School/Mass shootings what's the answer?

[VikingsGuy]

Well, you should care at some point, because the last attempt to close "the gun show loophole" would end up with a lot of you being felons, had that legislation gone through. fortunately it was voted down, but It was written so that if my firearm of any kind, ended up in your possession without me being present I would, by the new law, be a felon and subject to all of the ramifications that go along with it such as no longer being allowed to own a firearm. Hope you like bow hunting.
So, for example, say you and I are going hunting or maybe coming back and we both drive but as we break up hunting camp my rifle ends up in your truck. No big deal, right. We'll just get the gear right when we get back to town at your place. except the game check station notices and now I am a felon. Insert the scenario for going to the range or where ever.
Gives you an idea of liberties they left takes when you are 'just trying to do the right thing."

This anecdote overstates reasonable concern for a number of reasons. First, not sure that this anecdote is grounded in facts rather than lore. Second, this type of overly broad drafting could have been cleaned up with minor amendments if a pro 2A person was productively at the table instead of standing outside with a "hell no" banner. Third, it is not clear that even if such fuzzy language survived that courts or LEO would interpret as such. Fourth, if that ended up the law I would take the 2 minutes to get the right guns in the right truck -- how lazy and sloppy do we as gun owners need to be.

 

[mtmiller]

I think that is indicative of the area of the country the convention you attend is in. I have only been to one convention and it was in CA. Very diverse crowd. Currently I believe the NRA has about 40% women and around 40% minorities.

Apparently not the same cross section that attended last years convention. Few pics to roll through 1/2 way down.
https://www.nraam.org/

It will be interesting to see if they end up changing the title of the page.

Once again, all in fun.

 

[Tradewind]

This anecdote overstates reasonable concern for a number of reasons. First, not sure that this anecdote is grounded in facts rather than lore. Second, this type of overly broad drafting could have been cleaned up with minor amendments if a pro 2A person was productively at the table instead of standing outside with a "hell no" banner. Third, it is not clear that even if such fuzzy language survived that courts or LEO would interpret as such. Fourth, if that ended up the law I would take the 2 minutes to get the right guns in the right truck -- how lazy and sloppy do we as gun owners need to be.

My understanding is the legislation that went to committee vote had this language in it. If you have something different, post it. So now you get to go fight it in court. And you have solved what vs what you have now created. And your firearms have never gotten out of your sight nor will again? You're willing to acquiesce to that world. Good luck.

 

[Gut Shot]

But again, at times emotion and politics trumps logic. There will be additional gun regulation in the US over the next 10 yrs, just as 15 yrs ago it was clear the Feds were going to get heavy into medical care -- the choice for public land hunters is do we want to be part of crafting a compromise or do we want to just take what they hand us. Demographics are doing no favors to hunters and gun owners over the next 20 years. A ridiculously large percentage of our voting population will be urban with no personal experience with guns - not good for us. In the face of this reality, as a gun owner and as a 2nd amendment supporter, I would like to make some reasonable changes and get this issue down from boil to a simmer so future emotional voters can turn their attention to something else.

Compromise: settle a dispute by mutual concession.

Mutual concession means each side gives something. I see me giving up something and getting nothing in return. Where is the compromise?

 

[VAspeedgoat]

The above CANNOT be emphasized enough. I keep saying to friends/family in person and I'll keep saying it here. If we, as responsible sportsmen and firearm owners, don't come up with real, and reasonable, solutions/suggestions , the other side is going to make the new laws without us.

I live in Broward County, about 15 minutes south of the school where the shooting took place. Our Sheriff, Scott Israel, is talking about banning certain types of firearms outright. At some point, our laws WILL change as an emotional response to shootings like this. I just hope that we haven't shoved our heads so far in the sand, and been so unmovable, that we lose even more of our rights that we ever thought possible.

Your last paragraph is what concerns me the most. I think the reaction to more shooting and no changes on guns will be overwhelmingly terrible for even sportsmen with a few hunting rifles. I'm sure this is where someone will post the poem about "a little tear let me down" or just say the next steps will be to completely ban all guns. Unfortunately I feel that no give and all take will lead us to that very quickly. So what if the loophole wouldn't have prevented this, does that mean don't change it? It's petty fights like this that will lead us to our new prohibition if we don't take the lead.

 

[VAspeedgoat]

Compromise: settle a dispute by mutual concession.

Mutual concession means each side gives something. I see me giving up something and getting nothing in return. Where is the compromise?

My concern is no compromise will lead to a repeal of the 2nd. So my answer would be you concede an ar-15 and keep your remington 700 ( or whatever ). I'm sure you disagree that this is the end result and truthfully I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

 

[Gut Shot]

My concern is no compromise will lead to a repeal of the 2nd. So my answer would be you concede an ar-15 and keep your remington 700 ( or whatever ). I'm sure you disagree that this is the end result and truthfully I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

OK, fair enough, lets say I jump over to fantasy land and give up my AR-15. What concession will I need to make the next time some jackass kills a bunch of kids? Will my Remington 700 be on the block then?

Make no mistake, repeal of the 2nd amendment is the end game for the left.

Edit to add. I don't think things are as bad as some here are making it out to be. Let this settle down for a few weeks. Let the next sensational news headline hit the media and distract the sheep and I think the over the top gun ban/do something about guns movement will fade away.

 

[Straight Arrow]

So what if the loophole wouldn't have prevented this, does that mean don't change it? It's petty fights like this that will lead us to our new prohibition if we don't take the lead.

I agree. The worn out slippery slope argument is a red herring slimy excuse to do nothing. (Stick your head in the sand.)

 

[BrentD]

Make no mistake, repeal of the 2nd amendment is the end game for the left.

The left is not one unified whole with a single mindset or objective. Never mind an end game.

