Something must change

[Kennah]

I suspect the odds of any new federal gun legislation passing in the next 2 years are very close to zero. There is a small chance that something will change regarding the reporting of mental illness to NCIC, but again I stress a small chance.

There will be talk of a renewed Assault Weapon (AW) and Large Capacity Magazine (LCM) ban, but the 1994 law didn't actually ban possession, ownership, sale, use, or carry of anything already legally owned. With perhaps another million AWs and 10 million LCMs sold since 2004, the effect of a new AW/LCM law would be even more ineffective.

I am one who carries concealed, owns a couple of AWs and a number of LCMs, but two weeks after Newtown the event has not left me. Something must change.

Perhaps the NRA's odious in your face approach will start to turn things around. Who knows. I haven't sent them money in years, and I don't plan to start. I don't see a lot of value in a George H. W. Bush resignation, since they won't give a shit. Seems better to remain a member and perhaps just become annoying to them. Once again, they won't give a shit, but at least my membership costs them a few dollars every year in mailing costs.

Maybe a new AW/LCM ban will be a step towards something more meaningful in 4 or 8 years. If so, then for that reason I support renewal.

[LAGC]

1. You could always give yours up if you're feeling guilty about them.

I hear "AWs" and "LCMs" are fetching a pretty penny right now at the gun show circuit...

Personally, I'm going to wait a year until after this has all has blown over, the flood of all the stuff being snapped up right now is going to saturate the market, wouldn't be surprised if we saw AK's for under $300 and cases of ammo for under $100 again.

I mean, if this tragedy can't get gun control done in this country, nothing will.

[gejohnston]

2. What would you like to see changed?

I would like to see a change in their board of directors. Not being a member, let alone a voting member, I have no say in that. That isn't changing in the foreseeable future.
What I would like to see happen is a conversation about dealing with the root problems and fixing them. Right now we have extremists on both sides of the gun issue and know nothing pundits violating local gun laws while walking and being childish by yelling "your stupid. Oh yeah,

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/poll-51-percent-dont-want-gun-ban-85512.html

[Kennah]

6. With the NRA? I really don't expect any change.

Realistically, I think we need new regulation of all semiautos, but something not quite as restrictive as NFA. That, I believe, is doable. Regulation, without a ban, even a manufacturing ban, I believe would be far more possible.

[gejohnston]

8. even if possible and done

I seriously don't think it would make the streets safer. I seriously doubt it will satisfy the "antis" either. It is an all out culture war. Today's acceptable bolt action hunting rifle will be tomorrow's sniper rifle that needs to be banned. The OK pistol today will be the "hand machine gun", as Australian "antis" are starting to call them, and the double action revolver loophole.
Anyone who wants to base public policy based on "what I think you need" based no knowledge of the subject matter in any way is not to be trusted.

[Kennah]

11. I seriously doubt that in my lifetime ...

... the US will do anything approaching the restrictions of the UK or Australia, but even if they did, I am not sure it would be a bad thing.

[gejohnston]

13. good or bad is a value judgement

but I don't see it making the world a safer place either. Hasn't in either of those two. Might prevent the next rare mass shooting but the place would be taken by a home invasion victim that won't make the news.

[Kennah]

14. Not many home invasions are stopped by an AR and 200 rounds

At least not in suburban settings. Occassionally there is the need for a rifle in a rural setting.

Rather than good or bad, perhaps I should have said, "It may actually be useful and lead to greater safety long term."

[gejohnston]

16. using UK as an example

I don't think so.

[virginia mountainman]

3. The thing that has to change..

Is we need more mental health care in this nation..

Any registration, gun or accessory ban is a complete non-starter. If your so troubled by them, sell me yours.

The "in your face" approach the gun control movement has used over the past 20 years, has only hurt them, and their supporters.

[Kennah]

7. Never said I was troubled by the guns I owned.

But I am very deeply troubled by the number of deeply troubled people with guns.

