Posted on Feb 19, 2018
Trump backs effort to improve gun background checks: White House
5.23K
116
71
9
9
0
Whether or not you like the President, this is a step in the right direction if you feel that better backgeoind checks as part of a comprehensive set of gun control policies will ultimately reduce the amount of gun violence and reduce the number of gun related homicides from over 15,000 per year down to the same levels most of the rest of the 1st world has which for the US would be around 800 people. Still a tragic number but something to aim for.
Trump backs effort to improve gun background checks: White House
Posted from yahoo.com
Gun Control
2nd Amendment
Republicans
Democrats
Law
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 21
9
9
0
I support good background checks. I have been subject to them in the past and when I obtained by CC permit. There are issues beyond the background check. If there is nothing in the check then there is nothing to stop the purchase which was the case in this shooting and the one at the Church in Texas.
In Texas the USAF failed to inform the system of his conviction which could have stopped a legal purchase. In Florida he had a clean record, nothing would have stopped the purchase but the FBI could have had they done their job. Both of this shootings have one thing in common. The federal government not doing it's job.
We need to ensure we prosecute and get felony convictions on violent people. Pleading down charges and getting misdemeanors does not help anyone.
We have to come to terms with our brutal reality. There are people out there that can and will walk into a school and murder unarmed children, teacher and staff. The average shooting takes about 5 minutes from first shot to last. The cops will not be there in under 5 minutes. Someone needs to be able to engage the shooter or they can kill indiscriminately. That is our reality. To hide from it and kid ourselves about background checks is only going to sentence more to death at the hands of a killer.
In Texas the USAF failed to inform the system of his conviction which could have stopped a legal purchase. In Florida he had a clean record, nothing would have stopped the purchase but the FBI could have had they done their job. Both of this shootings have one thing in common. The federal government not doing it's job.
We need to ensure we prosecute and get felony convictions on violent people. Pleading down charges and getting misdemeanors does not help anyone.
We have to come to terms with our brutal reality. There are people out there that can and will walk into a school and murder unarmed children, teacher and staff. The average shooting takes about 5 minutes from first shot to last. The cops will not be there in under 5 minutes. Someone needs to be able to engage the shooter or they can kill indiscriminately. That is our reality. To hide from it and kid ourselves about background checks is only going to sentence more to death at the hands of a killer.
(9)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
MAJ James Woods
Better more thorough or integrated background checks are not a silver bullet. The weapons from Sandy Hook were taken from the shooters mother after he murdered her, the Vegas guns were all legally bought as was Parkland. Columbine's weapons, I believe, were illegally purchased.
That is why you have to harden the targets. We have people that demonstrate they will murder women, school children, teachers etc. with no mercy. This began to change about the mid 1990's. We have to address this brutal reality. We can pretend we can stop shooters with technology but we are kidding ourselves. We have people with dark hearts that need to be stopped by people ready to do real violence on them to protect innocent life.
Better more thorough or integrated background checks are not a silver bullet. The weapons from Sandy Hook were taken from the shooters mother after he murdered her, the Vegas guns were all legally bought as was Parkland. Columbine's weapons, I believe, were illegally purchased.
That is why you have to harden the targets. We have people that demonstrate they will murder women, school children, teachers etc. with no mercy. This began to change about the mid 1990's. We have to address this brutal reality. We can pretend we can stop shooters with technology but we are kidding ourselves. We have people with dark hearts that need to be stopped by people ready to do real violence on them to protect innocent life.
(0)
(0)
MAJ James Woods
Cpl Jeff N. - Again, as you stated in one of your posts, the conversation should actually address the issues. Why are we talking about improving existing background checks if none of the suggested improvements would've stopped any of the examples I provided from happening?
As for hardening the targets, you mean armed security and staff, active and passive defenses at schools and other locations. That's not facing reality, that's avoiding the other options that goes against one's right to have any gun and accessory they want.
It's a harsh reality that armor piercing bullets exist and can be used against police yet doesn't stop the argument for it to be legal for consumer purchase. It's a harsh reality that rifles can be purchased same day in some states while there's a waiting period for hand guns so it's not surprising rifles are the firearms of choose in mass shootings. It's a harsh reality that family members and friends know someone with violent behavior and disturbing views on life but don't have the ability to prevent that person from acquiring a gun without being able to provide sufficient proof a crime is about to be committed.
