Posted on 11/09/2018 6:56:39 AM PST by Paul R.
I am going to throw this out there as an incomplete idea, in the hope that some of our more astute FReepers can put some real thought into it, and make some serious suggestions. I believe that a certain level of "gun violence" is a price we pay for freedom. I also believe that a good deal of that violence associated with drug crime and the like could be addressed and minimized with harsher penalties and a widespread program to both saturate violence prone communities with knowledge of those penalties, demonstrate to members of those communities that cooperation with police WILL remove killers permanently from their midst, and move more aggressively against gangs. I think this sort of approach could literally cut "street" murders in some of these places, like Chicago, in half.
However, this does not address the problem of what are, quite simply in most cases, "crazies" shooting up schools and other places where people gather to work, pray, play, learn, and so on. While the actual numbers of people killed in these incidents are not actually very large, they DO get a great deal of media and "anti-gun" attention. That attention is not entirely unwarranted: It is a lot easier to be very upset about some lunatic murdering sometimes numerous innocent people, especially the young, at a time, than it is when it's gangs and / or drug dealers going at each other.
Now, the troubling thing is that in almost all these mass killing incidents, there are indications before the killer starts murdering people that a loose nut has begun rolling around. Gun control advocates advocate their arguments, failing to realize that their approach will not be very effective, here in the US: There is simply too much "weaponry" in public hands to reduce it's prevalence enough to keep guns out of the hands of evil doers. In addition, many millions of righteous people will NOT peaceably give up their means of defense against all sorts of threats: Confiscation attempts would lead to a hot civil war with deaths dwarfing what is happening now. Essentially the control / confiscation advocates hasten the day TSHTF, and most likely worsen it. People like David Hogg and Nancy Pelosi have NO idea what forces they are messing with.
On "our" side, we often hear that "we" need to lock up the loonies. But who is "we"? Do we want the State to have the power to confiscate weapons from anyone they deem a threat? And how long is it before this sort of power devolves into politically based decisions, rather than true mental health based decisions? Safeguards? Uh, is this like our Constitutional "safeguards" to keep Government small and limited? And do we need to gum up our courts further, with millions of contested cases (because that's where it will likely end up)?
I suggest that perhaps, somehow, the answer is in the "we" I just mentioned. We who support our 2nd Amendment rights are best suited to do the policing. The question, my question, is, how to accomplish this? I think a requirement is that we have to have serious "skin in the game' -- ie., direct financial risk if we judge poorly or irresponsibly. Beyond this is where I fully admit this notion is not "complete". I perceive all sorts of legal hurdles, but I am no legal or even Constitutional "expert". I can even see that perhaps the 2nd Amendment needs to be modified for less room for interpretation or distortion, but I am hardly the person to come up with the language! Maybe with that clarity the freedoms end could be in practice expanded, but perhaps the idea of more responsibility for it's beneficiaries needs to be addressed as well. (Is the old Swiss System defined comprehensively in their Constitution? I have not looked it up.)
What do FReepers suggest?
Maybe that title should be: “Do defenders of the 2nd Amendment need to take a new direction?” :-)
We need a series of regional “Star Chambers”, of specially-selected and capable DEA/NSA/Military/Police/Civilians to decide that all MS-13 and drug dealers need “neutralizing”. ID them, track them down and exterminate them all.
Well known to authority nut cases need to be institutionalized for their own good. This latest shooter is dead along with 12 others because society failed him and us. Who’s rights are being protected by current policies? Not his Not ours Not the victims.
The problem is that when the RATs are in power they will turn those forces against their political opponents, as they did the DOJ, FBI and IRS.
Gun violence is predominantly found 4 of 5 cities such as Chicago and Baltimore if you removed these cities you would find the U.S.A. Has one of the least gun associated crimes. These cities have the same common denominator, THEY ALL HAVE THE MOST RESTRICTIVE GUN CONTROL POLICIES IN THE NATION, THEY ARE ALL CONTROL BY, AND HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, THEY ARE PREDOMINATELY BLACK WITH HIGH DRUG PROBLEMS. CHECK OUT HEYJACKASS.COM SOMETIME
Here’s a thought — we set up, WITH **LOCAL** sheriff’s help and oversight, well-regulated militia. We become non-sworn extensions of their departments, or perhaps, we invest in POST training and become sworn LEOs with VERY restricted duties and roles.
