Given the gun control is A Bad Thing, how can we minimize shootings?

This is NOT a debate about whether we should have registration, licensing, etc. It is a question about how we can minimize the number of shootings WITHOUT passing laws that restrict legitimate gun ownership and self/civil defense.

First of all, there are several categories of shootings:

  1. deliberate murder
  2. murder committed “incidentally” to some other crime
  3. suicide
  4. accidental shootings due to pure ignorance
  5. “accidental” shootings due to carelessness by someone who should know better
  6. “accidental” shootings due to, well, stupidity (i.e. playing russian roulette)
  7. being hit by a stray bullet or ricochett, whether the shot was fired legitimately or not

Legalizing drugs would prevent many deliberate shootings and the associated stray bullets.

More free public ranges would encourage people to train more with their defense guns, also reducing stray shots.

Gun safety classes should be mandatory in school. Some parents would object, but their childred need the education the most of all, since they certainly won’t get it at home, and they are most likely to see guns as “the forbidden fruit”. The classes need not involve shooting, but should include handling a gun with dummy rounds, and witnessing a gunshot’s effects on reactive targets.

Some other ideas are gun safety commercials, newspaper ads, billboards etc. Perhaps gun shops should make anyone buying THEIR FIRST gun watch a video, and give them a copy to take home.

It would also help to promote the use of gun safes, especially those quick access handgun safes. Perhaps the purchase price could be tax deductable.

(formatting fixed - Jill)

[Edited by JillGat on 08-07-2001 at 09:20 PM]

oopps

You have some good ideas, but some just won’t work.

Free public firing ranges won’t work because of our litigous society. I personally know two range operators and they always talk about their unusually high insurance premiums. There seems to be no way to stop frivolous lawsuits caused by negligence or sheer stupidity on the part of the shooter.

Education in schools would be great and the NRA’s Eddie Eagle program is a perfect example of how effective this program can be. Unfortunately, many in our public school system are, ahem, on the left side of the aisle, and won’t even think of allowing the NRA to come into our schools and “teach our kids how to handle and shoot guns”. This is not the aim of the Eddie Eagle program (Stop, Go, Tell, is the mantra Eddie teaches and the only thing children have to know), but most gun control advocates refuse to accept even this much education about firearms safety.

Many media outlets refuse to carry anything the NRA proposes.

How do you document a “first” gun purchase? I think that all retail gun sales should be accompanied with a copy of a manual (pamphlet?) teaching basic firearms safety and the buyer must read the manual and sign a waiver to complete the purchase.

“Legitimate gun ownership” is defined differently in different countries. The best thing would be to find a good model (e.g. Britain), and copy it.

“A good model” is defined differently, too, depending on opinion. For example, I would tend to think the USA is a good model. But, we can’t very well copy ourselves.

It’s ironic that schools, which so desperately want to teach safe-sex, won’t touch the issues of guns. It’s a shame.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground on this issue. Either we get rid of personally owned weapons, or we don’t.

If we aren’t, we might as well stop screwing around and make it mandatory for every law abiding citizen to own at least one handgun and a rifle or shotgun. The general trend would appear to be less guns in the hands of honest, law abiding citizens, and the rest in either the crooks hands or government agencies.

That seems to have worked in Kennesaw, Georgia. And in Switzerland, and to some extent (I think) Israel.

Education is probably the single biggest piece of the answer. Not just in terms of handling guns, although that would be essential. But perhaps a better dose of the Golden Rule might help (with a bit of stress on the fact that the “others” so invoked includes all others).

Uneven punishment under the law goes a long way towards undermining people’s expectations regarding the Golden Rule - addressing that might help a bit, as well. Perhaps inviolable sanctions for gun use during a crime? Two years, no probation, no parole, no good conduct credit against time served for any crime committed via gun, regardless of the sentence one receives for the assault, armed robbery, whatever? Not subject to plea bargain. If you plea bargain a probated sentence for armed robbery and it’s the very first infraction on your record, if you used a gun the two years is automatic. To be effective, I would think this would have to include Deferred Adjudication as well, but IANAL and that might get sticky.

Second time is five years, independent of the primary charge. When prison overcrowding initiates early releases, those in on drug charges come before anyone in on a gun use sentence.

Just thinkin’ out loud.

Is this really GQ?

