said:

Some good points. Something needs be done.

However at the moment im wondering how we would collect all these firearms without more than just a few honky rebels causing problems. Millions of people who are not only firm believers in whatever amendments suit them, but also they are armed and many of them organized.

And also Trump would have to give the nod. Kinda a waste hoping for such things atm.

Click to expand...

Why don't we start with where we agree.

Something needs to be done.

We can worry about the end game later. How about picking a starting point, such as ending sales to the general population the high powered rapid fire rifles and hand guns that can accept large clips. How about adequately funding agencies responsible for gun checks and extending the period so those checks can be made? How about ending the loopholes around gun checks? That's a start. There is plenty that can be done but without intelligence it would be done willy nilly. How about allowing our health agencies to fund studies to learn more about the factors behind gun violence and homicides in this country and to learn effective ways to reduce them?

You are right. It won't happen under this administration. It's a great filter for who should make it into office this and following election cycles. We've gotten to this point over a 50 year period. I don't expect everything to change overnight. Why should you?

Fogdog said:

Why don't we start with where we agree.

Something needs to be done.

We can worry about the end game later. How about picking a starting point, such as ending sales to the general population the high powered rapid fire rifles and hand guns that can accept large clips. How about adequately funding agencies responsible for gun checks and extending the period so those checks can be made? How about ending the loopholes around gun checks? That's a start. There is plenty that can be done but without intelligence it would be done willy nilly. How about allowing our health agencies to fund studies to learn more about the factors behind gun violence and homicides in this country and to learn effective ways to reduce them?

You are right. It won't happen under this administration. It's a great filter for who should make it into office this and following election cycles. We've gotten to this point over a 50 year period. I don't expect everything to change overnight. Why should you?

Click to expand...

The only problem is that sensible debate is no longer a possibility, there are two shouty minorities who want the polar opposite of each other and that means that until one side backs down then nothing can change, it has become too entrenched. The last thing needed is a UK style absolute ban, nor do you need a Belgian-style process which takes two years. But the one thing that seems to be lost in the latest furore is how this kid in Florida was known to have "psychiatric problems" yet was still known to have "more than one" firearm (going by the few reports I've read, not been too engrossed in this because I know how biased any reporting on such a thing is). If that's the case, then how the hell is this not being addressed, for there's the glaring problem I see.

There are certain things that keep rearing their ugly heads whenever there's a high-profile shooting, yet they are never addressed as there are two, diametrically-opposed, shouty minorities who go out of their way to muddy the waters as they try to gain the "ultimate" superiority. Until they are ignored, nothing can change.

Fubard said:

The only problem is that sensible debate is no longer a possibility, there are two shouty minorities who want the polar opposite of each other and that means that until one side backs down then nothing can change, it has become too entrenched. The last thing needed is a UK style absolute ban, nor do you need a Belgian-style process which takes two years. But the one thing that seems to be lost in the latest furore is how this kid in Florida was known to have "psychiatric problems" yet was still known to have "more than one" firearm (going by the few reports I've read, not been too engrossed in this because I know how biased any reporting on such a thing is). If that's the case, then how the hell is this not being addressed, for there's the glaring problem I see.

There are certain things that keep rearing their ugly heads whenever there's a high-profile shooting, yet they are never addressed as there are two, diametrically-opposed, shouty minorities who go out of their way to muddy the waters as they try to gain the "ultimate" superiority. Until they are ignored, nothing can change.

Click to expand...

I can certainly agree that "shouty minorities" won't get anything done as exemplified by progress over the past 20 years. The numbers, however are against lax gun laws. Only 35% of households own guns. 65%, a super majority don't. The only thing acting in the favor of the NRA is that until now, most of the super majority have favored lax gun laws. If we keep seeing mass shootings at the rate we have lately, the tide will turn against. It may already have. It will no longer be a shouty minority demanding changes to our gun laws. 65% is an overwhelmingly large percentage and will have its way.

Regarding your question about the shooter's mental health. Quite laughable that Trump, the NRA and the reactionary right should bring it up.

Is the following fake news?

Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses
by ALI VITALI
President Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

Both the House and Senate last week passed the new bill, H.J. Res 40, revoking the Obama-era regulation.

Trump signed the bill into law without a photo op or fanfare.

The National Rifle Association “applauded” Trump’s action. Chris Cox, NRA-ILA executive director, said the move “marks a new era for law-abiding gun owners, as we now have a president who respects and supports our arms.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221

So, last year, Trump made it easier for people with reported mental illnesses to obtain guns. After Trump signed that bill into law, even if a person had been treated in a psychiatric hospital, which that kid had not, they can get a gun. Why the sudden change of heart? Has there been a change of heart? I suspect they are playing the old delay and deflect trick, hoping the furor will die down.

In any case --- really? You are claiming that the mental health profession is in charge of deciding who should own a mass murder weapon? In fact, no. But if we made it so, just how will that work? Florida, by the way has a deplorable mental health system. It's not up to the task of screening the population to decide who should own a gun. Not even close. I'm all for making people diagnosed with mental illness that makes them unable to make good decisions unable to own a gun. That's a very poor first line of defense. Do better than that.

Fogdog said:

I can certainly agree that "shouty minorities" won't get anything done as exemplified by progress over the past 20 years. The numbers, however are against lax gun laws. Only 35% of households own guns. 65%, a super majority don't. The only thing acting in the favor of the NRA at this time is the super majority, most of them, have favored lax gun laws. If we keep seeing mass shootings at the rate we have lately, the tide will turn against. It may already have. It will no longer be a shouty minority demanding changes to our gun laws. 65% is an overwhelmingly large percentage and will have its way.