Were we to set up recognized well-regulated militia in service to school safety, etc etc., it would be a true deterrent and live defense of the defenseless, it would improve OUR skills, and it would remove ANY objection from the anti-s, due to adherence to EVERY argued word of the 2nd Amendment.
Said militia WOULD be self-funded, with volunteers.
one thing needing doing... is to restore firearms safety training, target practice, and shooting sports in high schools
Like you said--a certain amount of violence will exist due to freedom, but I think even more violence will exist if they take that freedom away.
There’s plenty of laws already on the books, but they’re not being totally enforced or only enforced when there is political gain from it.
Only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun. It’s been that way from the beginning. Our so-called “civilized, snowflaked, bleeding heart, coward, society” has totally lost sight of that fact.
Bring back “WANTED, DEAD or ALIVE” posters for the most vile amongst us and hunt em like the animals they are. There are some folks out there that would have bad guys stacked up like cordwood outside the courthouse waiting for their paycheck.
There is an excellent book that has the answers you seek. It’s called, “That Every Man Be Armed,” by Stephen P Halbrook.
Also available in audiobook format.
He goes into great detail into the history of the second amendment, dating all the way back to Plato and Aristotle.
I believe that we can secure it by doing what we always do. By being good people, caring about innocent lives and knowing that our actions reflect on all gun owners nationwide.
But we can gain politically by telling our elected folks about the history of past leaders how they were able to maintain the love of the people by trusting them to defend themselves with arms. Something of a, “If you trust us with this, we’ll trust you with that,” scenario.
Liberal democrats are unable to do this because they believe that there is no higher authority than the state. Therefore, those people should never be given power in government.
Suburban home invasions make them nervous, but fortunately those are not too frequent and the media tends not to report on those.
Negligent shootings involving children and mass shootings are their bread and butter. To quiet the anti-gunners, figure out how to combat those.
Violence is unavoidable. Criminals don’t obey laws and neither do tyrants. Our only choice is whether normal people will be armed or just the unarmed victims of those who would harm us.
The problems with mass shootings today are (1) the empty lives experienced by those who fall for leftist propaganda lead to suicidal ideation along with a desire to be noticed, even if that notice is posthumous, and (2) the media’s fixation on modern mass shootings as a political tool to blame guns guarantees that the losers who commit those crimes will get the notoriety they seek. We cannot easily fix either problem.
If we could back up a minute and unload on some of the facts that I have gathered over the years from the FBI website and research.
#1-—I have averaged the gun laws among the states. They average 75-200 or more per state. That does not include municipal/local laws as well. On average there’s 6,250 state laws.
#2-— There’s almost 460 pages of ATF laws that cover just about everything the media pushes for-—prohibited buyers, sellers, crazies, etc. We have seen in the past, the government that oversees these laws dropped the call numerous times.
#3-—Reality. 67% of gun deaths are suicide and our suicide rate is lower than Japan, France and Iceland per 100,000. Then 15%-18% is justifiable or self defense (Police, security, law officers, etc) That’s 85% of 33,000 which is 4950 deaths per year. But I’m not finished. 85% of that 15% is gang violence (drug lords, drug deals, hardened criminals, etc). That leaves us with about 742 deaths per year used via firearms. 1950’s levels...
A country with 300+ million guns, 3D printing, illegal machine shops it will be impossible to ban guns and will only hurt citizens. So what changed? Our society and social changes——progressivism. Were drugs a problem in the 1940’s? Was divorce? Were families broken like they are today? No——so what changed? We are an “anything goes society” and sadly, anything goes. The surface problems are simply masking what’s underneath, a society where everything is devalued (life), where if you don’t get what you want you can be angry. Teachings of hatred and revenge. Acceptance of justification for anger and attacks. Unless the problem of progressivism is reversed, it will not change. That’s where we need to start.
Years back Texas built a lot of prisons. The problem is recidivism, and we need to figure out a way to keep these folks in prison. Sheriff Joe has the right idea. Tent prisons, work details, lousy food. Life should be hard for inmates. Now it’s a vacation away from crime. We need to increase capacity instead of catch and release.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.