I think this belongs in IMHO but oh well.
There are roughly 10 basic rules of gun safety and if everyone followed them, you would eliminate problems 4-7. The others require actual intention to break those rules for some purpose and these are the most difficult problems to deal with requiring complex solutions. Suicide for example requires a social/psychological solution. Laws can’t solve this, only changing the way people think and deal with their problems. Laws aren’t likely to prevent murder though they can be more effective in dealing with the murderer so he/she doesn’t repeat. Maybe a murder conviction carries automatic life sentence without parole or something. It is impossible to prevent murder by firearms unless you just gather up all the guns of the world and destroy them and the technology to create more and probably some other stuff. It’s just not feasible. I don’t think you can really even reduce the chances unless you increase the size of the defensible population by making CCW/CCL a requirement for all certified citizens or increase the presence of a police force AND make it their policy to act on an individual’s behalf to prevent crimes. This policy change is important because technically, police are not required to defend individuals from the criminal acts of others. See http://www.rkba.org/judicial/no-police-protection for more info on that.

Absolutely!!!

Try to follow this logic, if you can… There is concern over high rates of teen-age driving accidents and fatalities - so we institute Driver’s Education, in the schools. There is concern over high rates of teen-age pregnancy, STDs - so we institute Sex Education, in the schools. There is concern over drug use, addiction, alcohol abuse - so we institute DARE and AODA education programs - in the schools. Now there is a well-publicized concern over gun violence, gang shootings, and gun accidents - so we bury our heads in the sands and hope by outlawing the problem it will go away.

AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

I am a volunteer Hunter’s Education Instructor. I am passionate on the subject of gun safety, and safe gun handling. So is every other instructor and gun owner I know. We would love the opportunity to preach our gospel to kids in school - to demonstrate safety, responsibility, to demonstrate the power and effect of bullets. When we have Range Day in a Hunter’s Ed course, there is a demo period where we shoot cabbages, 5 gallon water buckets, and the like for visual effect. You should SEE the kids eyes bug out!

The children today get fed so much CRAP from TV, the movies, and video games that they have no real understanding of the power and finality of a gunshot. It’s not real to them anymore. They have the idea that a gun is a fashion accessory just like a pager or a cell phone, and are used as frequently and inconsequentially…

(AFotD steps back for a bit and wipes his brow, realizing that he’s gonna put this thread in the pit if he continues…

Please, people - education is the key! Teach the young the Proper Way! Teach them respect for the firearm! WE will do it - I know a dozen people who would jump at the chance! Let us try!

<blatant plug>
Look, you may not own a gun. You may hate guns, hunting, and everything associated with them. But give your kids a break - until we have safety education in the schools, look up such a course and enroll your kids. Talk to a sporting goods store clerk or call the folks at your local rifle range. Find a Hunter’s Ed or BB gun marksmanship course, and see if your son or daughter will take it. Do it just for the safety lessons. They might be around a gun someday when you’re not there - whose example should they follow - a responsible gun owner or the TV Tough Guy of the Week?
<end blatant plug>

IMO, the best approach is to train society the same way you train a puppy or a child.

  1. Educate. Teach owners how to handle guns safely. Offer shooting courses in school. Require training courses (for a reasonable fee) for any purchaser who is not certified as having passed a shooting course. For those of us who do not want the government to have those records will have the option of declining the certification and taking a training course with each purchase. The right to privacy and destruction of these records for anybody who so chooses will be protected by law or constitutional amendment. This would be an opt-IN measure, where the default is to destroy the records except on request of the purchaser.

  2. Enforce current laws. There are already thousands to choose from, covering everything from shootings to illegally transporting ammunition, so it should be relatively easy to pad the case load.

  3. Enforce those laws consistently. Let people find out that if you’re arrested for a gun crime, you WILL be prosecuted to the fullest extent. Don’t offer or accept plea bargains on gun violations.

  4. Enforce them strictly. Let people know that if you’re found guilty of a gun crime, you WILL suffer stiff penalties. If a punishment is not applied firmly, it is ineffective.

  5. Enforce them swiftly. Gun crimes are pretty cut and dry. Either you’re guilty or you’re not. There are possible extenuating circumstances, but it’s generally pretty simple. No long delays for trial, no running around on bail for years while your lawyer drags out the trial process. Present the facts and go.

And that’s it. Obviously my details probably are flawed because I just rattled this off of the top of my head, but the general concepts are universal and proven. Punishment has to be Firm, Consistent, and Swift for it to be of any use. Just like with a puppy.

