George, just shut the fuck up

[Sailboat]

@E-Sabbath

How? Never reported to the police.

Apparently, if I understand the somewhat garbled stories coming out, the authorities DID ask the police about this nut and were told “without a specific threat, nothing can be done.” AFTER that contact was made with police, and presumably the police kept the info on file, he purchased the gun and underwent the nominal background check. A more extensive check, consisting of pulling the local police file on him, would have turned up “his teachers call him dangerously unstable and are afraid of him” which might have been grounds for a pause in the sale and a more thorough look at the whole situation.

This hypothetical proposal is not particularly complicated nor difficult to imagine. It just means more work for some people and possibly slower access to guns for the impatient.

Nor is it likely to be 100% effective. But it might have helped.

Sailboat

[ltfire]

@Lord Ashtar

How do you propose this should work? Should everyone who wants to buy a gun give up a list of acquaintances who can be asked, “So are you, like, afraid of this person?”

Here in New York, and this was many moons ago…during the application part of getting a full carry permit, I had to submit 5 names of people that would vouch for me, and everyone of them received a letter from the court.
Only with said permit in hand could I purchase a hand gun. It is not left up to the dealer to investigate you, as in Virginia.

[Voyager]

@Mr. Moto

Some of these regulations are reasonable. Most are not.

Which ones aren’t, and why? I don’t see anything in the list which would prevent a responsible adult from owning a gun.

[Mr.Moto]

@ltfire

Here in New York, and this was many moons ago…during the application part of getting a full carry permit, I had to submit 5 names of people that would vouch for me, and everyone of them received a letter from the court.
Only with said permit in hand could I purchase a hand gun. It is not left up to the dealer to investigate you, as in Virginia.

You’re confusing the carry permit process and the purchase process. Down here they aren’t the same animal.

Purchasing a handgun runs the standard federal checks. Getting a concealed carry permit requires an application to be made to the court system, which will check your criminal and psychiatric record and ensure that you have the proper firearms training.

[RTFirefly]

@Mr. Moto

Actually, when I go to the range here I just put on my holster and go. Open carry requires no permit at all.

Airman Doors is in Pennsylvania, which I gather from his post is more restrictive than Virginia.

[Larry_Mudd]

@E-Sabbath

Now, of course, who pays for the extensive psychological testing? You, Larry, or the gun owner? It’ll be expensive, as there is no ‘stick your head here’ machine. And I’m willing to bet it’ll be found unconstitutional, like a poll tax, as an unreasonable restriction. People have tried to put 5000% taxes on bullets, you know. Doesn’t work.

Sorry, I’m a wild-eyed radical: I think when someone exhibits stalking and other anti-social behaviour, only interacts with imaginary friends, has an observed pattern of personal dissociation and violent ideation, there is a net gain if we take a closer look at that person. For the safety of the person in question and that of their co-workers or classmates, it isn’t really cost-prohibitive. We spend a lot more on lesser things.

Not talking about mandatory psych testing as prerequisite for a gun purchase here – but enough flags had been raised that there really should have been something in place for further evaluation that could have been helpful.

It wouldn’t take a magic machine to deterimine that this young man was maybe not the sort of person who ought to be armed.

I know that many people in the U.S. seem to have an ideological belief that this sort of determination should not be made at all, but it’s absurd.

“First they came for the pathologically delusional, and I said nothing, because I wasn’t pathologically delusional…”

You really think it would necessarily lead to unreasonable restrictions?

Do you realize how paranoid that is?

Oh, wait…

[LilShieste]

@Voyager

Which ones aren’t, and why? I don’t see anything in the list which would prevent a responsible adult from owning a gun.

I agree. The only one that I’m kind of iffy on is the last one (re: insurance). And I don’t even necessarily think that it’s a bad idea.

So, I’d be interested in hearing about the potential problems with those regulations, as well.
LilShieste

[Dag_Otto]

@DanBlather

8. Guns must be insured to cover the cost of damage done by the owner or if lost or stolen.

If they are lost or stolen, the damage done by the owner is zero.

