Solutions to Gun violence?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...olence/462537/

I'm going out the door - so I'll toss this out. Please solve the problems before I get back.

[Robinson]

This is not directed at the OP but rather at the linked article.

There are risks inherent in a free society. The Founders realized and put into law what should be considered the highest consideration in things related to arms -- the ability for citizens to keep and bear them freely. The intent, I believe, along with personal self defense is to guarantee that the citizenry is never outgunned by the federal government. The professional military has nothing to do with the question, as U.S. law prohibits its use for enforcement of domestic law. This holds true even if it means more guns are in circulation, as personal freedom and responsibility outweigh the fact that evildoers will put the instruments of self defense to unlawful use.

Gun violence cannot be gotten rid of as long as the Republic holds. What should have been done all along may never be possible now, since government programs to encourage what can truly be called responsible gun ownership (understanding of and adherence to the four rules, marksmanship, training, etc...) can't happen in today's political climate. Citizens had best prepare themselves and provide for their own self protection -- a personal solution to gun violence.

[Jeep]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...olence/462537/

I'm going out the door - so I'll toss this out. Please solve the problems before I get back.

I've never understood the stress on "gun" violence (unless, of course, as a rhetorical device to serve as support for a gun-banning agenda). Violence is inherent in human nature. We can reduce it--but never eliminate it. And since guys who are much larger than I are much more likely to win a contest involving spears, machetes, swords, knives, baseball bats, frying pans, knitting needles or pretty much everything else, I think the invention of the modern, reliable, firearm was a big step forward in human progress.

Guys who are 6'6" and 300 pounds might have a different point of view.

[FNFAN]

Put a 20 year sentence on top of the initial crime for any use of or possession of a firearm during a burglary, robbery, rape, kidnapping or delivery of narcotics. The 20 years would be non discretionary, I.e. could not be plea bargained and would begin after the sentence for the base crime is served.

Make the use of a firearm in a crime so problematic for career criminals that they're avoided and you'll eventually see another huge drop in their use in criminal acts.

You can either address behavior or availability and means. Addressing behavior means people using guns in crime go to prison. The other means getting rid of the guns.

[GardoneVT]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...olence/462537/

I'm going out the door - so I'll toss this out. Please solve the problems before I get back.

The solution is simple.
Hand out grand jury indictments at the Federal level against every politcian who profited or is profiting from gang violence, regardless of the skin color of said gangs members.

Did you or your campaign accept funds ,laundered or otherwise, from the work of thugs? Heres your suite at Club Fed. Sentence them to the same time the trigger men and kids get.

That'll cut down the "gun violence" stats immensely. So long as politicians cut deals in cities with criminals to get elected, the problem won't get solved-because they don't want it to be.

[Kukuforguns]

I've never understood the stress on "gun" violence (unless, of course, as a rhetorical device to serve as support for a gun-banning agenda).

The focus on "gun violence" absolutely pisses me off. The linked article cites to a National Journal article that demonstrates that states with tough gun laws generally have lower rates of homicides in which a gun was used. As Eugene Volokh pointed out though, there is no correlation between murder rate and tough gun laws. Why is it better to be killed with a knife than a gun? I can't think of a reason.

I also get pissed off when people throw the ~20,000 annual suicides by gun into the gun violence bin. Violence is harm directed at other people (unless you pay attention to the World Health Organization's definition). Self harm is not violence (there's a reason we call it self harm and not self violence).

I end up shouting at my radio/TV whenever I hear this kind of bullshit.

[voodoo_man]

"Gun violence" is a fictional term made up to isolate firearms as the problem and not the violence or offender.

It should be just "violence" or "criminal violence" so that the emphasis is added to the right concept.

If the courts did what they are supposed to do and sentence accordingly to the laws already on the books we wouldn't even be having this discussion, but they do not and there is no recourse, so here we are.

[TGS]

Put a 20 year sentence on top of the initial crime for any use of or possession of a firearm during a burglary, robbery, rape, kidnapping or delivery of narcotics. The 20 years would be non discretionary, I.e. could not be plea bargained and would begin after the sentence for the base crime is served.

Make the use of a firearm in a crime so problematic for career criminals that they're avoided and you'll eventually see another huge drop in their use in criminal acts.

I don't have any statistics to back this up, but my initial impression is that's not how it works. New Jersey has stiff penalties for firearms involved crime, and there's still plenty of people shooting each other....moreso than most other states. Depending on what year it is and how the survey is conducted/parameters, NJ can have up to 3 cities in the top 10 for violence nationwide.

[David S.]

"Gun violence" is a fictional term made up to.....

....politically charge the discussion.

-------------------
I believe that the individual has the responsibility to be his/her own primary solution to violence, not "society." If we actually had a nation of self-reliant grown ups, law enforcement's role would simply be viewed as supplemental in protecting the community. Based on that idealistic perspective, I think the entire discussion is a nonstarter.

On the other hand, we don't actually live in a free county, based on self-reliance and true liberty... Based on the love that Americans have for Leviathan, this article provides a pretty reasonable set of responses.*

*I did not follow the links in the article.

[voodoo_man]

....politically charge the discussion.

-------------------
I believe that the individual has the responsibility to be his/her own primary solution to violence, not "society." If we actually had a nation of self-reliant grown ups, law enforcement's role would simply be viewed as supplemental in protecting the community. Based on that idealistic perspective, I think the entire discussion is a nonstarter.

On the other hand, based on the Leviathan Lovin' society that we actually live in, this article provides a pretty reasonable set of responses.*

*I did not follow the links in the article.

I have this printed out and posted on a wall in my squads roll room