A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

[TwistedSage]

I was just following your line of thinking that growing your own should make it undoubtedly legal.

I was speaking specifically about pot, seeing how there were multiple proposals correlating marijuana regulation with gun violence. Still not accounting for the criminalization of marijuana being part of the entourage effect of issues we are seeing now. Of the failed war on drugs there have been more prosecutions for marijuana than any other drug. Marijuana still being federally in the same class of drugs as heroin. Even though people of all classes use pot, it is mainly the poorer people that feel the brunt of criminalization.

To bring it back to the op I just think that heavy regulations and penalties surrounding pot do nothing to address gun violence and the continued correlation of pot to the criminal element and gun use is hurtful to both gun rights and the right to grow or use marijuana. It was a flawed premise from the start of criminalization.

I think one of the most effective regulation they can pass would be for people to have to take some sort of gun competency and training course. This alone I beleive would weed out so many people that couldbt be hassled to have to take time and do something to get something they want. If the people who say they really want to hunt but can't find the time to take hunters ed is any indication, then I think having to take a course prior to purchasing your first weapon would deter a lot of people that probably shouldn't be able to just go buy a gun.

 

[88man]

Great post. I've wondered about many of the same things.

How many lives would we save if everyone had to blow into a device on their steering column before their vehicle would start?

way way more than the number of school shooting deaths. See its just not a political agenda item of the left so it will never be discussed or be a political talking point.

 

[88man]

I was speaking specifically about pot, seeing how there were multiple proposals correlating marijuana regulation with gun violence. Still not accounting for the criminalization of marijuana being part of the entourage effect of issues we are seeing now. Of the failed war on drugs there have been more prosecutions for marijuana than any other drug. Marijuana still being federally in the same class of drugs as heroin. Even though people of all classes use pot, it is mainly the poorer people that feel the brunt of criminalization.

To bring it back to the op I just think that heavy regulations and penalties surrounding pot do nothing to address gun violence and the continued correlation of pot to the criminal element and gun use is hurtful to both gun rights and the right to grow or use marijuana. It was a flawed premise from the start of criminalization.

I think one of the most effective regulation they can pass would be for people to have to take some sort of gun competency and training course. This alone I beleive would weed out so many people that couldbt be hassled to have to take time and do something to get something they want. If the people who say they really want to hunt but can't find the time to take hunters ed is any indication, then I think having to take a course prior to purchasing your first weapon would deter a lot of people that probably shouldn't be able to just go buy a gun.

no data, but I bet there are more people shot in drug dealings and lets include pot than all the school shootings combined the past 20 years. I bet those gang banger dealers will make sure they follow common sense gun laws.

 

[Tiredofthebickering]

Less than 10% of suicides are over the age of 75. Just about half of suicides are 34-65yo, and about a third is 12-34yo. On a per 100,000 basis rate of suicide of 65+ is less than that of age groups 24-65. (https://www.sprc.org/scope/age) You have to go to the small subset of 75+ men to get the statistic that makes this a logical end-of-life choice as you suggest.

Suicide, and the suffering that leads up to it, is a tragedy, not a pinnacle of freedom. You have a lot to learn about mental health.

Yes, I have plenty to learn about mental health.

To be fair, I specifically said "firearm" suicide and referenced a paper from Johns Hopkins which I assumed to be accurate. If we're no longer talking about firearms related deaths that many of prior thoughts only become more valid.

I apologize for being so callous with the next statement, but it's to the heart of what I've been trying to say. A dead brain can no longer suffer from mental illness or any other form of suffering. Death is the ultimate release (freedom) from suffering for THE DEAD PERSON. I've acknowledged it is tragic on the survivors. I've acknowledged my own spiritual beliefs concerning suicide. I said nothing of the suffering leading to suicide. It would be impossible to quantify pre-death suffering from any cause of future death as a data point that could be compared to other causes of death.

Suicide is almost exclusively an act of violence against one's self only. I'm making the argument that it shouldn't be included within the same discussion as firearm violence against others. And I'm making the further argument that if we're genuinely concerned about saving the most human lives then we shouldn't be talking about firearm suicides specifically, or firearm violence in general.

As a whole suicides accounted for less than 50K deaths in America in 2020 (here) and (here). The top three causes of death combined outnumber it at a rate of nearly 36:1 (here). That is not to say that funding and resources around suicide or mental illness are not a worthwhile endeavor. That is to say that on a scale of potential impact, it ranks lower than many other areas of concern.