How dare we should hope to be like other industrialized nations that do not have the amount of gun violence nor see the need to harden the targets.
As for hardening the targets, you mean armed security and staff, active and passive defenses at schools and other locations. That's not facing reality, that's avoiding the other options that goes against one's right to have any gun and accessory they want.
It's a harsh reality that armor piercing bullets exist and can be used against police yet doesn't stop the argument for it to be legal for consumer purchase. It's a harsh reality that rifles can be purchased same day in some states while there's a waiting period for hand guns so it's not surprising rifles are the firearms of choose in mass shootings. It's a harsh reality that family members and friends know someone with violent behavior and disturbing views on life but don't have the ability to prevent that person from acquiring a gun without being able to provide sufficient proof a crime is about to be committed.
How dare we should hope to be like other industrialized nations that do not have the amount of gun violence nor see the need to harden the targets.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
MAJ James Woods - James, there is no one thing that will improve our outcomes. Background checks are one of many things to work on. Since 1998 there have been about 1 million denials on NICS checks. So 1 million fewer purchases, the vast majority were due to the applicant being a criminal of some sort (State, federal etc). So they do stop some legal purchases. Background checks will not address it all.
Effective security is always layered it doesn't really work well any other way. Schools need layered security which can have fences around perimeters, cameras in some areas, limited entry points to the school, metal detectors perhaps and even locker and car checks etc. and yes, even armed security. That can be teachers with permits that are comfortable doing so or armed/hired security or some combination.
How many armor piercing bullets are used in crimes? Almost none. That is a red herring. Rifles are not the "weapon of choice". Handguns are used in far more shootings that AR-15's or rifles in general (between 1982 and 2017). Your assumption that rifles are the issue is misplaces. It makes sense too, handguns are far easier to conceal and are better in close quarters than rifles. Most thing that Sandy Hook was done with an AR, it was not. The shooter used hand guns. He had a rifle in the car but did not use it. This was widely misreported by a media with an agenda.
We are not like most other countries in many ways. We have a bill of rights and a Constitution and a government beholden to the people. I have a number of things we can do to help reduce the shootings but the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun. Most shootings are over in 5 minutes. The cops will not make it there for more than 5 minutes. You can ignore the reality of the depravity we have in this country but that will not change it. We have people willing to kill innocent school children, their teachers and anyone else that gets in their way.
Effective security is always layered it doesn't really work well any other way. Schools need layered security which can have fences around perimeters, cameras in some areas, limited entry points to the school, metal detectors perhaps and even locker and car checks etc. and yes, even armed security. That can be teachers with permits that are comfortable doing so or armed/hired security or some combination.
How many armor piercing bullets are used in crimes? Almost none. That is a red herring. Rifles are not the "weapon of choice". Handguns are used in far more shootings that AR-15's or rifles in general (between 1982 and 2017). Your assumption that rifles are the issue is misplaces. It makes sense too, handguns are far easier to conceal and are better in close quarters than rifles. Most thing that Sandy Hook was done with an AR, it was not. The shooter used hand guns. He had a rifle in the car but did not use it. This was widely misreported by a media with an agenda.
We are not like most other countries in many ways. We have a bill of rights and a Constitution and a government beholden to the people. I have a number of things we can do to help reduce the shootings but the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun. Most shootings are over in 5 minutes. The cops will not make it there for more than 5 minutes. You can ignore the reality of the depravity we have in this country but that will not change it. We have people willing to kill innocent school children, their teachers and anyone else that gets in their way.
(0)
(0)
MAJ James Woods
Cpl Jeff N. - No kidding that there are no one thing that solves all outcomes; however, introducing a solution that doesn't address the problem is also wasting our time.
-Effective security is layered but we shouldn't feel that we need fences and walls, cameras and guards everywhere. That's a cop out defense to satisfy one's personal desire to have access to anything they want.
-Almost none? So the answer isn't zero. There is evidence that armor piercing bullets have been found at crime scenes but it's still okay to make them available to the public and the police just has to deal with it. Uh ok.
