The Gun Control Debate Thread

[Cotton]

So sick of the if you want a gun to commit a crime, well he's going to find a gun.

Such fucking bullshit.

At least we can do is take away all the legal means to buy a gun for these crazy motherfuckers.

But no, the NRA fights tooth and nail for psychopaths to have easy access to guns as well because it is our god given fucking right as Amuricans!!

Yeah, because that cocaine is easy to get. We need to make it illegal so people can't get it!

Wait...

 

[Cotton]

Trump budget would cut millions in school safety funds


President Trump’s proposed 2019 budget would cut millions of dollars from federal education programs designed to help school districts improve safety and provide mental health assistance in the event of a tragedy.

The budget proposal, which was unveiled earlier this week by the White House, would reduce funding for national school safety activities by $25 million compared to 2017, Politico reported.

That reduction would include the elimination of “project prevention grants,” which have helped schools across the country fund conflict resolution programs, prevent bullying and pay for mental health assistance for students.

Politico reports the budget would also cut the $1 million in funding for the School Emergency Response to Violence (SERV) program, which has previously provided millions in funding to the school district in Newtown, Conn., following the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

The program’s website says it funds services to help students “recover from a violent or traumatic event in which the learning environment has been disrupted.”

Liz Hill, an Education Department spokesperson, told Politico that the SERV program’s $5.2 million carry-over funds will allow it to function in the 2019 fiscal year.

Hill also told the newspaper that the department is "committed to providing resources, direct support and technical assistance to schools who have suffered unthinkable tragedy."

Trump’s budget proposal contains cuts to many federal agencies, including the State Department, the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, while increasing funding for the Pentagon. It also includes funding for a wall long the U.S.-Mexico border.

Politico's report on how the White House budget would affect school safety funding follows a mass shooting at a Florida high school on Wednesday that left 17 students and faculty dead and more than a dozen others injured.

In a speech Thursday, Trump said making schools safer was a “top priority” for his administration.

"Later this month, I will be meeting with the nation’s governors and attorney generals, where making our schools and our children safer will be our top priority," Trump said.

"It is not enough to simply take actions that make us feel like we are making a difference. We must actually make that difference," he added.

That title is so fucking misleading. Jesus Christ, at least try to veil the bias at least a little bit.

 

[Cotton]

Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses

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 rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database.

Had the rule fully taken effect, the Obama administration predicted it would have added about 75,000 names to that database.

President Barack Obama recommended the now-nullified regulation in a 2013 memo following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which left 20 first graders and six others dead. The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

The original rule was hotly contested by gun rights advocates who said it infringed on Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Gun control advocates, however, praised the rule for curbing the availability of firearms to those who may not use them with the right intentions.

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 president welcomed cameras into the oval office Tuesday for the signing of other executive orders and bills. News that the president signed the bill was tucked at the bottom of a White House email alerting press to other legislation signed by the president.

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.”

Everytown For Gun Safety President John Feinblatt said he expected more gun control rollbacks from the Trump administration. In a statement to NBC News, he called the action "just the first item on the gun lobby’s wish list" and accused the National Rifle Association of "pushing more guns, for more people, in more places."

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, called out Republicans over the move.

"Republicans always say we don’t need new gun laws, we just need to enforce the laws already on the books. But the bill signed into law today undermines enforcement of existing laws that Congress passed to make sure the background check system had complete information," he said in an emailed statement.

If that article were more slanted your drool would easily run off of it.

 

[Cotton]

1. We make it work with courthouses so gtfo with this bs
2. I'm ok with paying more taxes if it's clear this is what it's going for
3. Again I'm ok with paying more taxes if it's stipulated it goes to teachers who get certified to carry(they should def get a pay raise for doing this)

All my kids are out of school but I(and I'm sure most pro-2A) have no problem paying more if it's earmarked for this.

Absolutely.

 

[boozeman]

It would be outstanding to be able to legislate evil intent from society but unfortunately it just cannot be done. There is always a debate as to how it should be done but to my knowledge nothing has been successful in this regard.

Everyone agrees it should be done but cannot agree on how it is to be accomplished. On the matter of firearms the debate continues about whether the ability to own them is in fact the key to solving the problem. Nothing new here except the individuals only accomplish further polarization of political agendas.

It boils down to this. Change the heart of those who would perpurtrate their evil intentions with firearms or other destructive devices or change the way of how to acquire these devices. If anyone can solve it at this level then they will have a following from both sides of a polarized population. Easier said than done.

So basically you are saying do nothing.

I hate to break it to you, nobody can "change the heart" of bad people. And if you think you can, good luck trying, I would rather go after something that is feasible and/or attainable.

The best way to make a dent (not solve this) is to mitigate the circumstances.

