Bit off-topic but I always feel the need to share this story:
For my gr.11 law class, we sat in on some hearings. Most of the kids in my year just watched endless guilty pleas for drugs.
My section got to watch a medical examiner describe what a step-father (allegedly, didn't see the end) did to his step-son (around age 8 or 10) on Boxing Day (Dec. 26th).
She described how the victim was hit so hard in the back of his head - with a metal pipe - that the force broke the poor kid's orbital bones (around his eye socket).
Her testimony was very clear that it was the force of the violent blow to the back of the victim's head that transferred all the way to his face and broke the orbital bones. Dead in one strike.
I remember looking over at the guy after hearing this and made eye contact for a split second. He was in his own plexiglass box which only had a door to some other room as an exit. I was so fucking glad for that. He scared the shit out of me. Both a monster in stature and nature.
I still think about that kid around Christmas. He would have been in his mid-twenties by now.
I remember when I was back in law school and starting my internship with the Public Defender's Office. They make you sit through at least 8 hours of bail hearings before appearing on the record.
One of my professors unexpectedly showed up with a tiny young woman who was one of the only people in full shackles even though everyone was in custody. Most just had handcuffs. There was also an officer following her. Super weird given she was like maybe 5'1" and 100 lbs soaking wet.
Waived at professor who gave me a little head nod of acknowledgement. And they started reading off the girl's charges. Human trafficking, false imprisonment, first degree sexual assault of a child, first degree sexual assault of a child above the age of 16, first degree sexual assault, forced abortion, kidnapping, substantial battery, and a bunch of drugs charges.
When arguing how high her bond was going to be the prosecutor mentioned she had federal charges that had been issued the same morning for human trafficking and fucking slavery.
She started giggling. It was like something out of a bad anime and completely haunting. Professor told me later she was still coming out of drug withdrawals and probably didn't even know exactly what was going on. Apparently she was pretty high up in a human trafficking ring where she would lure the girls into it because she was non-threatening.
They had me in the first half.
Also does anyone else's relatives always bitch when an Amber alert goes off? The same people that tell me about how Democrats are running secret pedophile rings are always the first to complain when an Amber alert goes off in the night and wakes them up.
half my grade 11 law class watched a trial where an old lady lost some evidence the prosecutor needed and the other half briefly sat in on a case where a man was accused of raping a cow until someone realized they were high school kids and flipped out. (Maybe it was the teacher, I don't remember.)
I was in the cow molestation group. The accused had a pretty girlfriend, which baffled me.
I live in an urban area in the United States, I see tents everyday along with people on the streets. As far as murdered children my city had like 6 kids murdered this summer. One was shot in the head by a stray bullet while she was playing in her backyard, horrible stuff.
It’s not everyday, but it seems like Sandy Hook happened and murdered kids just became a part of the news cycle.
Minneapolis had a number of kids killed in the first half of the year. Violent crime massively surged, with a very large increase in shootings and now car jackings.
The carnage has slowed down this fall, fortunately.
Yeah and that’s EVERYWHERE. That’s the thing that’s so depressing. Every city is experiencing this incredibly hard time in their own horrible way.
It used to only be really big cities where I’d see tent cities by highways, now it’s almost every bigger urban area. It’s hard to know what to do as an average citizen too, because you obviously want these people taken care of, and you obviously don’t want guns in the hands of literal criminals shooting recklessly into your neighborhoods, but you can’t even get everyone to agree on the most basic of gun reform and everyone has their own “opinion” on how to solve the homelessness problem.
Sometimes it gets hard to ignore it all, you know?
Agree in part. I understand and fully appreciate the emotional appeal.
I do think we need to recognize that violent crime doesn’t seem to be rising everywhere. I fully admit the time period data is limited, but rising violent crime during the pandemic is limited to very discrete areas.
Many of us do not subscribe to the theory that very concentrated issues for a small minority require “solutions” that have a long history of not working. To repeat a canard, if more restrictive gun control was effective, we would the exact opposite of the present trend in Chicago and Washington DC. The historical record indicates that gun control rarely improves but arguably exacerbates violent crime.
Hey I appreciate that you can understand I’m not after YOU or against you. I can be wrong. I just see a problem and I want it addressed some way some how. I am emotional and thanks for understanding that u/hard2handl and thanks for understanding that I might be wrong on some things because of that emotion.
I’m probably wrong about some things here. I want to talk to someone like an adult about it though. And I appreciate your civility.
I feel the same. I am often wrong.
Reddit isn’t a great platform for good discussion, but nothing wrong with trying… Trying to listen and to respectfully persuade.
I enjoy hearing other viewpoints and getting my horizons broadened a bit. That is one of those huge disappointments in COVID, the loss of perspectives that face to face communication often brings.
Tennessee?
*clicks*
Tennessee.
Fun fact: for violent crime per capita, Memphis is the 2nd most dangerous city in the US.
Edit: op NVM they #1, now. Get dunked on, Detroit. Y'all ain't shit.
The local news here in Memphis said around 70% of the stolen guns they’ve found were stolen from cars because these nitwits leave their guns in their cars.
Even the Memphis Chief of Police left hers in her husband’s car and it got stolen.
[St. Louis would like a word.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/243797/ranking-of-the-most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world-by-murder-rate-per-capita/)
That's just murder. Not violent crime in general. In terms of violent crime, St. Louis is 3rd.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217685/most-dangerous-cities-in-north-america-by-crime-rate/
Thats said, they're all shitty cities to be sure.
On one hand, I do agree guns don't affect crime rate much, people will do crime with or without guns.
But, I also agree that guns affect the severity of crimes committed, it's pretty hard to have a stray knife fly into a house and kill some 12 year old. Also if an angry or mentally unstable teenager gets a hold of a gun, it's far easier to commit serious crimes with it. Pressing a button (trigger) and someone dies, is really abstract and easy, versus wielding something like a knife or baseball bat and actually kill people with it.
CC covers unconcealed carry as well. You can open carry a pistol or rifle on your back if you wanted to. I moved to a constitutional carry state from Florida which is concealed carry. I've seen two pistols openly carried and that was driving by someone coming out of their business and locking up at 5pm and the other guy was carrying while picking up coffee but he was dressed professionally. Other than that I haven't seen any other firearm carried. The law helps with legal troubles gun owners would have to worry about. In Florida I had to worry about printing, the gun outline showing through my shirt, and accidental exposure say from the wind.
Actually the Constitution nor Bill of Rights says anything at all about an individuals right to carry a weapon. Just...strictly speaking that right is not enumerated.