Nor is the right.

If we can't stop talking about our issues without this simplistic "them or us" perspective, we will not succeed in anything.

 

[Tradewind]

This anecdote overstates reasonable concern for a number of reasons. First, not sure that this anecdote is grounded in facts rather than lore. Second, this type of overly broad drafting could have been cleaned up with minor amendments if a pro 2A person was productively at the table instead of standing outside with a "hell no" banner. Third, it is not clear that even if such fuzzy language survived that courts or LEO would interpret as such. Fourth, if that ended up the law I would take the 2 minutes to get the right guns in the right truck -- how lazy and sloppy do we as gun owners need to be.

The larger point is it is really hard to get any compromise without the left inserting some sort of amendment like that in. It's hard enough when there isn't a shooting. Probably impossible now with the hysterics I see on the channels when I do watch them. I think the admin is doing well to engage and listen. But you had better care what the conversation is

 

[VAspeedgoat]

OK, fair enough, lets say I jump over to fantasy land and give up my AR-15. What concession will I need to make the next time some jackass kills a bunch of kids? Will my Remington 700 be on the block then?

Make no mistake, repeal of the 2nd amendment is the end game for the left.

Edit to add. I don't think things are as bad as some here are making it out to be. Let this settle down for a few weeks. Let the next sensational news headline hit the media and distract the sheep and I think the over the top gun ban/do something about guns movement will fade away.

I can't disagree with your edit. After the cnn town hall last night the timer is reset, but we'll see in a week. I knew a politician that said a week is a long time in politics. Thats been the case in the past for sure. What concerns me on this one is their momentum. The students have raised something like 3.5 million in a week. Mostly for a new building but thats a pile of money really fast.

 

[6mm Remington]

Great piece, thanks for posting that. Invite him to join this forum.

I did but he is pretty busy and he does post on the Nosler Forum quite a bit. Some really great people on that forum such as Dr. Mike.

 

[Irrelevant]

Make no mistake, repeal of the 2nd amendment is the end game for the left.

Then let's get out there and start inviting them hunting. I have yet to meet anyone from any political spectrum that can't support subsistence hunting for food. If you get them hooked on deer hunting they'll be less inclined to fear all guns. I'm taking two, new hunter out this fall, both a liberals, both want organic meat that they can feel proud to eat.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Compromise: settle a dispute by mutual concession.

Mutual concession means each side gives something. I see me giving up something and getting nothing in return. Where is the compromise?

I offer while laughing, but pretty close to the reality for at least 50 million Americans. ---> A list of my mother-in-law's concessions: 1. You get to kill animals in the first place 2. You get to own a firearm of any kind 3. You can take the firearm outside of your home 4. Did she mention that you can kill animals? 5. Did she mention you can own a firearm at all?

Ridiculous, yes, but be fully aware, the opponents in this debate already feel that they have given 95% of the way to start with, with only a little comfort in Class III framework and background checks with big gaps.

 

[Straight Arrow]

The students have raised something like 3.5 million in a week. Mostly for a new building but thats a pile of money really fast.

I think that portends to the evolution of this firearms issue. It will soon no longer be simply a left versus right divisiveness. The big battle ramping up is Generation Z versus the NRA ... and Gen Z will be voting and running for office in a short blink.

 

[fwagner]

Make no mistake, repeal of the 2nd amendment is the end game for the left.

Statements like this just demonstrate your lack of ability to be objective and look at a complex issue. There is no such thing as the "left" or the "right". I don't know many voters who can be summed up that easily. Also there is no evidence or poll that shows that 50% of America wants to get rid of the second amendment. Take the time to look into a issue, read, research, or don't say anything at all.

 

[schmalts]

This....https://www.facebook.com/GovMattBevin/videos/1810412182592000/

 

[cgarner]

I offer while laughing, but pretty close to the reality for at least 50 million Americans. ---> A list of my mother-in-law's concessions: 1. You get to kill animals in the first place 2. You get to own a firearm of any kind 3. You can take the firearm outside of your home 4. Did she mention that you can kill animals? 5. Did she mention you can own a firearm at all?

Ridiculous, yes, but be fully aware, the opponents in this debate already feel that they have given 95% of the way to start with, with only a little comfort in Class III framework and background checks with big gaps.

Not to knock your mother-in-law, this is more of a general statement. To bad people that think that way aren't educated on the thousands of gun laws on the books. Granted the total number of laws is somewhat dubious, but that is why there needs to be a multi-pronged approach. I think if folks like your mother-in-law pointed out other avenues to secure schools along with gun laws then the discussion would be more of a discussion instead of a debate. That goes for the other side as well.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Statements like this just demonstrate your lack of ability to be objective and look at a complex issue. There is no such thing as the "left" or the "right". I don't know many voters who can be summed up that easily. Also there is no evidence or poll that shows that 50% of America wants to get rid of the second amendment. Take the time to look into a issue, read, research, or don't say anything at all.

Last Gallup poll I saw a year or so ago said that 22% of Americans strongly support the banishment of all firearms by private citizens for any reason. So, not 50%, but still a number to recon with. A number of polls have shown this in the 15-24% range over recent memory. In turn about 8-10% believe we should have no limitations on the 2nd amendment. Around 80% of American want a universal background check for all transfers and about 85% want "scary black gun" ban. So, it is just a matter of time for those two. FWIW - I am OK with universal background check, 10 day wait, and Class III for AR-style weapons and high volume rifle cartridge pistols. I would also like a unified "shall issue" national conceal carry permit system -- take the classes, carry in all 50 states - would be a lot simpler.

 

[FAIR CHASE]

This....https://www.facebook.com/GovMattBevin/videos/1810412182592000/

Thank you for that link. So well stated.