Other than that, I don’t see anything in your list of suggested restrictions that would have prevented the shooter in the Virginia tragedy from getting the guns.

[RTFirefly]

@Mr. Moto

Well, Washington, DC has gun control as well, in theory. Of course this is a complete joke, as that control does not extend to criminals who actually use guns in crime, and then typically get lighter sentences than Virginia gun criminals get.

So the contention/rant that gun control proponents have a system that works is bullshit, from what I can see.

What DanBlather said. And surely this “Look at how well gun control works in Washington, D.C.” - “How the fuck can gun control work in a jurisdiction without secure borders?” dialogue has been repeated on the Dope some astronomical number of times by now.

Richmond had a nightmare of gun crimes until they stepped up enforcement and prosecution of the existing laws under both Project EXILE and Virginia EXILE. That is what got the situation there under control. Of course, that depends on prosecuting crimes and to a great extent controlling people who aren’t inclined to follow rules. It is hard work, much harder than passing yet another gun control law, which is why most lawmakers don’t press for it, lazy bastards that they are.

One lazy-bastard law that Virginia passed at least made gangbangers in the Northeast (or those that sell guns to them) have to travel further to buy guns. That would be your one-gun-a-month law. Of course, it would help if we had more states with that law.

So you decide what works for you, gun control or prosecution of gun crimes. As for myself, I’ve seen the evidence, and it leans in favor of the approach we’re taking here.

Why is it an either-or?

[Mr.Moto]

@Voyager

Which ones aren’t, and why? I don’t see anything in the list which would prevent a responsible adult from owning a gun.

Given what happened in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, I am not at all confident that the government can be trusted to keep its hands off my guns. Therefore, I am skeptical of registration schemes.

I am also quite a bit iffy about that insurance bit at the end there. I don’t understand what end it is supposed to accomplish.

I also don’t understand how the locking of guns part will work in practice. Is locking up your house sufficient? How about a room in that house? Washington DC took this law so far that any rifles and shotguns in peoples homes had to be unloaded and unassembled, or had to have a trigger lock attached at all times, a practice so ridiculous it was found unconstitutional recently on appeal.

So yes, there were problems with the list.

[LilShieste]

@Dag Otto

Other than that, I don’t see anything in your list of suggested restrictions that would have prevented the shooter in the Virginia tragedy from getting the guns.

I don’t think DanBlather made any assertion to the contrary. He presented that list as a collection of reasonable firearm regulations.
LilShieste

[Mr.Moto]

@RTFirefly

Why is it an either-or?

It isn’t, really. But you’re leaning strongly toward the either, which would interfere with rights I exercise frequently without hurting anyone.

Keep in mind, I moved down here in 1998, and I was single then. I could have lived anywhere in the area. I intentionally did not choose Washington, even though I spent a good bit of my time there. My first apartment was in Arlington.

Want to guess what was a big reason behind that decision? Could it have been that I didn’t want my innocent hobby to make me a felon?

[LilShieste]

@Mr. Moto

Given what happened in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, I am not at all confident that the government can be trusted to keep its hands off my guns. Therefore, I am skeptical of registration schemes.

I’m not following what you mean - could you explain this some more, Mr. Moto? (serious question, not sarcastic)
LilShieste

[Fish]

@RickJay

…unless Bush is capable of raising the dead or reversing the course of time.

I think it’s been proven that Bush capable of reversing the course of bugger all except the Constitution.

[Mr.Moto]

@LilShieste

I’m not following what you mean - could you explain this some more, Mr. Moto? (serious question, not sarcastic)

New Orleans cops went door to door and demanded that people give up their guns. If they didn’t comply, they burst in and searched the home.

Then they left. In many cases, those folks didn’t see cops again for days. They saw lots of looters though.

[Lord_Ashtar]

@Sailboat

That’s what they did to me for my security clearance. More or less.

One might argue that there is no constitutional right to a security clearance.

@Sailboat

You may argue that this would be expensive – charge the buyer.

Fine with me, so long as the price remains reasonable.

@Sailboat

You may argue that this would be cumbersome and slow down the rate of acquisition of guns – so what?