-Rifles aren't the weapon of choice? Tell us again what weapons has been used in mass shootings the last 10 years? 20 years? Not shootings that resulted in less than 5 deaths to include the shooter; actual mass casualty events. If you're going to generalize all gun related violence between '82-'17 to support your hand gun argument, you're using disinformation.
-Our Bill of Rights and Constitution makes us not like other countries? We're not the only democracy in the world. We're not the only country that guarantees rights for their citizens in those democracies. They have constitutions or declarations or articles or a different name that defines their democracy and rule of law and rights. Many of them allows the right to own a gun and have the same mental health and family issues. Yet somehow they have lower murder rates, lower incarceration rates, lower mass shooting rates; so yeah we're not like most other countries and it has nothing to do with our Bill of Rights and Constitution.
-"the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun." No kidding. No one is saying you stop an active shooter with a knife, taser, or big stick. Now lets stop being reactive and start being proactive which means prevention which means telling some individuals they cannot own a gun because they have a documented history of violence that should be reportable.
-Effective security is layered but we shouldn't feel that we need fences and walls, cameras and guards everywhere. That's a cop out defense to satisfy one's personal desire to have access to anything they want.
-Almost none? So the answer isn't zero. There is evidence that armor piercing bullets have been found at crime scenes but it's still okay to make them available to the public and the police just has to deal with it. Uh ok.
-Rifles aren't the weapon of choice? Tell us again what weapons has been used in mass shootings the last 10 years? 20 years? Not shootings that resulted in less than 5 deaths to include the shooter; actual mass casualty events. If you're going to generalize all gun related violence between '82-'17 to support your hand gun argument, you're using disinformation.
-Our Bill of Rights and Constitution makes us not like other countries? We're not the only democracy in the world. We're not the only country that guarantees rights for their citizens in those democracies. They have constitutions or declarations or articles or a different name that defines their democracy and rule of law and rights. Many of them allows the right to own a gun and have the same mental health and family issues. Yet somehow they have lower murder rates, lower incarceration rates, lower mass shooting rates; so yeah we're not like most other countries and it has nothing to do with our Bill of Rights and Constitution.
-"the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun." No kidding. No one is saying you stop an active shooter with a knife, taser, or big stick. Now lets stop being reactive and start being proactive which means prevention which means telling some individuals they cannot own a gun because they have a documented history of violence that should be reportable.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I am in agreement (LifeTime NRA member). I don't mind improving the system. The continued failure to enforce existing laws needs to be addressed as well to include stricter sentencing for straw purchasers.
(6)
(0)
Susan Foster
What existing laws and what are straw purchasers? Honest question. RPers have taught me a lot about guns and ammo this week.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Amazingly, there is no federal law against gun trafficking
And efforts to close the gap have been stymied by the gun lobby.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Obama’s empty tough-talk: Gun prosecutions plummet on his watch
President Obama decries gun violence and presses for more laws to restrict ownership, yet his Justice Department has prosecuted 25 percent fewer cases.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
Here we go again. After every horrific incident, we "discuss" the issue. But, what really is the issue? Did the perpetrator skirt existing laws to procure the weapon he used? Did the system deliver a weapon into the hands of someone who should have been barred? Is the issue a faulty law or absence of a needed law, or is it a failure of the "agencies" to enforce the law? Of course, such things require thoughtful inquiry and investigation, don't they? Are we now responding to such a process, or are we responding to the hysteria of the moment?
(5)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
It ; looks like he complied with the law on purchase and that there was no reason under current statues to bar that Purchase even if the FBI had interviewed him since his posts were not tactfully criminal just bug-nuts crazy. Crazy posts are not criminal just crazy, and crazy comes under the jurisdiction of county and state,
None of the current laws even if enforced perfectly would have made a difference
Florida social services had a shot, but they determined he was not a threat.
None of the current laws even if enforced perfectly would have made a difference
Florida social services had a shot, but they determined he was not a threat.
(3)
(0)
CDR (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish thank you for the response. Those are excellent questions that need to be explored further. Unfortunately I don’t think that will happen in this polarized environment. But I do believe something has to change. What it is I don’t know.
(3)
(0)
MAJ James Woods
Well, Jack, we do agree on one thing. Are we now responding to a process or are we responding to the hysteria of the moment?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google