When people realize that gun crimes are serious business, then it doesn’t take long for behavior to change.

Oh, I almost forgot:

  1. Punish gun crimes, not with prison, but with public floggings. 10 lashes for minor offenses (carrying illegally, etc), 20-50 lashes for more serious offenses (use of a gun during the commission of a crime, no injuries or shots fired; failure to secure your gun resulting in theft and subsequent use in crimes; negligent accidental shootings; etc), execution for major crimes that involve death or serious maiming of another person (murder, rape, robbery with injuries, etc).

One final point regarding this:
Number of lashes doubles for each subsequent offense, until at some point (I don’t know when) you are branded a dangerous habitual offender, and either locked up for life or executed (depending on the seriousness of your record).

kalashnikov
How can we minimize the number of shootings WITHOUT passing laws that restrict legitimate gun ownership and self/civil defense.

Excellent thought. I believe that rights come with responsibilities. And it’s important to emphasize the responsibilities alongside the rights. To their credit, I have met many gun owners who do exactly that.

Gun safety classes should be mandatory in school. Some parents would object, but their childred need the education the most of all, since they certainly won’t get it at home, and they are most likely to see guns as “the forbidden fruit”. The classes need not involve shooting, but should include handling a gun with dummy rounds, and witnessing a gunshot’s effects on reactive targets.

I’ve no particular problem with gun ed (in analogy to sex ed) but I’d like it if, like sex ed was at my school, parents can opt their kids out of it if they deliver a written request. You know, a little opt-out slip with their name, their kids name, and their signature.

I agree that those kids whose parents don’t want them to take the classes are the ones who most need it. But the same is true of sex ed, and we still let people opt their kids out of that.

Really, I don’t think the government has the right to dictate what my (or your) kids learn. I have no grudge against public schools, being the product of them myself. But I do believe that a parent should be allowed to opt their kid out of any or everything being taught. Most, of course, won’t bother. And that’s exactly as it should be. But if a few have different beliefs, well, more power to them. Let them live their lives the way they want. They’re only hurting themselves, and I believe everyone has the right to hurt themselves and only themselves if they are stupid enough to deliverately choose that. I don’t like it, but I think that’s their right never the less.

The other thing, of course, is that kids are very interested in learning about guns. How many “opt-out” slips would be given to kids and the kids would “accidentally” lose them, and “forget” to tell mom and dad until they were already signed up for the class? ;]

More free public ranges would encourage people to train more with their defense guns, also reducing stray shots.

Man, I’d settle for ANY public shooting range. The nearest one to me is about 40 miles off. Makes is hard to go shooting unless you plan your whole day around it. Fortunatly for me I don’t carry, and don’t hunt, so my lack of practice just means I’m an embarassingly poor shot. People who carry… their lives could depend on their marksmanship.

Some other ideas are gun safety commercials, newspaper ads, billboards etc. Perhaps gun shops should make anyone buying THEIR FIRST gun watch a video, and give them a copy to take home.

I’d go further. Mandatory gun safety classes. I took the NRA gun safety class before I bought my target pistol, and I can’t praise it enough. Mine took two evenings and a Saturday. It included firing my first few shots in an indoor range, under the careful and watchful eye of a very experienced instructor. You couldn’t ask for better, safer conditions.

A gun is a very powerful tool, and it’s non-trivial to operate one safely. People think because they see Arnie use a gun in the movies, they can do it too. Funny, they don’t seem to think that just because Arnie can jump a harley off a 12’ ledge into a concrete drainage canal, and land just fine, they can also do THAT.

It would also help to promote the use of gun safes, especially those quick access handgun safes. Perhaps the purchase price could be tax deductable.

Oh hell yes. Safe storage is something that I think the vast majority of gun owners neglect, and badly. It’s easy to forget about it, but it’s so crucial. It keeps your guns out of the hands of your kids, if you have any, (how many kids in those school shootings stole their guns from parents and relatives collections?) and also out of the hands of that bastard who broke into your house while you were away on vacation.

sewalk
*Education in schools would be great and the NRA’s Eddie Eagle program is a perfect example of how effective this program can be. Unfortunately, many in our public school system are, ahem, on the left side of the aisle, and won’t even think of allowing the NRA to come into our schools and “teach our kids how to handle and shoot guns”. This is not the aim of the Eddie Eagle program (Stop, Go, Tell, is the mantra Eddie teaches and the only thing children have to know), but most gun control advocates refuse to accept even this much education about firearms safety. *

Sigh. I really think my fellow liberals are quite foolish in their hysteria in not allowing, well, SOMETHING like Eddie Eagle into elementary schools. I mean geez - “Stop! Don’t touch it! Go tell an adult.” - Is that a BAD thing to be teaching our kids about guns? Christ.

