That's supposed to be actual policy? See something, say something?WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 1:47 pmHow right you are. Oh, wait, my first post here in November of last year included the following:MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 11:24 amHave you seen ANY credible suggestions from Waffle to reduce gun deaths in America?njbill wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2024 3:46 pm Waffle, you guys trip all over yourselves talking about law abiding gun owners. But then you say if an AR ban or some other type of ban or restriction were to be put in place, that is, enacted into law, all you guys would disobey it. “You’ll have to pry my guns from my cold, dead hands.”
So which is it? Are you law abiding and obey the laws or do you only obey the laws you want to obey? If the latter, you aren’t law abiding.
You aren’t the only one who claims gunowners are “law abiding” citizens. It’s a regular trope of the 2A gang.
I haven't.
And we won't, because that ain't what Waffle actually cares about.
3rd actually attempts to put out a whole series of well-defined, specific measures that overall simply transfer the risk of mis-use to the owners of the guns that bear such risk, ala insurance against mis-use of cars, etc. With all sorts of credible specifics that are consistent with 2A.
Doesn't mean 3rd's ideas are necessarily the 'best' ideas, but it's a serious attempt at presenting specifics.
So, Waffle resorts to specious 2A arguments, with no real offer of credible alternative approaches.
Thus, the conversation is one-sided, no matter how many pages Waffle takes up.
If we can set aside the collective emotional enmity for AR-15 rifles for just a few minutes, here’s what we CAN do. After Sandy Hook in 2012, President Obama put together a task force headed by then Vice-president Joe Biden. Representatives included the Attorney General/DOJ, Education Secretary/DOE, Health & Human Services Secretary, and the included the additional presence of FBI and other community leaders. In 2013, when their findings were published by the FBI, the key takeaway was a logical definition regarding how a mass shooting/active shooter incidents should be defined, which is as follows: “an incident in which four or more victims are fatally shot in a public location within a 24-hour period in the absence of other criminal activity, such as robberies, drug deals, and gang conflict.” This has been updated to exclude family annihilations. There have been 200 such Mass Public Shooting incidents since 1966. In addition, the development of a nascent deterrence playbook - which incorporated strategies previously identified (some going back decades) with a commitment to new research studies - was set in motion. The goal? Find ways to offramp potential mass shooters in the making BEFORE they are able to enact their horrific mass murders.
One member serving on the Obama commission was now retired FBI Special Agent Katherine Schweit. Quick aside: She’s a female Blue State Democrat voter. As an attorney and special agent she spent nearly five years as the executive responsible the FBI’s active/mass shooter efforts. Since retirement, she has tirelessly researched Mass Public Shootings (utilizing facts, incident reports, and empirical data), lectured, consulted, and authored a book I'd like to recommend titled "Stop the Killing" (now in its second edition). The book unpacks the root causes of Mass Public Shootings, and outlines actionable and effective solutions which have been proven to help reduce these horrific crimes NOT by disarming law abiding citizens of AR-15s, but rather by teaching strategies for OFF RAMPING those on the path toward resorting to such actions.1) See something, say something. 2) taking to task our politicians and media and THEIR ROLE in creating a COPYCAT CONTAGION which inspires potential mass killers (and in many cases AR-15 usage in mass killings). 3) EDUCATING our political, school, and community leaders, and the public at large, to recognize the warning signs (aka LEAKAGE) given off by an overwhelming majority of mass public killers. 4) Addressing the role of mental illness and PHARMACEUTICALS present in a high percentage of mass killers. 5) creating a THREAT ASSESSMENT TEAM infrastructure in America which focuses on prevention and intervention. 6) Implement HARDENING strategies for public places such as churches, schools, and workplaces. These include personnel, training, and physical elements. We know where and why Mass Public Shooter are choosing their venues, which are overwhelmingly gun free zones. The recent Maine shooter chose his venues with care: bars and bowling alleys are by law “gun free zones” in a state with a large percentage of the population carrying concealed. His mentally ill, twisted mind knew all too well exactly where he wouldn’t meet a good guy or gal with a gun (more on that topic coming below). Yet “sensible hardening strategies” meet with a great deal of pushback. There is a growing body of “intercepted incidents” (170 and counting according to the National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services database) which attests to the EFFECTIVENESS of these strategies, including an averted event just one week before the most recent Maine incident (which SHOULD have been another MPS averted success story!), and a disturbing credible threat (made by a Cornell engineering student) just last week.
The single most important action we can take to stop Mass Public Shootings is SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING. Yet this “off-ramping superpower” is not a part of the public consciousness. How could it be when we’re so busy vilifying inanimate objects? In interview after interview of persons who knew a mass public shooter and sensed something was “off”, they mention the fact that by “saying something” they felt like they would betray the person in crisis. Sadly, this mindset has prevented these “early warning radar detection opportunities” from initiating an off-ramping sequence. Estimates suggest up to 90% of Mass Public Shootings could be averted, which speaks volumes about how far sideways the public mass public shooting discourse has gone. Why aren’t our political leaders, academics, lobbying groups, and the public demanding policies which focus on the creation of a public awareness campaigns which encourage better understanding and safe reporting avenues which would jump start broad utilization of this powerful intervention tool?
But, please, be condescending and wrong in one post. Or snarky in my query on today's Kamala Thread where I referenced some posts I had seen, asked for some insights from some of our more deeply invested political wonks, and you start your reply off with... "I don't want to be disrespectful in tone or substance, but that's not a well informed post." Here I was thinking "there is no such thing as a stupid question" still applied here in 2024. But apparently not for those amongst us who are the self-appointed arbiters of such things.
Sorry if you're butt hurt that I don't feel your plan to sequester AR usage to ranges is an earnest if completely misguided non starter. You do realize your suggestion is tantamount to discrimination by both economic resources and demographics (ie: you okay with the poor and minorities and women your plan will effectively discriminate against?).
Under your mandates this woman, her husband, and unborn child would potentially have lost their right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ho ... 5-n1076026
But you've made it clear there are no valid reasons for AR ownership, be it for self defense, varmint and small game hunting, invasive animal control by ranchers and farmers and homeowners, or just plain target shooting fun. Nope. Not valid.
And all 25mm Americans who own them are MAGA tacticool wanna be Ruby Ridge guns as male anatomy proxy fetishists. After all, that's what Bloomberg's army of lobbyists and politicians and researchers who love juicy grants if their policy based evidence making furthers the narrative will have you...feeling.
For the poster talking about would be assassin and dad's AR, how about we focus on his mental health, his mental health professional parents, and what pharmaceuticals he might have been on, in addition to weapon, whether AR or scoped hunting rifle or one of his IED devices. Where is the "Bipartisan waiving of hippa protections for live or dead perpetrators of assassination or mass public shootings act"? Let's get it passed. That way we can begin to understand how America's mental health epidemic and powerful big pharma drugs are fueling an environment where the sickest among us are acting out in the most visibly sick and shocking manner? Anyone on either side of this issue take issue with that? Page. Playbook.
Specious arguments cut both ways, gentlemen. The great thing about this place is it's a bastion of old school privilege, so regardless of social and societal ills we tussle over as keyboard warriors, most of us will never come within a country mile of experiencing first-hand the dark side of criminal gun violence. I've experienced it first hand, and recounted that experience here.
Be well
Blame Big Pharma???