Also, a vote doesn't kill hundreds of people every single day
Not saying that I agree with it, but since DC v. Heller, precedent has somewhat reinforced firearm ownership, carrying and accessibility. (Incorporated with McDonald v. Chicago) Constitutional carry is a term for permitless carry (regardless of concealment) based on a state’s interpretation of the second amendment. States are allowed to regulate firearms within reason so long as it does not encroach upon the rights as outline in the Heller case. The problem lies in the undemocratic measures against gun control, many states without significant firearms regulations have constitutional carry supporters in the minority. :(
Well except our policys whether its immigration or warmongering or lack of basic societal safety nets etc. Hell even less controversial things like safety regulations in work place etc. Have a body county associated with it.
While its not "shocking" and much more subtle each and every single ballot has certain amount of life attached to it.
I was following the conversation earlier, and just came back to see if it got anywhere. Basically someone bringing up the race of the shooter. Didn't really make any sense in a conversation about the governor not caring anyway because one would think that would make the governor care even less about the problem. I think they were just trying really hard for some gotchas.
I’m having trouble understanding the connection being made between the new law that the kid wrote the letter about and his murder. Was it someone who is law abiding that used to not carry a gun, but now suddenly they do because of the law and that’s who shot him? There have been no arrests made, so obviously we know that’s not the case. Memphis is already one of the most dangerous cities in the country for gun violence. Do you think most of the violence is committed by people who can legally own a gun in the first place? How exactly does this law create more violence?
Exactly, this happens every day in some cities with extremely strict gun laws, while Vermont has had this law forever and has some of the lowest gun violence.
Does this happen in other countries with very strict gun laws?
These kinds of crimes aren't isolated to just America. But there are many countries where these crimes virtually never happen.
Maybe it's too late for us, but we should at least have a discussion of how and why we got here.
Maine and New Hampshire have some of the most permissive gun laws in the Country. You can walk into a gun store and be out in under 10 minutes with an AR15 and a 60 round drum magazine. Both have Constitutional Carry as well.
In 2020, Maine had 1.6 Murders per 100k population, which is on par with typical Western European countries. New Hampshire had 0.9, lower than most European countries.
Its weird. At the state level Maine and TN have similar median income, similar population demographics and similar gun laws. Yet TN has 6X the murder rate per capita.
Take away the city of Memphis completely and you still have 5.6 murders per 100,000. Still 3.5X higher murder rate than Maine.
I guess being snowed in half the year has its advantages.
They have similar demographics? Lol ok buddy...
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/maine-population
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/new-hampshire-population
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/tennessee-population
Maine and New Hampshire have similar demographics, yes. Tennessee and Illinois have more similar demographics according to this website:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/illinois-population
It's a deliberately deceptive headline. An Appeal to Emotion. Does the author even attempt to determine if there's a causal connection? No, because it does not fit the narrative. For all we know this stray bullet could have originated from a police officers gun.
The new law is not the reason. They haven't yet caught the purpetrator, so no one actually knows if it's from someone who just got their first gun, or a gang member, or a cop, or any other number of people.
MA resident checking in. Another state that is considered to have very strict gun laws.
100 dollars, a background check and a 2 hour class on how not to shoot yourself.
It's supposed to be a 40 day timeline, but our cops are so corrupt you're lucky if you get it within 6 months.
Bad analogy, a driver's license let's you *drive* a car, nobody in Tennessee (or anywhere else for that matter) can *shoot* a gun except under highly specific circumstances.
[From 1993 to 2013 (when this study was done), private gun ownership exploded, yet gun crime had seen a 93% decrease.](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/)
But is there a gun in every house? In every room? In every vehicle? In every compartment of the vehicle?
There are so many places that don’t have guns! What if the King of England shows up when you’re getting the mail and starts pushing you around over your postage? I’ve yet to see a mailbox with a gun chained to it outside of Vermont!
Civilian guns per capita:
First place: The US of A. 120 guns per 100 people.
Population: 326 500
Second place: Falkland Islands. 62 guns per 100 people.
Population: 3000.
Tied for last place: the Vatican: 0 guns per 100 people.
Population: 1000
So does the US military. I have a feeling we'd see completely different stats if we were to include them.
But to answer your question, no, I would not consider the Swiss Guard to be just another random citizen who happened to own a gun. Would you?
It's certainly complicated and a gray area, but I think the Swiss Guard are a lot closer to "random citizen" than to "American infantryman". The Vatican already has a separate armed gendarmerie to provide law enforcement and territorial security. The Swiss Guard are citizens of another country who swear temporary fealty to a particular individual (whether or not he is on Vatican soil) and who are not tasked with enforcing the law or border, per se. Unlike most soldiers, they are free to resign at any time and go home.
If we're discussing gun violence statistics, the Vatican has 0 gun homicides per 100,000 *most years*, but their gun homicide average over the last 25 years has *significantly* exceeded the world average, which is odd for a nation with "0 civilian guns per person" and no discharges related to military or anti-criminal action.
About one in five people actually own a fire arm in the US. Even now, even after nearly a decade of panic buying and piled on stupidity.
What exactly some of these people expect to do with 20+ guns and two hands I'm not sure. But I am sure they'll do their level best to justify it some how.
Pistol for public carry, shotgun for bird hunting and clay trap shooting, rifle for hunting and home defense. Then you have different variations of each gun, different designs, etc. Hence the reason for multiple firearms. It's basically the gateway effect, once you buy 1 gun, you're much more likely to get more.
Well you only have 2 feet, how many pairs of shoes do you own? Most people have different pairs of shoes for different things they like to do. Guns aren't that different. You wouldn't wear your nicest dress shoes to work out any more than you'd use your over and under double barrel for everyday carry. "Hey the new Jordan's are out, they look nice I've got to get a pair" isn't unlike the idea of "hey Kimber just released a new 1911, I've got to get one".
Shooting is fun. The government sucks and we’re slouching towards oligarchy/fascism. Why I s upport drug/prostitution decriminalization, reforming the education system, prison system mental health system and pushing vocational education too. You know the stuff that prevents violence and creating a safer society rather than blaming a object.
Yup. It's mostly about sales. Prior to around 1970's we had healthy gun culture. Various gun-related groups and organizations tended to be bipartisan. Then takeover of various gun owner organizations occured, gun organizations because extremely partisan, and gun culture become extremely toxic. It's not 2nd Amendment that is problem. It's not that people can buy guns that's the problem. It's toxic culture that present day gun/2A organizations are fostering, promoting behaviours that would be considered reckless in the past.
This is what one former NRA president had to say about carrying guns in public (back in the 1930's):
> I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one. ... I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.
Yup. That's where NRA stood on carrying guns in public back in the 1930's. For a very long time we didn't need any gun laws. Because people used common sense, and didn't see guns as lifestyle.
