We need an armed guard on every firetruck

[MichaeltheGreat]

They're easy to obtain if you're willing to violate laws. Ability to get guns has nothing to do with the number of gun laws on the books, really. Otherwise Mexico, Brazil, and South Africa would all be gun violence free paradises.

Nice ignorant generalization. Mexico has relatively little gun violence outside of drug cartel and related organized crime enterprises, and the vast majority of guns there are smuggled from the US. The situations in Brazil and South Africa are not analogous to each other or to Mexico.

[MichaeltheGreat]

HC just doesn't like the inconvenient truth of being constantly reminded that he has the blood of those children and the firefighters on his hands because of he supports the laws that creates the environment where those people can be gunned down in their droves on a daily basis.

He doesn't actually care that they're dead, because he's a cold heartless f*ck, but it is embarrassing all the same...

Hey MOBIUS, how's it going? I see you're the same incoherent troll as ever.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Yes, because our gun laws have completely failed to do anything meaningful for the past 80 years, we should start passing more in the blind faith that with just that much more government oversight things will become magically better. Mr. Firetruck Shooter's guns were illegal multiple times over. 1) he's a felon, 2) he had a gun in NYC, 3) he was carrying a gun in public in NYC, 4) he discharged a gun illegally in NYC, 5) he shot at people with intent to kill or maim.

So a convicted felon ineligible to possess firearms had a gun in a place where they are severely restricted to non-felons already and carried one without a permit, then discharged it and succeeded in committing murder. Maybe if we had stacked five or six more laws onto that he would have paid attention and stayed home.

Except you don't really hear of many of these things committed by people using Thompson SMGs, or real assault rifles (as opposed to the ignorant press misuse of the term), etc., or many homicides using silencers. Wonder why? Gee, maybe because those things have long been effectively regulated since the National Firearms Act back in 1934?

[regexcellent]

Or more likely because there's no percentage in having a suppressor or an automatic gun over an ordinary, inexpensive, easy to conceal handgun.

Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

[Kidlicious]

Anyway Brazil is a pretty well-developed country, if not super wealthy, especially in cities like Sao Paulo.

Poverty is a massive problem in Brazil.

We did a study last year on the factors that affect the Index of Homicides of Adolescents in each county and discovered that the three most powerful factors are population size; poverty (specifically the average income of the poorest); and the quality of education.

http://www.comunidadesegura.org/en/S...erty-in-Brazil

[MichaeltheGreat]

If mass murder and 15 minutes of posthumous fame is one's thing, then I'm sure spray and pray full auto would be the choice of nutjobs if they were easily available. These people want to make an impact.

An outright MSR ban is not going to be effective, since there are already so many out in the population, but transactional restrictions, licensing and other regulations may be at least partly effective.

[regexcellent]

An outright ban or buyback would probably drive people to sell their guns on the black market at huge profit margins and therefore would probably be counterproductive, especially in the short term.

[Dinner]

MtG, that's why we should have a massive gun buy back scheme like Australia did. Personally, I'd like to combine it with Japanese style regulations where gun owners must renew their gun license every year (I'd push the license fee as high as possible; $1000 per gun sounds right), require a 100 question test on gun laws (which must be flawlessly passed or you fail), and a yearly mental comprehensive mental health examine before you can legally own or keep a gun. Fail any of those and you can't keep your gun without it becoming an unlicensed gun. Possessing an unlicensed gun should be a felony where you spend not less than 10 years in prison, lose any and all rights to EVER own a gun again since you've proven you can't be trusted to obey the law, and a fine so massive most people would lose their home.

As a correlary anyone can turn in any gun at any police station and receive fair market value for the gun no questions asked. The police should then be legally required to destroy the gun. Law abiding people who can prove they know the laws and use the gun responsibly would still be able to get them but yahoos wouldn't and the number of guns out there would quickly dry up as hand in their guns when they can't pass or can't afford to renew the license.

[regexcellent]

Because criminals are definitely going to be interested in taking your test and registering their guns.

[Kidlicious]

MtG, that's why we should have a massive gun buy back scheme like Australia did.

[MrFun]

Because criminals are definitely going to be interested in taking your test and registering their guns.

What about laws against drinking and driving? Obviously a significant number of people across the country continue to violate this law. Should we just not have laws against drinking and driving?

[regexcellent]

What about laws against drinking and driving? Obviously a significant number of people across the country continue to violate this law. Should we just not have laws against drinking and driving?

You do not have the mental capacity to participate in this discussion.

[giblets]

Because criminals are definitely going to be interested in taking your test and registering their guns.

There's obviously no middle ground between perfectly law abiding citizens and hardened professional criminals.

[Kidlicious]

The tougher the laws get the more criminals there will be.

[Felch]

What about laws against drinking and driving? Obviously a significant number of people across the country continue to violate this law. Should we just not have laws against drinking and driving?

I'm against drunk driving laws. If you can stay in your lane, follow the rules of the road, and make it home safe, then there's no reason to punish you. If not, you should be sanctioned for your specific violation, not for being tipsy.