The shooting in Thousand Oaks California.

1. 82

   peoplepower73posted 6 years ago

   GA and others, sometimes it takes a long time for me to sort things out.  I realize, I never proposed anything, but I said, "I believe reasonable gun control is the next best thing, because we don't have the funding or resources for mental institutions.
   
   I hate to sound trite, but when people get defensive they not only put words in their mouth, but in mine as well. That is the reason I can't come up with anything  that works. If one reads my underlying message, what I'm doing is protesting the fact that nothing is done to stop this carnage.  Here is my opening statement.
   
   "The shooting in Thousand Oaks is too close to home. I use to work in Thousand Oaks. Our thoughts and prayers are with you means nothing to those who lost loved ones. We are being attacked by domestic terrorism from within by mentally unstable people who have easy access to lethal weapons. Every time we have one of these attacks, we lose more loved ones and a little more of our freedom.
   
   I have been on many forum websites and argued with the anti-gun control people. Their main argument is that statistics show more people are murdered by other means than guns every year. They ask, "Should we ban those items as well?" They go to ad absurdum to include, but are not limited to trains, planes, cars and even knifes, and forks.
   
   Almost all mass-shootings are caused by mentally unstable people. However, without proper funding and legislation for mental institutions, this carnage will continue. I believe reasonable gun control is the next best thing that can be done. But guns are big business for the gun industry, gun lobbyist, and the NRA.The anti-gun control people fight any type of gun control because they feel it is a violation of their 2nd Amendment rights.
   
   Is arming everybody the answer? I don't thinks so. There was a security guard at the entrance of the bar in Thousand Oaks and he was the first one who was taken out by the shooter...I have a little great nephew, who asked while he was being taken to school, "Is it safe for me to go to school anymore?" What a sad commentary on our what our life has become."
   
   GA:  That's it, it is a protest to do something, because I believe doing nothing is as bad or worse than doing something. What I suggested was reasonable gun control, meaning it's as close as you can get to  a win, win situation for all involved.  If I knew what the answer was, I wouldn't be sitting here on this forum.  I would submit it to those who could implement my solution.
   
   Perhaps, before we reply in these controversial forums,  we should always go back to the OP's opening statement to keep us on track.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      With this I think we can all agree...all except the default position of "I can't think of anything, so institute more gun controls even though they don't work". 
      
      It's a tough nut to crack, but to date we have nothing whatsoever to even try.  Everything we've done is centered on the tool used rather than the who's and why's of the problem, and it hasn't accomplished a thing.  It is long past time to default to a different position - almost anything that stands at least some chance of actually working.  Arming the public.  Armed guards in schools.  Further education. Public recognition that anyone that kills someone else is crazy as a hoot owl (whether true or not).    Anything but the same old thing that has failed us so badly and left so many loved ones lying on the ground.
      
      And PP, I'll go further.  Sandy Hook really struck home to me as I picked up my 2 small grandchildren at their elementary school the next day and sat there watching as a hundred tiny people poured out of the building, safe and sound...this time.  So I haunt forums and social media, tryiing to make people understand that gun controls just   don't   work!  That we need answers, not feel good programs to put it out of mind until the next time.
      
      You want to know what's sad?  Every time there is a mass shooting my hub on gun controls skyrockets in views.  That's the only time anyone cares - when people are dying!  As soon as the tears dry and the furor dies, it's all quiet again and no one wants to discuss violence in our culture.
      
      And I think a big part of the reason is that it means there is something wrong with us, with our culture and that's unacceptable.  It means that we ALL have a price to pay instead of just those demonized gun owners.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Mike you make a good point about 'sorting things out' and 'going back to the Op' to make sure everyone is talking about the same thing.
      
      But to be fair, what brought me into our exchange was your comment about reasonable gun control - perhaps starting with this: "I believe a start would be to ban any further sale of the most common weapons that are used in mass shootings."
      https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/341 … ost4045338
      
      I joined the conversation because I don't think that is "reasonable gun control."
      