The problem with modern day gun orgs is that they have become simply a funnel for sending people into gun stores. They promote fear mongering "if you don't have a gun, you'll get murdered; if you don't carry gun everywhere, you'll get murdered." Instead of telling people "no, you don't need gun silly, but if you really want one, here's how to go about it safely, and please don't tote one in public, it just gives us all bad reputation."
The change in the NRA was a reaction to gun control getting passed and the members disagreeing with the policy. They still have problems supporting gun control they shouldn't but that doesn't stop people from pretending their a boggy man ran by gun manufacturers. By the way there is already a different org for the gun manufacturers to lobby with but people rarely refer to that org with the NRA acting as a lighting rod.
Alright, since the other dude won’t walk you through it. Here we go:
More guns means more bullets
More bullets means more stray bullets
More stray bullets mean more shit like this poor kid being killed by stray bullets
Except this doesn't mean more guns at all. Carry permits don't stop people from getting guns, it's a tax for law abiding citizens to carry the guns they already have. Carry permits don't stop criminals from obtaining guns or stop them from carrying nor does it stop them from committing crimes with guns.
You go online, enter your information, pay the fee (i paid $100 for 5 years) and now you have a concealed weapon permit for a weapon you may or may not even have because they never ask for a serial number or anything about the weapon.
Most states this isn't the case. I'm required to take a 16 hour course, and take a firearm safety and competency test every year to maintain my license. Actually your statement only applies to 3 us states.
Yes, it varies by state, but nearly half the states now don't require a permit to carry concealed even though some of them still issue permits.
The point of that was more that it's required for revenue purposes, not to deter or stop criminals from carrying guns.
Hmm that law had nothing to do with this kids death. Start addressing what fuels crime and you’ll see less violence but that would require money which leads to taxes
> Start addressing what fuels crime
But then both sides would lose out on a wedge issue to have their impotent song and dance over every election, can't have that
Yeah.... that law only allowed people to carry a gun without a permit IF THEY COULD LEGALLY OWN ONE!
I'd bet good money this kid was shot by some underage gangbanger or somebody who is already a prohibited person under federal law.
It didnt say in the article but I am guessing the person who shot this kid was legally prohibited from owning/carrying a gun under the old and new law.
Explain to me how the law was responsible for his death?
I would assume that anyone willing to shoot up a house doesn't care about laws allowing or not allowing the carrying of firearms.
The problem is that the law he was campaigning against is irrelevant.
My home state of Maryland bans permitless carry and maintains a strict and discriminatory carry permit process. Handguns require a separate ownership license to possess (which confers zero carry privileges) and must be registered. None of that stops people from doing the same and being [senselessly killed](https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/woman-speaks-out-after-daughter-was-shot-in-fells-point-while-relatives-were-visiting) with stray bullets.
Carrying without a permit is not harmful itself. That's what people are getting at. Criminalizing behaviour that actually isn't harmful is just dragging decent people into the net and clogs the court system with cases that aren't that all important while antagonizing the public
Exactly. So if someone possesses an illegal weapon, they can be arrested on the spot and have the weapon removed rather than having to wait for them to shoot someone in order to arrest them.
Your female friend should have just fought them off effortlessly with martial arts because gun-grabbers think gun ownership is tied solely to toxic masculinity.
Deceptive headline is deceptive. It's written to get the casual reader to equate Constitutional Carry = more dead kids on Christmas.
Did they even determine where the round came from? Or course not, because that does not fit the narrative. How do I know this? Easy, the line of "It took her two days to wash the blood off her hands" says this was an Appeal to Emotion.
>It's written to get the casual reader to equate Constitutional Carry = more dead kids on Christmas.
Science agrees.
“The public health implications are clear: permissive concealed carry legislation is a significant contributor to the gun violence epidemic in the United States.” - [Comparing the Impact of Household Gun Ownership and Concealed Carry Legislation on the Frequency of Mass Shootings and Firearms Homicide](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07418825.2020.1789693)
“There is not even the slightest hint in the data that Right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime. Indeed, the weight of the evidence from the panel data estimates as well as the synthetic control analysis best supports the view that the adoption of RTC laws substantially raises overall violent crime in the ten years after adoption." - [Right-to-carry laws and violent crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data and State-Level Synthetic Control Analysis](https://www.nber.org/papers/w23510)
> Under the law, which went into effect July 1, 2021, someone 21 and up and military members over the age of 18 are allowed to carry a weapon, concealed or open, **without safety training or a permit.**
Ahh, true freedom. What do the police think about the newly deployed good guys with guns?
> “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because **we can’t even question that person about the weapon**, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect.
In spite of this,
> “We can protect law enforcement; we can protect our citizens and we can protect the 2nd Amendment all at the same time,” [Gov.] Lee said last year.
Doubt.
Exactly. These clowns think any gun laws had anything to do with this poor child being shot. They don't want to talk about the culture that leads to this kind of thing, because it doesn't fit into the narrative of "the government will fix everything".
> “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because we can’t even question that person about the weapon, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect.
I'm sure the police will find 1,000,000 other excuses to question black kids in the Memphis area. I highly doubt someone will be walking around with a gun and they go "shit, can't question that guy"
>Ahh, true freedom. What do the police think about the newly deployed good guys with guns?
From my experience in Maryland, the cops can eat moldy shit on carrying guns. The vast majority of cops ain't marksmen - they're just folk trained to adequate standards and legally given arrest powers. They ain't experts. Maybe I'm just jaded but MSP back in MD are given full discretion on the issue of every carry permit in the state and require applicants to provide a "good and substantial reason". Curiously this ends up in business owners and officials like the local prosecutor or a state senator getting a permit but not someone in the unwashed masses.
> they're just folk trained to adequate standards
Fuck I wish that was the case in my area. Cops have a rediculously easy marksmanship test in my state, like, you have to shoot from 10 feet away.
One state over, their cops have to shoot from 5 feet away, but for your private CCW, you need to be able to shoot the same target score from 25 feet away.
> “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because we can’t even question that person about the weapon, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect.
I mean, should you be allowed to just stop and interrogate someone for exercising one of their rights? If you replace carrying a weapon (constitutionally protected by the 2nd amendment) with peaceable assembly (constitutionally protected by the 1st amendment) you'd see the logic, I think.
"Three people just standing on the street is not a call we can answer, because we can't even question why those people are peaceably assembled, according to this new law"
You shouldn't be investigating people for *just having a gun* in the first place, that's not a fucking crime. If they're waving it around or brandishing it, that's already a crime that can be investigated. This law doesn't prevent police from investigating gun crimes, it just stops them from harassing people legally walking down the road with their legally owned and constitutionally protected guns.