And all of that being said, this is a worthless discussion. If one is personally impacted by mental health or suicide, one will likely care about that more than obesity related diseases. If one watches a family member slowly eat themselves (or drink themselves) to an early grave then one will likely care about that more than mental illness (although there is potentially correlation there). It is likely impossible for us to consider these topics from a purely analytical, data oriented viewpoint. If it were, gun violence would barely register a blip on our radar. But we're emotional, and drawn to the (self defined) tragic, and our own personal experiences influence the weight of any particular tragedy. Ignore the data, focus on what impacts you personally, and invest your personal energy into making a difference towards the particular tragic thing you care about most. And in the meantime, expect others to largely do the same whether it agrees with you, and the data, or not.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I do think that whoever owns the gun should also be responsible for it. If your gun is used in a crime because you didn't secure it you should be charged for negligence. There would be exceptions to this like you leave your gun in your locked car because you are somewhere that doesn't allow guns. Then someone breaks in and steals it.

MA has a secure storage law, and essentially this ^.

If you have a gun stolen you have to report it and it that incident will be looked at when you go to renew your license. In your car unless you have a concealed carry aka "Unrestricted LTC", your firearm must be locked in either a hard sided case or have a trigger lock in place in a soft case. There are additional rules with hand guns and high capacity firearms. The best way to be legal is to always case your gun and put in a trigger lock.

Couple guys in the parking lot told me that game wardens will bust you if for instance you take your trigger lock off and have your gun leaning up against your car when your getting ready... or if you load it before shooting light.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I apologize for being so callous with the next statement, but it's to the heart of what I've been trying to say. A dead brain can no longer suffer from mental illness or any other form of suffering. Death is the ultimate release (freedom) from suffering for THE DEAD PERSON. I've acknowledged it is tragic on the survivors. I've acknowledged my own spiritual beliefs concerning suicide. I said nothing of the suffering leading to suicide. It would be impossible to quantify pre-death suffering from any cause of future death as a data point that could be compared to other causes of death.

Suicide is almost exclusively an act of violence against one's self only. I'm making the argument that it shouldn't be included within the same discussion as firearm violence against others. And I'm making the further argument that if we're genuinely concerned about saving the most human lives then we shouldn't be talking about firearm suicides specifically, or firearm violence in general.

As a whole suicides accounted for less than 50K deaths in America in 2020 (here) and (here). The top three causes of death combined outnumber it at a rate of nearly 36:1 (here). That is not to say that funding and resources around suicide or mental illness are not a worthwhile endeavor. That is to say that on a scale of potential impact, it ranks lower than many other areas of concern.

And all of that being said, this is a worthless discussion. If one is personally impacted by mental health or suicide, one will likely care about that more than obesity related diseases. If one watches a family member slowly eat themselves (or drink themselves) to an early grave then one will likely care about that more than mental illness (although there is potentially correlation there). It is likely impossible for us to consider these topics from a purely analytical, data oriented viewpoint. If it were, gun violence would barely register a blip on our radar. But we're emotional, and drawn to the (self defined) tragic, and our own personal experiences influence the weight of any particular tragedy. Ignore the data, focus on what impacts you personally, and invest your personal energy into making a difference towards the particular tragic thing you care about most. And in the meantime, expect others to largely do the same whether it agrees with you, and the data, or not.

Where do you land on drugs then... should all schedule 1 drugs be legal?

Personally I struggle with Meth being illegal, but self harm with firearms being ok.

 

[Irrelevant]

You have a lot to learn about mental health.

You did a real good job on this thread up until that comment. Trying to establish your belief on this matter as superior to another is not consistent with an open discussion.

 

[woods89]

way way more than the number of school shooting deaths. See its just not a political agenda item of the left so it will never be discussed or be a political talking point.

I don't necessarily see it as left vs right, but yes, for some reason we tend to skip over a lot of things that kill a lot of young people to get to mass shootings. I think something about them is particularly horrifying to us, and rightfully so, but if sparing lives is the goal, there's some low hanging fruit.

I'm 33, and I've never been legitimately threatened by a firearm. I cannot count the number of times I've had to take some sort of preliminary evasive action on the road, and I would guess a certain percentage absolutely were impaired.

 

[Tiredofthebickering]

Where do you land on drugs then... should all schedule 1 drugs be legal?

Personally I struggle with Meth being illegal, but self harm with firearms being ok.