If that means an extensive background check, longer waiting period, upping the age requirement, etc. for even a small segment of the weapons that are involved, that is doing something.

What exactly would enacting something like that hurt?

 

[Cotton]

Wait, so the issue is pissing off the militia idiots?

In all seriousness though, I am not pretending to know the reaction, but if pissing off a bunch of yahoos is a trade off to keeping kids safe or making it not a risk to go to a church, a movie or concert.

And BTW, the initiative I was referring to was not an outright ban. Read my post before that with other suggestions.

You need to educate yourself on what an AR-15 actually is. It is a .223. Meaning, a gun made for shooting coyotes. It is not this "assault rifle" the media wants to feed you. And, guess what, and I know this will come as a shocker, but most ARs don't look like a military weapon. ~gasp~ I know.

 

[Cotton]

Ok, I did miss that post of yours, my bad. I wouldn't object to raising the age requirement, I might even go farther than you and say 35. The rest though I have problems with.

Also I did not mean militias, I personally know hundreds of people with what non gun owners would consider arsenals that would not give them up without a fight

I'm okay with the min age being pushed back. I think 35 is a bit much, though.

 

[Cotton]

The ACLU has its own nutjob element to it anymore. When they start cite the Huffington Post as news to support their stance, I laugh.

It just happened to align with the NRA for once this time.

I wonder why that is.

 

[boozeman]

You need to educate yourself on what an AR-15 actually is. It is a .223. Meaning, a gun made for shooting coyotes. It is not this "assault rifle" the media wants to feed you. And, guess what, and I know this will come as a shocker, but most ARs don't look like a military weapon. ~gasp~ I know.

Looks like it is a gun made for shooting at a group of targets in schools, churches and concerts too by the looks of things.

But hey, gotta have them for that coyote control.

I don't give a shit what the fuck it is made for. There is little to no reason why some method of restriction on the ease to attain one would hurt anybody.

 

[Cotton]

Looks like it is a gun made for shooting at a group of targets in schools, churches and concerts too by the looks of things.

But hey, gotta have them for that coyote control.

I don't give a shit what the fuck it is made for. There is little to no reason why some method of restriction on the ease to attain one would hurt anybody.

Dude, the fucking point is that it is just like any other rifle. It can just be made to look all badass and shit, but it's not all that powerful a weapon. But, "assault" and all that.

 

[boozeman]

Dude, the fucking point is that it is just like any other rifle. It can just be made to look all badass and shit, but it's not all that powerful a weapon. But, "assault" and all that.

So why is it currently the weapon of choice for psychos? Just flavor of the moment?

 

[Cotton]

So why is it currently the weapon of choice for psychos? Just flavor of the moment?

Because it's cheap to make.

 

[L.T. Fan]

So basically you are saying do nothing.

I hate to break it to you, nobody can "change the heart" of bad people. And if you think you can, good luck trying, I would rather go after something that is feasible and/or attainable.

The best way to make a dent (not solve this) is to mitigate the circumstances.

If that means an extensive background check, longer waiting period, upping the age requirement, etc. for even a small segment of the weapons that are involved, that is doing something.

What exactly would enacting something like that hurt?

No I’m saying find a different way to trying to solve the problem instead of the same old knee jerk positions. It’s obvious those positions are essentially a do nothing approach and creates further polorazation.

I don’t know the answer but I know the approaches of the past are dead end roads. Something different will have to emerge or it’s business as usual.

Your suggestions may help but they will also be met with resistance.

 

[Cotton]

You know, we can debate guns all we want, but ultimately, the FBI knew about this fool and did nothing. That needs to be addressed.

 

[boozeman]

You know, we can debate guns all we want, but ultimately, the FBI knew about this fool and did nothing. That needs to be addressed.

They did investigate, but like every branch of the government, they were inefficient and inept due to bureaucracy.

 

[boozeman]

No I’m saying find a different way to trying to solve the problem instead of the same old knee jerk positions. It’s obvious those positions are essentially a do nothing approach and creates further polorazation.

I don’t know the answer but I know the approaches of the past are dead end roads. Something different will have to emerge or it’s business as usual.

Your suggestions may help but they will also be met with resistance.

So trying to change the "heart" of people is not a dead end road? Are you kidding me?

 

[boozeman]

Because it's cheap to make.

Whew, can't have the gun manufacturers take a hit on their profit margins. They might go out of business or something.

 

[Cotton]

They did investigate, but like every branch of the government, they were inefficient and inept due to bureaucracy.

And, they should be held accountable for that.

 

[Cotton]

Whew, can't have the gun manufacturers take a hit on their profit margins. They might go out of business or something.

You are suggesting that poor people should not be able to buy a gun, you racist.

 

[boozeman]

You are suggesting that poor people should not be able to buy a gun, you racist.

Guilty as charged then.