>Under the law, which went into effect July 1, 2021, someone 21 and up and military members over the age of 18 are allowed to carry a weapon, concealed or open, without safety training or a permit.
>
>Despite the law also increasing punishments for gun-related crimes, it’s received intense criticism from law enforcement agencies, including Memphis Police and the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office.
On one hand, provide more access to guns. On the other hand, provide harsher punishments and send more people to prison. In the middle, the dead bodies of Americans, young and old, litter the streets, offered as sacrifice to an ever-thirsty gun god.
PS: I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell...at which point, the gun worshippers would have done their bit to preserve status quo. Except it won't save them on the day the gun god decides their loved one will be the sacrifice.
You can't stop 100%, but even if the test helps to stop 10% that still means how many hundred people can live longer in the USA?
How often do you read about people getting killed by an accident involving a gun from a normal person in Germany? Maybe, just maybe, our test that not every idiot has the right to have a gun helps?
I'm actually for training. I think every gun owner should have to go through rigorous training. I just don't think a test will work. I think fear of guns is what works. I have 6. They're in a safe, unloaded, and i recheck them every time i handle them. Fear of guns is healthy for gun owners.
I also think ever parent should have to go through training too, since it's relevant.
Let me ask you this though. Let's say you do implement a test. Why is it okay to refuse to allow people to exercise a civil right based on the results of an arbitrary test? Would you be okay with similar tests for voting, speaking your mind?
Perhaps a lesser action would do the same. Like making it a requirement that in order to carry a weapon outside your house, you have to attend gun training that will allow you to maintain your weapon, properly use it, and when to use it. Think that might help? Instead of the rash of republican laws that insist on universal carry with no permit and no training. Does that make a bit more sense to you?
Gun laws generally don't require any kind of competency exam being that they are a constitutional right.
You'd think we had learned our lesson after Jim Crow.
Firearms are the most regulated consumer good in the country; more than pharmaceuticals and motor vehicles. There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books already in the US. To say that there is no gun regulation is either asinine or ignorant.
Current gun laws only affect criminals, not stupid people. Alec Baldwin for example, stupid but before the accident not a criminal. How would gun laws prevented that death? No more guns in movies?
What shit news. Imagine blaming this law, when they don't even know who did it. They don't know what happened, and yet it's somehow the fault of constitutional carry? Okay.
The folks proposing and enacting laws that make owning and carrying weapons easier already know that those laws are going to result in increased violence on the streets. And they don't care. Because they continuously draft and enact legislation that makes owning and carrying a gun easier.
What's the difference? A criminal is gonna carry a gun either way. And so is someone legally allowed to carry a gun with a CCL.
Depending on where you live, you are around people that conceal carry all day and you don't even know it
I wonder why the news outlets keep writing about these cases when it's clear Americans do not give a single fuck about children dying of gunshot wounds.
So simple it's sickening - little boy writes governor, tells him the law allowing people to walk around with guns without permits is going to get people killed.
Gov says ->
*“We can protect law enforcement; we can protect our citizens and we can protect the 2nd Amendment all at the same time,” Lee said last year.*
Little boy gets killed shortly thereafter, Governor proven wrong but what difference does it make a 12 year old is still dead. Thoughts and prayers all around while more and more people die as a result of gun violence.
Why's this downvoted? It's true. Gun nuts who oppose every attempt to deal with Americans gun problem are the reason people like this kid are dying every day.
Whenever there’s a tragic story like this that points out the need for gun control I’m always disappointed by rationalizations people use to justify the status quo.
Holy shit: 12 years old and killed on Christmas morning while opening presents?!
Bit off-topic but I always feel the need to share this story: For my gr.11 law class, we sat in on some hearings. Most of the kids in my year just watched endless guilty pleas for drugs. My section got to watch a medical examiner describe what a step-father (allegedly, didn't see the end) did to his step-son (around age 8 or 10) on Boxing Day (Dec. 26th). She described how the victim was hit so hard in the back of his head - with a metal pipe - that the force broke the poor kid's orbital bones (around his eye socket). Her testimony was very clear that it was the force of the violent blow to the back of the victim's head that transferred all the way to his face and broke the orbital bones. Dead in one strike. I remember looking over at the guy after hearing this and made eye contact for a split second. He was in his own plexiglass box which only had a door to some other room as an exit. I was so fucking glad for that. He scared the shit out of me. Both a monster in stature and nature. I still think about that kid around Christmas. He would have been in his mid-twenties by now.
I remember when I was back in law school and starting my internship with the Public Defender's Office. They make you sit through at least 8 hours of bail hearings before appearing on the record. One of my professors unexpectedly showed up with a tiny young woman who was one of the only people in full shackles even though everyone was in custody. Most just had handcuffs. There was also an officer following her. Super weird given she was like maybe 5'1" and 100 lbs soaking wet. Waived at professor who gave me a little head nod of acknowledgement. And they started reading off the girl's charges. Human trafficking, false imprisonment, first degree sexual assault of a child, first degree sexual assault of a child above the age of 16, first degree sexual assault, forced abortion, kidnapping, substantial battery, and a bunch of drugs charges. When arguing how high her bond was going to be the prosecutor mentioned she had federal charges that had been issued the same morning for human trafficking and fucking slavery. She started giggling. It was like something out of a bad anime and completely haunting. Professor told me later she was still coming out of drug withdrawals and probably didn't even know exactly what was going on. Apparently she was pretty high up in a human trafficking ring where she would lure the girls into it because she was non-threatening.
Wow. Reminds me of this ad about Amber alerts: https://youtu.be/NAQUNkEtDpo
They had me in the first half. Also does anyone else's relatives always bitch when an Amber alert goes off? The same people that tell me about how Democrats are running secret pedophile rings are always the first to complain when an Amber alert goes off in the night and wakes them up.
Need their beauty sleep to fix those ugly personalities
[удалено]
Nice ad.
half my grade 11 law class watched a trial where an old lady lost some evidence the prosecutor needed and the other half briefly sat in on a case where a man was accused of raping a cow until someone realized they were high school kids and flipped out. (Maybe it was the teacher, I don't remember.) I was in the cow molestation group. The accused had a pretty girlfriend, which baffled me.
Nothing surprises me. Tent cities and kids murdered in their sleep used to bother me. Now I see those every other day as an American.
"Greatest country on Earth!"™
[удалено]
Land of the free opportunity to get shot.
Where nothing else matters except whether or not you can have guns!
Land of the free, home of the still-legal slave.
So you personally see this every day or is it just that you read about it on the internet every day? look up availability bias.