Honestly, considering public opinion on both alcohol and marijuana, there is certainly an argument to be made that nearly all drugs should be legal at least within one's home. There should probably be caveat about purchasing said drugs from an FDC approved/inspected manufacturer/seller just for the general safety of the consumer. I've never personally understood the public or legislative difference of opinion towards various mind/mood altering substances. Why can someone get blackout drunk in a local business but can't do a hallucinogenic drug in the relative safety of one's own home?

I have personal moral objections to most drugs and alcohol as I think they are a net negative on society. But I'm not foolish enough to believe that legislating my morals upon a country is a wise move. So, once you've made way for excessive alcohol abuse with no real public disapproval (rather, celebration in some aspects), you might as well go all the way and allow the rest. Of course, you might as well regulate and tax the snot out of is as well lol.

 

[Nick87]

Saw this pop up tonight on youtube.

 

[DouglasR]

Saw this pop up tonight on youtube.

Dude I almost shared this.
Someone needs to tell the principal not to point the barrel at her chest when she aggressively slaps the clip in!

 

[Bigjay73]

Dude I almost shared this.
Someone needs to tell the principal not to point the barrel at her chest when she aggressively slaps the clip in!

Someone needs to know that it's a magazine, not a clip

 

[DouglasR]

Someone needs to know that it's a magazine, not a clip

Omg I’m the goose again.
I wonder if it had bullets in it?

 

[woods89]

Great post. I've wondered about many of the same things.

How many lives would we save if everyone had to blow into a device on their steering column before their vehicle would start?

I got curious enough to Google it.

In 2020, 32 people died per day from accidents involving drunk drivers, per NHTA. In other words, we have the equivalent to the Uvalde shooting every 16-18 hours. Not all children, I realize. And if every vehicle had a breathalyzer on the steering column that disabled the vehicle, we could arguably drop that to almost zero.

Seriously, one person dies every 45 minutes here in the US. Why isn't this a bigger deal?

 

[LWC55]

I got curious enough to Google it.

In 2020, 32 people died per day from accidents involving drunk drivers, per NHTA. In other words, we have the equivalent to the Uvalde shooting every 16-18 hours. Not all children, I realize. And if every vehicle had a breathalyzer on the steering column that disabled the vehicle, we could arguably drop that to almost zero.

Seriously, one person dies every 45 minutes here in the US. Why isn't this a bigger deal?

This is a good question. I guess we have too many people that like to drink and don't feel it is important enough to address. Within the last week there was a prominent senator's husband get a dui. Worth over $100 million and 82 years old. Would think he might be able to at least afford a night time driver.

 

[Gr8bawana]

 

[The Hedgehog]

Start them young.

 

[88man]

This is a good question. I guess we have too many people that like to drink and don't feel it is important enough to address. Within the last week there was a prominent senator's husband get a dui. Worth over $100 million and 82 years old. Would think he might be able to at least afford a night time driver.

Its not a political talking point.

 

[88man]

MA has a secure storage law, and essentially this ^.

If you have a gun stolen you have to report it and it that incident will be looked at when you go to renew your license. In your car unless you have a concealed carry aka "Unrestricted LTC", your firearm must be locked in either a hard sided case or have a trigger lock in place in a soft case. There are additional rules with hand guns and high capacity firearms. The best way to be legal is to always case your gun and put in a trigger lock.

Couple guys in the parking lot told me that game wardens will bust you if for instance you take your trigger lock off and have your gun leaning up against your car when your getting ready... or if you load it before shooting light.

It is unsafe to lean a firearm against a vehicle loaded or unloaded. In Pa it is illegal to do so loaded or unloaded.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

It is unsafe to lean a firearm against a vehicle loaded or unloaded. In Pa it is illegal to do so loaded or unloaded.

The specific context was I had my shotgun sitting stock out, like 75% into my trunk, unloaded while I was putting stuff in my pack. The guy next to me was like… don’t do that keep it cased until the very last second, and told me about the leaning thing. In MA it’s not a “safety” law like leaning is dangerous because it could fall over it’s an “under your direct control law”. I can almost guarantee you that no criminal has gotten their hands on a shotgun because some hunter had it sitting next to them on the backseat and they sprinted up and grabbed it.

I get the safety issue, but IMHO that law is far more intrusive/ripe for abuse personally I’d be fighting that one more than background checks.

Basically Joe Pickett would be f-ed in MA.