I think the resistance is mostly shock driven. Seeing “NRA” on something is enough to drive some people into paranoia. Schools could so easily adapt something of their own invention, like Eddie Eagle but not quite, into their curriculums; they don’t even have to take the NRAs materials. But NNNOOOOO…

How do you document a “first” gun purchase? I think that all retail gun sales should be accompanied with a copy of a manual (pamphlet?) teaching basic firearms safety and the buyer must read the manual and sign a waiver to complete the purchase.

I don’t know how well this would fly, but maybe you have to watch a training video, then take a brief (ten question) written test. The video (and test) would cover the three basic rules of gun safety, plus any other highly important gun safety information. If you fail the test, you get to watch the video again until you figure it out. ;] I admit this wouldn’t stop someone from memorizing the info and then forgetting it ten seconds later, but it’d be a start IMO.

Though I’ll be the first to say that there are some pretty serious constitutional, and practical, problems with making a right dependent on passing a test. Jim Crow laws, anyone? :stuck_out_tongue:

Tedster
There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground on this issue. Either we get rid of personally owned weapons, or we don’t.

Although I’m a supporter of second amendment rights (though probably more left-wing than many), I do think there’s middle ground to be found here. I’m really sick of the kind of absolutist rhetoric that’s often been spewed by both sides of the gun debate. It seems like we don’t even try and find acceptable compromises on this issue, and that annoys me. I don’t think either pro or anti gun people are inherently unreasonable. I just think nobody even tries any more. I do believe that there are reasonable things we can do (hell, look at this thread) if we just put our minds to it.

If we aren’t, we might as well stop screwing around and make it mandatory for every law abiding citizen to own at least one handgun and a rifle or shotgun. The general trend would appear to be less guns in the hands of honest, law abiding citizens, and the rest in either the crooks hands or government agencies.

I’m afraid I don’t agree here either. I believe that something that you can choose to exercise or not, that’s a right. Something that you are forced to exercise is not a right, it’s a duty. And just as I believe that the right to freedom of religion gives me the right to have NO religion if I choose, and the right to free speech gives me the right to NOT speak if I choose (enhanced further by the 5th amendment, even!), so does the right to bear arms guarantee me that nobody can ever force me to own or keep a gun if I don’t want to. I don’t like the idea of the government having that kind of power over me. I want it to remain a CHOICE, now and forever. Freedom is what I want, not government mandated guns for all.

beatle, breaknrun and JoeCool

I am all for punishing criminals who use guns very harshly. If we really want to get guns off the streets, we should make the penalties for firearms in crimes extremely high. If your average thug knows it’s ten years, mandatory, waiting for him if he uses a gun, or maybe two, with parole for using a knife… which do you think he’s more likely to choose? Criminals are dumb, but they’re not entirely stupid.

Throw in legally armed citizens who carry concealed guns for self-defense, and criminals are going to stop mugging people and start doing less directly harmful stuff like property crime pretty quick.

It’s unfortunate this comes down to lesser evils, but if it’s me being shot in an alley vs. having my car broken into and the stereo taken, I know which one I’m choosing…

But JoeCool, about the public floggings - betcha it’d never fly. “Cruel and unsusual punishment.” A little barbaric for my tastes, too…
-Ben

{fixed italics. --Gaudere}

[Edited by Gaudere on 08-08-2001 at 05:30 PM]

If you think Britain provides a good example for gun ownership rules, it is clear that you do not believe that free citizens should be allowed to keep and bear arms, since that is the attitude of the Brits.

The Australians and Canadians seem to be following the British policy. It hasn’t led to any reduction of violent crime in any of those countries…just the opposite in fact.

Whereas it is true that US jurisdictions that have “liberalized” gun ownership and concealed carry laws have experienced a decrease in such crimes, despite hysterical predictions that those juridictions would become “Dodge Cities”…

It seems to me that people who are opposed to the Second Ammendment simply don’t trust their fellow citizens to behave responsibly with guns. They may also suffer from some distrust of their own ability to control their impulses or suffer from some irrational object-phobia…like my aunt who refused to have anything sharper than a butterknife in her kitchen, presumably out of fear that a sharp knife would jump out of the drawer and slice her wrists…or that she wouldn’t be able to resist the urge to slit her wrists…

I prefer to trust myself and my fellow citizens to keep and bear arms responsibly. Training is important, as is practice with the gun. Those who behave irresponsibly and/or criminally with guns should be punished.