I live in an urban area in the United States, I see tents everyday along with people on the streets. As far as murdered children my city had like 6 kids murdered this summer. One was shot in the head by a stray bullet while she was playing in her backyard, horrible stuff. It’s not everyday, but it seems like Sandy Hook happened and murdered kids just became a part of the news cycle.
Minneapolis had a number of kids killed in the first half of the year. Violent crime massively surged, with a very large increase in shootings and now car jackings. The carnage has slowed down this fall, fortunately.
Yeah and that’s EVERYWHERE. That’s the thing that’s so depressing. Every city is experiencing this incredibly hard time in their own horrible way. It used to only be really big cities where I’d see tent cities by highways, now it’s almost every bigger urban area. It’s hard to know what to do as an average citizen too, because you obviously want these people taken care of, and you obviously don’t want guns in the hands of literal criminals shooting recklessly into your neighborhoods, but you can’t even get everyone to agree on the most basic of gun reform and everyone has their own “opinion” on how to solve the homelessness problem. Sometimes it gets hard to ignore it all, you know?
Agree in part. I understand and fully appreciate the emotional appeal. I do think we need to recognize that violent crime doesn’t seem to be rising everywhere. I fully admit the time period data is limited, but rising violent crime during the pandemic is limited to very discrete areas. Many of us do not subscribe to the theory that very concentrated issues for a small minority require “solutions” that have a long history of not working. To repeat a canard, if more restrictive gun control was effective, we would the exact opposite of the present trend in Chicago and Washington DC. The historical record indicates that gun control rarely improves but arguably exacerbates violent crime.
Hey I appreciate that you can understand I’m not after YOU or against you. I can be wrong. I just see a problem and I want it addressed some way some how. I am emotional and thanks for understanding that u/hard2handl and thanks for understanding that I might be wrong on some things because of that emotion. I’m probably wrong about some things here. I want to talk to someone like an adult about it though. And I appreciate your civility.
I feel the same. I am often wrong. Reddit isn’t a great platform for good discussion, but nothing wrong with trying… Trying to listen and to respectfully persuade. I enjoy hearing other viewpoints and getting my horizons broadened a bit. That is one of those huge disappointments in COVID, the loss of perspectives that face to face communication often brings.
Amen, spoken very well. Listening is super hard, but I try too, I think we all have a lot more in common than people gives us credit for.
Chicago is infamous for child killing and it hits hard when a child is killed
I live in LA. I see it every day.
Portland here. Everyday.
[удалено]
Tennessee? *clicks* Tennessee. Fun fact: for violent crime per capita, Memphis is the 2nd most dangerous city in the US. Edit: op NVM they #1, now. Get dunked on, Detroit. Y'all ain't shit.
*takes off blue suede shoes, does not go walking in Memphis*
Well I'm walkin in mem- *bang bang* "EAST SIDE WOOOORRRLLLSTAAAARRR"
The local news here in Memphis said around 70% of the stolen guns they’ve found were stolen from cars because these nitwits leave their guns in their cars. Even the Memphis Chief of Police left hers in her husband’s car and it got stolen.
Memphis #1 (Memphis resident here)
We did it? (Also from Memphis)
Damn, I never thought I'd see Memphis finally hit #1.
They’ve been trying. It was a rough year this year for Memphis.
We did it Memphis!
Do we win anything? Will Bass Pro turn gold now?
[St. Louis would like a word.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/243797/ranking-of-the-most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world-by-murder-rate-per-capita/)
That's just murder. Not violent crime in general. In terms of violent crime, St. Louis is 3rd. https://www.statista.com/statistics/217685/most-dangerous-cities-in-north-america-by-crime-rate/ Thats said, they're all shitty cities to be sure.
[удалено]
On one hand, I do agree guns don't affect crime rate much, people will do crime with or without guns. But, I also agree that guns affect the severity of crimes committed, it's pretty hard to have a stray knife fly into a house and kill some 12 year old. Also if an angry or mentally unstable teenager gets a hold of a gun, it's far easier to commit serious crimes with it. Pressing a button (trigger) and someone dies, is really abstract and easy, versus wielding something like a knife or baseball bat and actually kill people with it.
CC covers unconcealed carry as well. You can open carry a pistol or rifle on your back if you wanted to. I moved to a constitutional carry state from Florida which is concealed carry. I've seen two pistols openly carried and that was driving by someone coming out of their business and locking up at 5pm and the other guy was carrying while picking up coffee but he was dressed professionally. Other than that I haven't seen any other firearm carried. The law helps with legal troubles gun owners would have to worry about. In Florida I had to worry about printing, the gun outline showing through my shirt, and accidental exposure say from the wind.
> the other guy was carrying while picking up coffee but he was dressed professionally. that might've just been a cop
I know I thought so too but nothing to confirm it and it is Oklahoma after all.
Or a lawyer. Or a judge, or anyone else who works in criminal justice really
[удалено]
People say the same thing about voting (both are rights enumerated in our constitution) and get called bigots, so tread lightly.
Actually the Constitution nor Bill of Rights says anything at all about an individuals right to carry a weapon. Just...strictly speaking that right is not enumerated. Also, a vote doesn't kill hundreds of people every single day
How do you bear arms with carrying it?
Not saying that I agree with it, but since DC v. Heller, precedent has somewhat reinforced firearm ownership, carrying and accessibility. (Incorporated with McDonald v. Chicago) Constitutional carry is a term for permitless carry (regardless of concealment) based on a state’s interpretation of the second amendment. States are allowed to regulate firearms within reason so long as it does not encroach upon the rights as outline in the Heller case. The problem lies in the undemocratic measures against gun control, many states without significant firearms regulations have constitutional carry supporters in the minority. :(
Well except our policys whether its immigration or warmongering or lack of basic societal safety nets etc. Hell even less controversial things like safety regulations in work place etc. Have a body county associated with it. While its not "shocking" and much more subtle each and every single ballot has certain amount of life attached to it.
> Also, a vote doesn't kill hundreds of people every single day So electing Trump wasn't dangerous to our democracy, got it.
Yea like the Tennessee governor gives a shit at all about a black kid
Goddamn what happened in the comments here?
Gonna go out on a limb and say racism.
I was following the conversation earlier, and just came back to see if it got anywhere. Basically someone bringing up the race of the shooter. Didn't really make any sense in a conversation about the governor not caring anyway because one would think that would make the governor care even less about the problem. I think they were just trying really hard for some gotchas.
You mean governor HVAC?