[gejohnston]

9. if he would have used a katana

or a machete and killed the same number of kids just as fast, how would that effect you? The mistake the UK made was that they did a duct tape and band-aid that banned the guns used in the previous mass murder. But they didn't do anything to prevent the next one. Then the next one happened. It kind of reminds me of the beat poet William S. Burroughs observation that "After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it."

[Kennah]

10. There are not very many mass knifings, swordings, or machetations that result in 26 dead

[gejohnston]

12. not here

few shootings too.

[Kennah]

15. Mass shootings are pretty much everywhere in the U.S.

[gejohnston]

17. according to the map I saw

spree murders were concentrated too. True, the can happen anywhere, but seemed to start only in the past 30 years. I'm interested in learning why. Otherwise, it is more band-aids and duct tape.

[Kennah]

18. Just over 30 years ago, a B grade actor got elected, and I'm betting that was a factor in cause

Our safety nets have been weakened, and economic disparity is one of the prime contributory factors.

[gejohnston]

19. agreed

plus FDA approving some fucked up drugs. Each one of these cases is mental health failure. How many are because of dangerous legal drugs?

[Kennah]

20. Definitely another factor, but one cannot pretend guns are not part of the equation.

[gejohnston]

21. only the means

and I'm not a fan of basing public policy on "black swan" events, especially policies that are based on culture war than public safety. Otherwise, I think Bill Ruger had the right idea.

[Kennah]

22. Easy access to guns certainly facilitated Newtown and other killings

Maybe without guns, some of the intelligent among the murderous would resort to bombs and inflict more carnage. However, if they really are smarter than average bears, then they would already be able to figure out to build a bomb and inflict the carnage.

[gejohnston]

23. we would have to study

each individual. IIRC, Holmes did have bombs. Of course, that would be balanced by the number of dead home invasion victims during that same time.

[Kennah]

24. Armed response to home invasion is rare

[gejohnston]

26. doesn't have to be that common to top a black swan event

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory
Although I doubt they are that rare.
My first reaction was similar to yours, then I started to look at in the larger context once I reflected more.

[GreenStormCloud]

25. Simple instructions for bombs are on the internet.

Anarchist's Cookbook is available on Amazon.

Instructions for poison gases can be found on the internet. Since many of them are from before WWI, they aren't cutting edge chemistry.

The point is that they don't need to reinvent the wheel. Remember Oklahoma City, killed 168? Happy Land arson in 1990 in NYC that killed 87? Bath Township bombing in 1927 killed 44? In 1995 radicals released Sarin gas in a subway in Japan, killed six and injured hundreds. The last member of the plot was arrested in January 2012. When people have a will to do evil, no law will stop them.

[Kennah]

27. Bombings tend to be political, and arson deaths are 300-500 per year in U.S.

Capitalism is probably the biggest factor in most arson deaths, not malice.

[GreenStormCloud]

28. You missed the point.

I am saying that a person CAN do those things if they want to.

[brindleboxer]

4. I certainly understand...

the felt need to "do something" in the wake of a tragedy like this, but that doesn't mean we should do something ineffective, intrusive and politically calamitous just to say we tried. There are things we can do which are sensible and will help, but also don't involve the wholesale ban of entire classes of weapons and which won't provoke a backlash from gun owners. An AWB is meaningless, unless you're going to ban all magazine fed semi autos (you're not) it is pointless.

A magazine capacity restriction makes more sense, though I still don't support it as at best it will minimally reduce the effectiveness of mass murders (a statistically insignificant part of gun murders) at the cost of a relatively significant and politically costly intrusion into our 2a rights.

Cracking down on trafficking, increasing background checks and mental health reporting to NICS will have a much better effect and wont piss nearly as many people off.

[DemDealer]

5. We're supposed to be uniters and organizers.

What must change is the obsession with issues that split the country in two, and distract the public from more pressing national problems like the debt crisis and ridiculous wars. M2C.