Also fine with me, to a point. Five days for a background check? No problem. Five weeks? That’s just silly.

What would you consider to be a reasonable time frame for a background check?

---

Gun Dealer: Sorry, the law requires a five day waiting period. We’ve got to run a background check.
Homer: Five days? But I’m mad now! I’d kill you if I had my gun.
Gun Dealer: Yeah, well you don’t.

[Lord_Ashtar]

@ltfire

Here in New York, and this was many moons ago…during the application part of getting a full carry permit, I had to submit 5 names of people that would vouch for me, and everyone of them received a letter from the court.
Only with said permit in hand could I purchase a hand gun. It is not left up to the dealer to investigate you, as in Virginia.

Again, that’s for a CCP, not to own a gun. Let’s not confuse the two.

[Lord_Ashtar]

@RedFury

What? You’d like to carry a concealed howitzer and they just won’t let you? Boo fuckin hu.

We’re talking about how to buy a gun. Why do people keep confusing the issue with concealed carry permits and talking about wanting to be armed with an M-16 and the like?

Obfuscate much, RedFury?

[LilShieste]

@Mr. Moto

New Orleans cops went door to door and demanded that people give up their guns. If they didn’t comply, they burst in and searched the home.

Then they left. In many cases, those folks didn’t see cops again for days. They saw lots of looters though.

Thanks for the explanation, Mr. Moto. Without going off on a tangent, under what authority were these cops operating, being able to do this? It’s not illegal for people to have owned those guns, right?

If that is the case, then I agree that what happened there was ridiculous. I don’t think that that situation has any bearing on the (suggested) regulations that DanBlather had posted, though. (Unless said regulations state that police officers may demand your firearm at any time, for any reason, and that you must comply.)
LilShieste

[RTFirefly]

@DanBlather

Since this thread has debased into a gun control debate (in part thanks to me) I may as well give my best thoughts as to reasonable gun regulations.

1. To operate, carry, or use a gun as an adult you must have a license and pass a test showing you understand gun safety, regulations, etc.
2. Minors must have a “learners permit” and be under the supervision of a licensed adult.
3. Handling or shooting guns while drunk or impaired is illegal.
4. All guns must be either locked up or under the direct and immediate control of a sober, awake, and licensed adult.
5. All operable guns must be registered along with their serial numbers.
6. Transfer and sale of guns requires a title transfer similar to the sale of automobiles.
7. Licenses may be revoked for people convicted of felonies (or under a restraining order?).
8. Guns must be insured to cover the cost of damage done by the owner or if lost or stolen.

I"ve managed to stay out of taking positions on gun control in gun threads for many years now, and it’s been conducive to my peace of mind. But what the hey - I think I’ll take a position on the registration and licensing question, anyway.

With respect to long guns, I’m against registration. Oddly enough, I find myself having some sympathy with the kooks who want to make sure that the government can’t take away their guns if the [del]Soviets[/del] Islamofascists conquer us someday. It hasn’t been a problem yet, but someday it might. You never know.

And besides, very little crime is committed with rifles of any sort. They’re visible, unwieldy, and inconvenient. Their length is a problem at short range, where your potential victim can get too close for you to shoot. By and large, long guns are down in the white noise in terms of being a societal problem.

Handguns are a different matter. To the extent that we have a gun violence problem, it’s largely a handgun violence problem. Handguns have a wide range of illegitimate, criminal purposes, and one legitimate purpose - self-defense against those carrying handguns for criminal purposes.

I can’t see why registration of handguns, complete with title transfers every time they’re sold, given away, inherited, or whatever, should be a problem for those using them for self-defense. But it would be a problem for criminals, in that it increases the risk that they can be linked to their crimes. Or that they can be locked up for carrying a handgun that’s not registered to them. Or locked up if someone else uses the handgun registered to them for a crime.

IOW, it makes it more difficult for criminals, while placing only a modest burden on law-abiding citizens.

Would it do anything about guys like Cho? No. But massacres like his are rare; it’s the day-to-day gun crime that’s more the problem.