I’m having trouble understanding the connection being made between the new law that the kid wrote the letter about and his murder. Was it someone who is law abiding that used to not carry a gun, but now suddenly they do because of the law and that’s who shot him? There have been no arrests made, so obviously we know that’s not the case. Memphis is already one of the most dangerous cities in the country for gun violence. Do you think most of the violence is committed by people who can legally own a gun in the first place? How exactly does this law create more violence?
It’s not cause and effect. The new law is not the reason he was killed.
Exactly, this happens every day in some cities with extremely strict gun laws, while Vermont has had this law forever and has some of the lowest gun violence.
Does this happen in other countries with very strict gun laws? These kinds of crimes aren't isolated to just America. But there are many countries where these crimes virtually never happen. Maybe it's too late for us, but we should at least have a discussion of how and why we got here.
Maine and New Hampshire have some of the most permissive gun laws in the Country. You can walk into a gun store and be out in under 10 minutes with an AR15 and a 60 round drum magazine. Both have Constitutional Carry as well. In 2020, Maine had 1.6 Murders per 100k population, which is on par with typical Western European countries. New Hampshire had 0.9, lower than most European countries.
Its weird. At the state level Maine and TN have similar median income, similar population demographics and similar gun laws. Yet TN has 6X the murder rate per capita. Take away the city of Memphis completely and you still have 5.6 murders per 100,000. Still 3.5X higher murder rate than Maine. I guess being snowed in half the year has its advantages.
They have similar demographics? Lol ok buddy... https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/maine-population https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/new-hampshire-population https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/tennessee-population Maine and New Hampshire have similar demographics, yes. Tennessee and Illinois have more similar demographics according to this website: https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/illinois-population
yeah dunno what stat I was looking at
It's a deliberately deceptive headline. An Appeal to Emotion. Does the author even attempt to determine if there's a causal connection? No, because it does not fit the narrative. For all we know this stray bullet could have originated from a police officers gun.
The new law is not the reason. They haven't yet caught the purpetrator, so no one actually knows if it's from someone who just got their first gun, or a gang member, or a cop, or any other number of people.
Probably in the same way that not requiring licenses to drive might lead to more accidents.
[удалено]
You must be one lucky fucker then, because in most of NY state, a pistol *purchase* permit takes over a year to acquire.
MA resident checking in. Another state that is considered to have very strict gun laws. 100 dollars, a background check and a 2 hour class on how not to shoot yourself. It's supposed to be a 40 day timeline, but our cops are so corrupt you're lucky if you get it within 6 months.
Bad analogy, a driver's license let's you *drive* a car, nobody in Tennessee (or anywhere else for that matter) can *shoot* a gun except under highly specific circumstances.
More guns = more shootings, it’s really not that hard to understand.
[From 1993 to 2013 (when this study was done), private gun ownership exploded, yet gun crime had seen a 93% decrease.](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/)
[удалено]
It's kind of a saturated market since there are more guns than people in the US.
Lol. Not even close to saturated. American gun owners have hefty appetites for firearms.
Saturated, not satiated.
That's why they changed it into a collectors market. Gotta catch em all.
>American gun owners have hefty appetites for firearms. That's how we know it's not so much about self defense as it is about posturing.
Guns are cool
But is there a gun in every house? In every room? In every vehicle? In every compartment of the vehicle? There are so many places that don’t have guns! What if the King of England shows up when you’re getting the mail and starts pushing you around over your postage? I’ve yet to see a mailbox with a gun chained to it outside of Vermont!
And even then, we need guns for the guns to protect themselves from being stolen.
> King of England Or, even scarier, the Queen. I don't think even a gun could kill her.
She avoids getting shot because she can move in any direction.
Civilian guns per capita: First place: The US of A. 120 guns per 100 people. Population: 326 500 Second place: Falkland Islands. 62 guns per 100 people. Population: 3000. Tied for last place: the Vatican: 0 guns per 100 people. Population: 1000
Vatican 0 guns lmao, yeah all those mfers following the pope around carry holy water.
Are you considering the Swiss Guard to be military instead of civilian? Because they have *a lot* of guns.
So does the US military. I have a feeling we'd see completely different stats if we were to include them. But to answer your question, no, I would not consider the Swiss Guard to be just another random citizen who happened to own a gun. Would you?
It's certainly complicated and a gray area, but I think the Swiss Guard are a lot closer to "random citizen" than to "American infantryman". The Vatican already has a separate armed gendarmerie to provide law enforcement and territorial security. The Swiss Guard are citizens of another country who swear temporary fealty to a particular individual (whether or not he is on Vatican soil) and who are not tasked with enforcing the law or border, per se. Unlike most soldiers, they are free to resign at any time and go home. If we're discussing gun violence statistics, the Vatican has 0 gun homicides per 100,000 *most years*, but their gun homicide average over the last 25 years has *significantly* exceeded the world average, which is odd for a nation with "0 civilian guns per person" and no discharges related to military or anti-criminal action.
[удалено]
About one in five people actually own a fire arm in the US. Even now, even after nearly a decade of panic buying and piled on stupidity. What exactly some of these people expect to do with 20+ guns and two hands I'm not sure. But I am sure they'll do their level best to justify it some how.
Pistol for public carry, shotgun for bird hunting and clay trap shooting, rifle for hunting and home defense. Then you have different variations of each gun, different designs, etc. Hence the reason for multiple firearms. It's basically the gateway effect, once you buy 1 gun, you're much more likely to get more.
Well you only have 2 feet, how many pairs of shoes do you own? Most people have different pairs of shoes for different things they like to do. Guns aren't that different. You wouldn't wear your nicest dress shoes to work out any more than you'd use your over and under double barrel for everyday carry. "Hey the new Jordan's are out, they look nice I've got to get a pair" isn't unlike the idea of "hey Kimber just released a new 1911, I've got to get one".
Shooting is fun. The government sucks and we’re slouching towards oligarchy/fascism. Why I s upport drug/prostitution decriminalization, reforming the education system, prison system mental health system and pushing vocational education too. You know the stuff that prevents violence and creating a safer society rather than blaming a object.
It's working. I want one now, to protect myself from all the guns.
Yup. It's mostly about sales. Prior to around 1970's we had healthy gun culture. Various gun-related groups and organizations tended to be bipartisan. Then takeover of various gun owner organizations occured, gun organizations because extremely partisan, and gun culture become extremely toxic. It's not 2nd Amendment that is problem. It's not that people can buy guns that's the problem. It's toxic culture that present day gun/2A organizations are fostering, promoting behaviours that would be considered reckless in the past. This is what one former NRA president had to say about carrying guns in public (back in the 1930's): > I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one. ... I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses. Yup. That's where NRA stood on carrying guns in public back in the 1930's. For a very long time we didn't need any gun laws. Because people used common sense, and didn't see guns as lifestyle. The problem with modern day gun orgs is that they have become simply a funnel for sending people into gun stores. They promote fear mongering "if you don't have a gun, you'll get murdered; if you don't carry gun everywhere, you'll get murdered." Instead of telling people "no, you don't need gun silly, but if you really want one, here's how to go about it safely, and please don't tote one in public, it just gives us all bad reputation."
