Most upvoted comment
Daily News cover(r/atheism)
Edit: Thaks for the gold anonymous strangers
Edit 2: Some clarifications
Edit 3: Sanitized for /r/bestof
(NOTE Many of the links referenced are not intended or implied to be exhaustive research, the were just simply ’bout the first thing I could find.)
So as a firearm enthusiast, I have to object to your parroting here. Everything you suggest (or others suggest) is either already in place, known to not work, or non-existent. Let me address:
> Limit the gun industry with regulations
1) The firearm industry is already so immeasurably straddled with regulations that it’s hard to put a meaningful metric on it. One tiny example: several ounces of metal and plastic in fairly basic shapes, which would cost on the order of cents to a few dollars and cents to produce and bring to market in any other industry costs on the order of $30 to bring to the market in the firearms industry.
To add to this, due to these regulations, firearms themselves are simply outrageously priced when compared to similarly complicated devices in other industries.
> remove their ability to lobby congress
2) So lobbying is a big, big problem (and I actually agree with you on this one in principle), but who gets to decide who get’s to lobby? I would suggest outlawing all lobbying, but for the time being, an industry lobbying for their dollar is little different than any other industry lobbying. You can’t say one industry or interest can or cannot lobby. This should be applied to big oil, big pharma, big banks, etc. All of which can be accused of killing far more people than firearms.
Personal anecdote: I don’t like the NRA any more than you do. But they’re the only one protecting a not-insubstantial investment I’ve made and a hobby I enjoy. So I give them a non-insubstantial amount of money every year. If there were a better way, I would do it, but there’s a heavily mis-informed level of hostility based on non-truths or barely-truths that I (and other firearm owners) have nowhere else to turn to.
CASE IN POINT:
> close the gun show loop holes
3) There is no such thing as the “gun show loophole”.
EDIT FOR CLARITY: I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t do away with private sales, what I’m taking offence to is a made up term for a made up problem that simply does not exist PDF WARNING. It’s a little old–and there’s a newer one somewhere, I just can’t find it–but 0.7%, that’s 7 out of 1000–not total guns, criminals that got their guns at gun shows.
There’s not even a written exemption for private-party sales, it’s simply a side-effect of the Commerce Clause of the US constitution. A private person may sell a firearm to another private person provided they have no reason to believe the buyer is prohibited from buying a firearm, and can only do it in their home state to a resident of their home state. I’d also like to point out that it is ILLEGAL for a private seller to use the NICS (background check) system. If a widow inherits a bunch of guns, she is free to sell them to anybody she likes (with many exceptions), and if she chooses to, can rent a table at a gun show. This is the extent of that alleged “loophole.” With that said, and I’ve only been to a handful of gun shows, I’ve never once seen a private person offering firearms. The overwhelming majority are licensed dealers and the background check laws apply. There is no law anywhere in the country exempting gunshows from any state or federal firearms-related regulations.
Source…FTA: “The Gunshow Loophole…is a political term in the United States..[and]..refers to a perceived gap in the law regarding the sale or transfer of firearms between private citizens. (emphasis added).
> implement strict background checks
4) This already exists. I don’t know what exactly you mean by strict, but if you’ve been convicted of a felony or any other disqualifying circumstance applies to you, you won’t pass this. I’ve been through the background checks several dozens of times. They’re a pain in the ass. I should mention that I and my wife are model citizens. She’s a nurse while I’m an eagle scout, engineer, licensed pilot with access to the 911 facility in my town, every first-aid certification just short of EMT, volunteer emergency communications coordinator, storm chaser, and the department I manage at work handles 911 calls for THOUSANDS of businesses and residents.
If you’re suggesting the background checks involve (and be denied as a result) for any sort of brush with law enforcement…essentially anybody ever accused of a crime (I have been several times), then you start making a really slippery slope: Name one other constitutional right you forfeit because of an accusation? Remember, innocent until proven guilty. I get it, kids that show anti-social behavior and revolt against authority are an indicator, but are you seriously suggesting that every time some kid gets sent to the principal’s office that it trigger a federal investigation?
> take real action to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill
This I will completely f’ing agree with you on.
I don’t know how to do it, so if you have some ideas, let me know. Like really…seriously, I know congressmen, we all know this the biggest problem. As a gun owner, I can tell you we would all be really thrilled to put something in place that would ease the red-tape us normal, never-gonna-shoot-up-a-mall people have to deal with. We don’t like seeing this kind of stuff on TV either.
If you really want to know what annoys us…my guess is that you don’t, but if you do…is that every time something like this comes along, some new encroachment comes along and is just a pain in our asses while really doing nothing for the perceived problem.
NOTE: I’m kinda done digging up links, I will if you ask me to, but it’s getting late.
The FBI will tell you that mass shootings, while they’re a big deal, amount to a proportionately small number of casualties. I’m not trying to downplay them, but mass shootings amount for on the order of a couple hundred deaths a year. Falls from ladders kill more people than that.
You don’t get to count suicides as “gun deaths”. These people wanted to kill themselves and simply chose the most effective way to do so. Australia enacted sweeping firearm legislation and (as far as suicide goes) simply shifted the method of suicide to other means.
Magazine capacity laws are meaningless. The Virginia Tech shooter just carried more magazines. Here’s a video dispelling many of the things that capacity limits allege to produce.
No other industry is legally liable for the illegal use of their products.
Children finding guns and killing themselves is certainly tragic. That’s not, however, our (the proverbial our) fault. A negligent parent is a big deal. Now, what are you going to to? Send them to prison when their family has already suffered enough?
The vast majority of the remaining firearm related deaths (excluding suicide, genuine accidents, and legal killings) occur as minority on minority crime in major cities with (typically) stolen or otherwise illegally acquired guns. This is a function of income disparity, the drug war, and the poverty cycle coupled with violent culture. All the magazine capacity and background checks you can do won’t correct this. And what are you going to do, make somebody a criminal simply because they were a victim of a crime (having their gun stolen)?
EDIT: We don’t know right now, but there’s a very good chance that literally none of the proposed changes to firearms laws would have prevented this. If a “solution” can’t be shown to have done so, why consider it at all?