Both my parents were quite involved with guns from an early age (mom = living in a rural area, dad = growing up in WWII Germany). I grew up in the city, and neither myself nor my brother or sister could give a damn about guns… not part of the lifestyle or necessary in what we do. I may join the reserves soon, at which time I will learn about them - until then, I really have no interest and have NEVER been exposed to any situation involving guns, period. I guess my point is that lots of people won’t ever have a need for the knowledge, and if they do, there are plenty of good places to aquire that knowledge at a time when the person is ready, interested, and serious about learning. Guns are by no means neceassary accesories to many types of lifestyle; they’re simply powerful weapons that a person has the choice of using or not. I can see things like sex-ed in schools because it will be a part of just about every human’s life (hopefully :p), so it’s a good idea to know something about it. Guns are optional… adored by some and dispised by others, and always contraversial… so perhaps they ought not be pushed on kids in school - sort of like forcing all kids to learn how to use a spear?. The knowledge would be good, but it doesn’t really mix with the school atmosphere where kids are learning math, history, and basic guidelines to society and employment. Need some learnin’ on weapons? sign up at the nearest hunting store or army base after class.

I think it’s pretty universally accepted that Switzerland has a model that works better than any other in the world, but anyone in favor of gun control acts as if that country doesn’t even exist. They always seem to want to point to the “European” model, when they really mean Britain or Germany. What’s so wrong with the Swiss approach? Switzerland is as European as a country can be. Gun-related crime in Switzerland is almost non-existant yet firearms ownership is pervasive.

IMO, people need enough education so that they don’t have to turn to crime to make a living. It’s really a societal problem. Teaching people from a young age how to handle guns safely will reduce the number of accidental shootings. (“Stop! Don’t touch it! Tell an adult” is a good start.) The big problem is to stop people from using them illegally. I think this can only be done by “improving their lot in life”. That comes from education. But how do you stop crimes of passion? What can you do to stop people from becoming very angry and grabbing a weapon (of any kind, not just a gun)?

As for Switzerland, don’t they have mandatory military service? Sure, there are a lot of automatic weapons floating around, but these people are active or former members of the military. While it’s true that there is very little gun crime in Switzerland, do we really want mandatory military service in the U.S.? (Please note that I am pro-choice and have chosen to own firearms. Just making the point that the “Swiss model” might not work here.)

I think it comes down to people having a good general education, the liklihood of making a legitimate living, and better upbringing by parents. (Try to legislate that!)

Modernronan2, but now that you mention your arguments, maybe it’s not such a bad deal.

Since the 2nd Amendment is designed for “militias” which are basically every able bodied citizen, it only makes sense to require everyone to own weapons as basically a national security issue.

We don’t have a draft anymore for military service, but what the hey. We have a serious problem with criminals, but the knowledge that any number of people could be carrying a weapon would probably decrease crime pretty severely.

Again, I’m joking, but it seems clear that prohibiting law abiding citizens a means of self defense against gun toting criminals is insane- certainly more so than suing the gun manufacterers for crimes committed with their products.
Our country is being turned upside down, by the way.

We need better mental heath care access to all Americans. In recent mass killings many of the killers had a history of mental problems, and in many cases poor supervision.
I would exchange paying more taxes to help families with special needs than having to go through another mass killing.
One example: the church massacre in Fort Worth, Texas: The killer was mentally unstable but his lone old father was taking care of him. When the father died, he completely lost it, and there was virtually no one to take care of him or that his medication was taken. No caseworker was there to intervene. About a month later the massacre happened.
Having more affordable mental care access will also help in the prevention of suicides.

Another point: one of the arguments to protect gun ownership has been to put the blame of gun violence in the entertainment industry. But the movie industry, for example, dodges having too much government control thanks to the MPAA.
The point is: were is the MPAA for guns? Remember that many in the movie industry hates the guts of the MPAA because of censorship issues. So the NRA is not it. The ATF is the government so again no.
An independent gun organization that, with the backing of gun owners, gives some real regulating pain to their own members in exchange for less government intervention, is sorely needed.