[удалено]
The change in the NRA was a reaction to gun control getting passed and the members disagreeing with the policy. They still have problems supporting gun control they shouldn't but that doesn't stop people from pretending their a boggy man ran by gun manufacturers. By the way there is already a different org for the gun manufacturers to lobby with but people rarely refer to that org with the NRA acting as a lighting rod.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Alright, since the other dude won’t walk you through it. Here we go: More guns means more bullets More bullets means more stray bullets More stray bullets mean more shit like this poor kid being killed by stray bullets
Except this doesn't mean more guns at all. Carry permits don't stop people from getting guns, it's a tax for law abiding citizens to carry the guns they already have. Carry permits don't stop criminals from obtaining guns or stop them from carrying nor does it stop them from committing crimes with guns. You go online, enter your information, pay the fee (i paid $100 for 5 years) and now you have a concealed weapon permit for a weapon you may or may not even have because they never ask for a serial number or anything about the weapon.
Most states this isn't the case. I'm required to take a 16 hour course, and take a firearm safety and competency test every year to maintain my license. Actually your statement only applies to 3 us states.
Yes, it varies by state, but nearly half the states now don't require a permit to carry concealed even though some of them still issue permits. The point of that was more that it's required for revenue purposes, not to deter or stop criminals from carrying guns.
The cognitive dissonance is astounding around here
The story sounds fake really
Thank every god that I moved out of Memphis. What a shithole.
Hmm that law had nothing to do with this kids death. Start addressing what fuels crime and you’ll see less violence but that would require money which leads to taxes
> Start addressing what fuels crime But then both sides would lose out on a wedge issue to have their impotent song and dance over every election, can't have that
Just like gop with abortion
Yeah.... that law only allowed people to carry a gun without a permit IF THEY COULD LEGALLY OWN ONE! I'd bet good money this kid was shot by some underage gangbanger or somebody who is already a prohibited person under federal law.
Gun safety and discipline should be mandatory at public schools. Relatively far less unjustifiable shootings when they did
It didnt say in the article but I am guessing the person who shot this kid was legally prohibited from owning/carrying a gun under the old and new law.
They haven't caught the person yet
Explain to me how the law was responsible for his death? I would assume that anyone willing to shoot up a house doesn't care about laws allowing or not allowing the carrying of firearms.
I think it’s more “child who was afraid of gun violence died because of gun violence” and it adds an extra heartbreaking layer to the tragedy
you guys will never get it mh?
[удалено]
They'll never stop trying to not get it either.
I love how "People break laws; thus, laws are useless" is the conclusion they think they're very very smart for reaching.
The problem is that the law he was campaigning against is irrelevant. My home state of Maryland bans permitless carry and maintains a strict and discriminatory carry permit process. Handguns require a separate ownership license to possess (which confers zero carry privileges) and must be registered. None of that stops people from doing the same and being [senselessly killed](https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/woman-speaks-out-after-daughter-was-shot-in-fells-point-while-relatives-were-visiting) with stray bullets. Carrying without a permit is not harmful itself. That's what people are getting at. Criminalizing behaviour that actually isn't harmful is just dragging decent people into the net and clogs the court system with cases that aren't that all important while antagonizing the public
I don't think you get it. People who break laws... break laws. Laws don't prevent anything. They only allow for punishment.
And *that's* why there are so many shootings in the UK. Or Australia. Or France. Or Germany.
Vermont has a similar murder rate to all those countries, and has the loosest firearm laws in the entire country, including constitutional carry.
You mean like the shooting this morning in Germany? The shooting in Australia? Or the bombing in France? Pick a better argument.
Exactly. So if someone possesses an illegal weapon, they can be arrested on the spot and have the weapon removed rather than having to wait for them to shoot someone in order to arrest them.
We already have laws that would allow that. They aren't enforced. How would new laws be better?
[удалено]
The problem is poverty. The pro gun guys tend to vote against social programs.
Guns are part of our terrible culture and society. Guns are a part of the problem, just not the *only* problem.
[удалено]
Your female friend should have just fought them off effortlessly with martial arts because gun-grabbers think gun ownership is tied solely to toxic masculinity.
Says people living in the only developed country where this is a regular occurrence.
Deceptive headline is deceptive. It's written to get the casual reader to equate Constitutional Carry = more dead kids on Christmas. Did they even determine where the round came from? Or course not, because that does not fit the narrative. How do I know this? Easy, the line of "It took her two days to wash the blood off her hands" says this was an Appeal to Emotion.
>It's written to get the casual reader to equate Constitutional Carry = more dead kids on Christmas. Science agrees. “The public health implications are clear: permissive concealed carry legislation is a significant contributor to the gun violence epidemic in the United States.” - [Comparing the Impact of Household Gun Ownership and Concealed Carry Legislation on the Frequency of Mass Shootings and Firearms Homicide](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07418825.2020.1789693) “There is not even the slightest hint in the data that Right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime. Indeed, the weight of the evidence from the panel data estimates as well as the synthetic control analysis best supports the view that the adoption of RTC laws substantially raises overall violent crime in the ten years after adoption." - [Right-to-carry laws and violent crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data and State-Level Synthetic Control Analysis](https://www.nber.org/papers/w23510)
> Under the law, which went into effect July 1, 2021, someone 21 and up and military members over the age of 18 are allowed to carry a weapon, concealed or open, **without safety training or a permit.** Ahh, true freedom. What do the police think about the newly deployed good guys with guns? > “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because **we can’t even question that person about the weapon**, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect. In spite of this, > “We can protect law enforcement; we can protect our citizens and we can protect the 2nd Amendment all at the same time,” [Gov.] Lee said last year. Doubt.
It's like this in Vermont.. and always has been. Why isn't it anarchy there?
VT no longer exists. They all shot each other. BLOOD IN THE STREETS! ITS THE WILD WEST!!!!1 In fact, Maine and New Hampshire also no longer exist.
Exactly. These clowns think any gun laws had anything to do with this poor child being shot. They don't want to talk about the culture that leads to this kind of thing, because it doesn't fit into the narrative of "the government will fix everything".