      I am not against more gun control. I could live with a reasonable waiting period, universal retail purchase background checks, (by that I mean to exclude personal sales, like me to my brother-in-law), safe storage requirements, and other similar things. But those things must not include a cost burden, like expensive permit fees or expensive training courses.
      
      I am not against more gun control as an action, but I am against more gun control that has no more expectation than a hope that it would be effective. That is how I saw your comment. Hope, based on unsupported logic.
      
      Law abiding citizens will be the only ones that pay a price for more gun control laws if they infringe  their 2nd Amendment Right. So, if they have to bear a cost, then the expectations of those new controls must be supportable.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 89

         wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         That's my feeling as well.  Not only must the expectations be supportable, but they must be commensurate with taking rights and freedoms from some of the people.  What is being asked for is not a simple thing; it attacks the roots of our society and there be some strong expectations that go a long way to ending the problem.  Not just a small step, but a giant one considering the price to be paid.
         
         When we gave up rights to homeland security there was an enormous uproar, but the result was no more 911's.  A pretty big result for a big imposition.  Before we remove rights we need an honest expectation of big results.

         replyreport
         1. 82

            peoplepower73posted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Everybody:  What I presented was an opinion that I'm entitled to.  You guys had the expectations that I could carry this through to fruition of some sort. 
            
            Like I said before, If I had the answers, I wouldn't be sitting here on a forum arguing about whether my opinion is going to be the eventual cause of the confiscation of all firearms. 
            
            But whenever you guys hear the words "Gun Control", you get all up in arms (no pun intended) and you start arguing about how they are coming for your guns.
            
            It's not up to me to determine what is reasonable gun control, but my thinking is, it includes not coming for your guns.  I know that is hard for anti- gun control people to believe and  accept, but that is my thinking. 
            
            The reason I said banning any further sale, is because it was law before and it could be improved on with proper legislation. Also universal background checks could be improved upon with better checking of the mentally ill.  Obama had a plan, but it was shot down (another pun) by the NRA and the republican congress after the Sandy Hook shootings.

            replyreport
2. 0

   Ed Fisherposted 6 years ago

   You people who wholly defend the first or the fifth amendment to the death of all debating yet are perfectly willing to cave at the first hint of the thought of doing same with with the second amendment are an interesting breed of Americans.
   
   In that sense alone I am proud to be of the percentage of people who see right through that hypocrisy as if we were superman ourselves.   The vast majority of you , in my experience , when handed a firearm for "show and tell " purposes are as likely to grab it from the wrong end as not .
   
   And it's the same with the actual debate .
   
   
   

   replyreport
3. 0

   Ed Fisherposted 6 years ago

   Peoplepower , You have a good heart ,  somewhere inside the man there is the desire to do a good thing , to bring about the positives of some kind of change in gun deaths .  There is honor in that !  What you are failing to see is that there are so many guns and so many legal and safe gun owners in America .
   
   Yet, not only are there hundreds of millions of guns but millions of hunters , recreational shooters , many many female shooters to say nothing about men and women  who own just for protection . The sporting , hunting and collecting industry is major in size and scope  and it is incredible in the amount of billions of dollars spent every single year in America .
   
   Yes , you ARE up against the NRA , larger than most small countries , the lobbying powers of the NRA is outrageously important in U.S. politics , in spends millions of dollars in gun education on all of these  gun owning citizens  above .
   
   Where Peoplepower is wrong but in an honorable sense ?  He is wrong in that the REASONS for mass shootings is in the proliferation of legal firearms ,  He is misguided in that he thinks the system of our laws is effective if we WOULD just eliminate the tools of the criminal or the mentally defective.  And he is wrong in ignoring the abject failures of these institutions of justice and of mental health.  He's also obviously thinks the policing of crime and mental health are effective enough NOW .

   replyreport