Regarding your question about the shooter's mental health. Quite laughable that Trump, the NRA and the reactionary right should bring it up.

I've asked somebody else and they haven't answered. Is the following fake news?

Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses
by ALI VITALI
President Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

Both the House and Senate last week passed the new bill, H.J. Res 40, revoking the Obama-era regulation.

Trump signed the bill into law without a photo op or fanfare.

The National Rifle Association “applauded” Trump’s action. Chris Cox, NRA-ILA executive director, said the move “marks a new era for law-abiding gun owners, as we now have a president who respects and supports our arms.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221

So, last year, Trump made it easier for people with reported mental illnesses to obtain guns. After Trump signed that bill into law, even if a person had been treated in a psychiatric hospital, which that kid had not, they can get a gun. Why the sudden change of heart? Has there been a change of heart? I suspect they are playing the old delay and deflect trick, hoping the furor will die down.

In any case --- really? You are claiming that the mental health profession is in charge of deciding who should own a mass murder weapon? The answer is no. But if so, just how will that work? Florida, by the way has a deplorable mental health system. It's not up to the task of screening the population to decide who should own a gun. Not even close. I'm all for making people diagnosed with mental illness that makes them unable to make good decisions unable to own a gun. That's a very poor first line of defense. Do better than that.

Click to expand...

I'm saying better control in regard to that aspect would go a long way in some respects, but it isn't going to to do anything about the "gang" killings at all which are another issue altogether.

Bottom line is that giving firearms to someone who is a tad "unhinged" rarely ends well, having them in the same house as someone else who is beyond that point is never going to end well, so why shouldn't there be psych assessments, using your medical records and a face-to-face should there be any "history", to weed out the potential for such people to go nuts in the first case?

Won't stop the "illegal" sale and possession, won't stop someone else to go completely monkeypoop in some way, but at least you are weeding out the potential for such things to happen in the first case.

I'll use the UK as an example again, the most famous school shooting, Thomas Hamilton at Dunblane. The upshot was that most firearms were banned except under exceptional circumstances, but nobody answered why someone with a rather "disturbing" history, which came out VERY quickly, had his firearms licences renewed at the stroke of a pen every year. I mean this guy was not only born in the Year of the Fruitbat, he lived every year as if it was the Year of the Fruitbat, his obsessions, known to police, should have had all sorts of bells and tooters going off but they still made sure he had the means, legally, to do what he did. Like with so many, it was preventable, same as better integration of data used, psych evals if necessary, removal of firearms from those with certain conditions until proven to be no "risk", would also cut down the risk of someone being able to go off on one.

And a better integration with health and welfare, especially mental health services, wouldn't go far wrong either. Identify and treat them before they can do anything. Many countries lack in this respect, it's a cost which has benefits that are not easy to proclaim as a "success" so gets pushed by the wayside.

Some factors are easy to see, easy to control. Start with them and then you can concentrate on the other factors which are more complicated, sometimes it's better to thin out the bigger picture out so you can see the interaction of what is buried in the middle than it is to try and deal with too many things at once as that usually ends in the knee-jerk reactions wanted by some as they try to gain the power to shape national policy without being elected, politicising every real issue as they go along, and that sort of reaction never works out well in the end.

Fogdog said:

take a look at your list and strike off the ones that are preventable. Your list would look like this:

Suicide
Gun deaths

Click to expand...

The top three are caused mostly by smoking cigarettes and could definitely be lowered. Flu deaths can be lowered, oh wait that's right flu vaccines are poison never mind that.

Besides that medical malpractice kills more too can can be prevented.

907cannabis said:

The top three are caused mostly by smoking cigarettes and could definitely be lowered. Flu deaths can be lowered, oh wait that's right flu vaccines are poison never mind that.

Besides that medical malpractice kills more too can can be prevented.

Click to expand...

According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Frosted Flakes cereal and Pop Tarts are healthy foods, but foods containing large amounts of nuts are not. ... However, this means products like almonds and avocados, which both have enormous health benefits, would be considered, “unhealthy” by the FDA's standards.Feb 16, 2017

"It's more profitable in war to wound then kill."

Who's in your FDA?

Dr. Gottlieb will also have to navigate his relationship with Mr. Trump, who has not hesitated to call out the pharmaceutical industry over high drug prices, even as he has also promised to ease regulations at the F.D.A. and to make sure that drugs reach the market more quickly. Critics have said that bringing drugs to market without the proper safeguards could expose the public to dangerous drugs that have not been properly vetted.

We should be proud that industry has now upped our (human) value to $3000.00 up from $1000 in the Bhopal Chemical days. Although nobody received survivor benefits here in the US.

McKesson Agrees to Pay Record $150 Million Settlement for Failure to Report Suspicious Orders of Pharmaceutical Drugs

A recent analysis suggested that the total costs of prescription opioid use disorders and overdoses in the United States was $78 billion in 2013. Of that, only 3.6 percent, or about $2.8 billion, was for treatment.

FDA nor the NRA is not protecting Americans lives but Global Monies.

People asault......... weapons do not..

Let's see here. Chicago has one of the nation's strictest gun control laws and also has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the United States. Vermont has some of the nation's most lenient gun control control laws and one of the nation's lowest rates of gun violence. So you tell me if gun control works. Oh and by the way these shooters could do more damage with a semi auto shotgun a drum clip and some buck shot then a ar-15.