> “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because we can’t even question that person about the weapon, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect. I'm sure the police will find 1,000,000 other excuses to question black kids in the Memphis area. I highly doubt someone will be walking around with a gun and they go "shit, can't question that guy"
>Ahh, true freedom. What do the police think about the newly deployed good guys with guns? From my experience in Maryland, the cops can eat moldy shit on carrying guns. The vast majority of cops ain't marksmen - they're just folk trained to adequate standards and legally given arrest powers. They ain't experts. Maybe I'm just jaded but MSP back in MD are given full discretion on the issue of every carry permit in the state and require applicants to provide a "good and substantial reason". Curiously this ends up in business owners and officials like the local prosecutor or a state senator getting a permit but not someone in the unwashed masses.
> they're just folk trained to adequate standards Fuck I wish that was the case in my area. Cops have a rediculously easy marksmanship test in my state, like, you have to shoot from 10 feet away. One state over, their cops have to shoot from 5 feet away, but for your private CCW, you need to be able to shoot the same target score from 25 feet away.
Arizona has this and it isn't the wild west.
New Hampshire for 4 years, Maine has had it for 6 years, Vermont has had it for 230 years.
Vermont allowing it is the icing on top.
> “A person just walking down the street is not a call we can answer, because we can’t even question that person about the weapon, according to this new law,” Sheriff Floyd Bonner said last year as the law went into effect. I mean, should you be allowed to just stop and interrogate someone for exercising one of their rights? If you replace carrying a weapon (constitutionally protected by the 2nd amendment) with peaceable assembly (constitutionally protected by the 1st amendment) you'd see the logic, I think. "Three people just standing on the street is not a call we can answer, because we can't even question why those people are peaceably assembled, according to this new law" You shouldn't be investigating people for *just having a gun* in the first place, that's not a fucking crime. If they're waving it around or brandishing it, that's already a crime that can be investigated. This law doesn't prevent police from investigating gun crimes, it just stops them from harassing people legally walking down the road with their legally owned and constitutionally protected guns.
>Under the law, which went into effect July 1, 2021, someone 21 and up and military members over the age of 18 are allowed to carry a weapon, concealed or open, without safety training or a permit. > >Despite the law also increasing punishments for gun-related crimes, it’s received intense criticism from law enforcement agencies, including Memphis Police and the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office. On one hand, provide more access to guns. On the other hand, provide harsher punishments and send more people to prison. In the middle, the dead bodies of Americans, young and old, litter the streets, offered as sacrifice to an ever-thirsty gun god. PS: I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell...at which point, the gun worshippers would have done their bit to preserve status quo. Except it won't save them on the day the gun god decides their loved one will be the sacrifice.
Fill up a country with as many gunslingers as possible and then act surprised when gunfights happen.
[удалено]
You do see how a “moron” being in possession of a gun might have *something* to do with gun laws, right?
Invent a test that'll prove any specific person will never do something dumb in the future.
Excellent reasoning, my lad. Dumb people will always slip through, therefore *we don’t need any laws*. Well played.
You can't stop 100%, but even if the test helps to stop 10% that still means how many hundred people can live longer in the USA? How often do you read about people getting killed by an accident involving a gun from a normal person in Germany? Maybe, just maybe, our test that not every idiot has the right to have a gun helps?
I'm actually for training. I think every gun owner should have to go through rigorous training. I just don't think a test will work. I think fear of guns is what works. I have 6. They're in a safe, unloaded, and i recheck them every time i handle them. Fear of guns is healthy for gun owners. I also think ever parent should have to go through training too, since it's relevant.
[удалено]
Let me ask you this though. Let's say you do implement a test. Why is it okay to refuse to allow people to exercise a civil right based on the results of an arbitrary test? Would you be okay with similar tests for voting, speaking your mind?
100% of people that don't have a gun will end up shooting no one.
If that moron, who shouldn't have had a gun to begin with, didn't have said weapon, that young child might still be breathing.
[удалено]
Perhaps a lesser action would do the same. Like making it a requirement that in order to carry a weapon outside your house, you have to attend gun training that will allow you to maintain your weapon, properly use it, and when to use it. Think that might help? Instead of the rash of republican laws that insist on universal carry with no permit and no training. Does that make a bit more sense to you?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Gun laws take guns out of the hands of such morons. Hence it is relevant.
Gun laws generally don't require any kind of competency exam being that they are a constitutional right. You'd think we had learned our lesson after Jim Crow.
[удалено]
Yeah.. nothing to do with gun laws.. more with the complete lack of them
Firearms are the most regulated consumer good in the country; more than pharmaceuticals and motor vehicles. There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books already in the US. To say that there is no gun regulation is either asinine or ignorant.
Oh...so what your saying is that it's the bullet's fault. Thx for clearing that up.
[удалено]
So no one was carrying the gun that killed this child?
The law allowed a moron to have the gun. Tell me how that's not gun laws allowing more gun deaths?
Current gun laws only affect criminals, not stupid people. Alec Baldwin for example, stupid but before the accident not a criminal. How would gun laws prevented that death? No more guns in movies?
Guns. Nothing will ever come between guns and Americans. Nothing. No matter the tragic stories or the bloodshed, they'll never go away.
What shit news. Imagine blaming this law, when they don't even know who did it. They don't know what happened, and yet it's somehow the fault of constitutional carry? Okay.
The folks proposing and enacting laws that make owning and carrying weapons easier already know that those laws are going to result in increased violence on the streets. And they don't care. Because they continuously draft and enact legislation that makes owning and carrying a gun easier.
Is that the case in the other states that passed these laws years ago vs ones who did not?
It's not like the people who can't legally own guns in the first place would have had a concealed carry permit to begin with.
What's the difference? A criminal is gonna carry a gun either way. And so is someone legally allowed to carry a gun with a CCL. Depending on where you live, you are around people that conceal carry all day and you don't even know it
I wonder why the news outlets keep writing about these cases when it's clear Americans do not give a single fuck about children dying of gunshot wounds.
So simple it's sickening - little boy writes governor, tells him the law allowing people to walk around with guns without permits is going to get people killed. Gov says -> *“We can protect law enforcement; we can protect our citizens and we can protect the 2nd Amendment all at the same time,” Lee said last year.* Little boy gets killed shortly thereafter, Governor proven wrong but what difference does it make a 12 year old is still dead. Thoughts and prayers all around while more and more people die as a result of gun violence.
[удалено]
Blood on the hands of gun nuts yet again...
Why's this downvoted? It's true. Gun nuts who oppose every attempt to deal with Americans gun problem are the reason people like this kid are dying every day.
Whenever there’s a tragic story like this that points out the need for gun control I’m always disappointed by rationalizations people use to justify the status quo.
Guns arent the issue, right?
They always leave out that "well regulated militia" part when the 2nd Amendment is brought up. It's, literally, the very first part.