Good on you! Certainly the case that a large proportion of gun owners have sound rationale. It's just a shame that a significant proportion of demand reflects unjustified fear.
Which amounts to none at all, since there is no registration of firearms. And such laws are easily ignored as it is impossible to enforce them without the corresponding registration of every single firearm in existence. As per the findings of the department of justice.
Irrational or otherwise is subjective from one person to another, and does not change the fact the culture of the united states is predicated on fear.
Your "general rule" is just your opinion, not based on any kind of data. It's less valid than an anecdote.
Is there any evidence that this is a real problem? Are law-abiding sellers really transferring guns to criminals frequently? I recognize that theoretically this is possible, but I have yet to read any article that shows any data that it's a real problem. The real problem is straw purchasers, which basically speaking, are impossible to stop.
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. If draconian gun laws were effective, then Chicago, Baltimore, L.A. etc wouldn't have such high homicide rates. I don't believe that even comparing the differing US States is valid in that they vary so much in so many different ways. Nobody agrees on the number of times that a DGU (Defensive Gun Use) has saved someone from being murdered, raped, severely beaten or robbed but some estimates are higher than over 2 million unreported DGUs per year. Until those unreported DGUs can be factored in, any conclusion that fewer guns mean fewer gun deaths is flawed. During my life I have been forced into 3 DGUs with one of them involving saving non gun owning, pro gun control neighbors from home invaders after the home invaders had cut the phone lines (This was before cell phones were pervasive.) Those same neighbors became gun owners 2 days later and no longer support gun control after learning the hard way that criminals really do not obey laws, including gun laws. Regarding gun suicides, I became intimately aware that a determined individual will kill themselves with or without a gun present while I worked on an Emergency Psychiatric Unit for a large inner city for 10 years. As a "Scratch n' Dent" Veteran, I've been trained in the use of a wide variety of firearms & since I no longer compete in bicycle racing & contact sports (wrestling, boxing, football etc), target shooting is one of the activities I can still enjoy. At any rate, it is unlikely that any significant gun control measures will become law under the current U.S. administration nor are they likely to fare well in the face of Trump appointed judges.
The license is required to sell guns as a business. A private individual selling a couple guns from his private collection every now and again does not quality.
Basic error! No one suggests that only guns impact on homicide rates. You're therefore deliberately pushing spurious conclusion.
I didn't expect to find an answer to this, but here it is. "Behavior is an expression of the problem, not the problem." If SPECT imaging is as promising as this video portrays, we could track potential mass shooters by periodically scanning the brain of every citizen throughout their lifetime.
I would. Make it a national service, not a militia. That way those green peoole .Could work In parks and rec. Etc.not everyone should be in the military Y
If we can register the names of all american's, give them car license, ensure most of the population has taken a few vaccines to get rid of a sickness, then I think we can get a decent amount of americans to take brain scans every 5 or 10 years depending on their brain results. It wont be easy, but that's all in the details.
In my humble opinion, probably the single most impactful thing we can do to reduce gun violence is to encourage and support the nuclear family - two parent families. Along with that, I believe that children should be taught that there is absolute "right" and absolute "wrong", absolute "good" vs absolute "evil". Not just "acceptable" vs "inappropriate" behavior. Not just behavior that we "have issues" with. Not just "good consequences vs bad consequences". And parents must not enable and defend their kids when they're wrong. Teaching morality matters. It should be taught at home, in school, and in the media and entertainment industry. Seth
Without going into the science of understanding what we know, don’t know, and find promising about understanding brain functions and behavior using brain scans as a tool, there is are reasons why polygraph tests are inadmissible in court, why brain scans haven’t been accepted as a polygraph alternative, why DNA samples are not manditory for all citizens, and why astrologists aren’t consulted in criminal cases and phrenology isn’t used in building a criminal case. One of those reasons isembedded in the BOR.
What exactly isn't occurring? Thanks to the success of vaccination, the last natural outbreak of smallpox in the United States occurred in 1949. In 1980, the World Health Assembly declared smallpox eradicated (eliminated), and no cases of naturally occurring smallpox have happened since. https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/index.html We've been able to give enough people vaccines to eradicate smallpox, polio, and other diseases. Most drivers have licenses and car insurance. If I'm not mistaken, all US Citizens are registered through social security, legal residents have green cards, we all have passports... these are all examples of our ability to implement systems and procedures across a broad range of individuals. I still think we are capable of the occasional brain scan. If you disagree, please elaborate.
Are you referring to the fourth amendment? What other reasons are you referring to? If I'm not mistaken, I think phrenology was used in the past to subjugate african americans, is this what you're referring to? I wouldn't compare astrology and phrenology to SPECT imaging. There is a lot we don't understand about the brain, but there is also a lot we do understand -like which lobes are responsible for which actions or processes. We also know that our cells need oxygenation, and that the brain receives this nourishment via blood pumping through it. SPECT imaging shows us which parts of the brain are not receiving proper oxygenation, which tend to correlate with perceived behavior. In the video, it explains that a cyst was removed from the brain of an abnormally violent child and "he became the sweet loving boy he always wanted to be."
Are you advocating looking at someone's brain scan and deciding to limit their rights based on what you saw?
