Kamala Harris proposes major executive actions to crack down on guns

[Whispering 18,865]

43 minutes ago, geopang said:

Please dm me with the research studies. You do realize that horrible people will always find a way to get a gun? Just because law abiding people can’t have access to guns anymore, the criminals still will. That only does a disservice to the general, normal population. 

Easy-to-obtain assault weapons, once banned under U.S. law, are a common thread connecting many of the deadliest mass shootings that have occurred in the past few years. Many gun violence experts believe that it's time to bring back the federal assault weapons ban — or at least something like it.

“You would see drastic reductions in what I call gun massacres” with the return of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, said Louis Klarevas of the University of Massachusetts at Boston.

For his 2016 book “Rampage Nation,” Klarevas collected data on every gun massacre — which he defines as six or more people shot and killed — for the 50 years before 2016. His aim was to see whether there was any change in the number of gun massacres while the 10-year federal ban on assault weapons was in place.

 He calls the results “staggering.” Compared with the 10-year period before the ban, the number of gun massacres during the ban period fell by 37 percent, and the number of people dying from gun massacres fell by 43 percent. But after the ban lapsed in 2004, the numbers shot up again — an astonishing 183 percent increase in massacres and a 239 percent increase in massacre deaths.

Klarevas says that the key provision of the assault weapons bill was a ban on high-capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. “We have found that when large capacity mags are regulated, you get drastic drops in both the incidence of gun massacres and the fatality rate of gun massacres.”

 The opinion is shared among many researchers who study gun violence for a living. In 2016, for instance, the New York Times asked 32 gun policy experts to rate the effectiveness of a variety of policy changes to prevent mass shootings. The roster of experts included violence prevention researchers like Harvard's David Hemenway, as well as more ideologically driven gun rights advocates like John Lott.

On a scale of effectiveness ranging from 1 (not effective) to 10 (highly effective), the expert panel gave an average score of 6.8 to both an assault weapons ban and a ban on high-capacity magazines, the highest ratings among the nearly 30 policies surveyed.

The killers in recent incidents like Las Vegas, Orlando and Sutherland Springs were each able to walk into a gun shop in the days and months before their attacks, and legally purchase their assault weapons and magazines after passing a standard background check. Under an assault weapons ban, that wouldn't be possible.

[Meruk Holland 2,420]

1 hour ago, geopang said:

When people can go into schools and public areas and shoot people, and yet no one has a gun to defend themself or kill the attacker, sounds to me like we are still at war and we have a severe problem. 

There are a lot of things wrong with this. If this is what war sounds like, then you don't know what a war is and you insult those that have or are participating in one.

It is not the public's responsibility to stop hostile shooters, especially not teachers. 

Kamala Harris is making propositions to help ensure guns can only be in the hands of sane, mentally stable people. 

[Petie Estie 5,736]

y'all dont need guns & if the government wanted to militarize the people they could regardless of your duke nukem citizen militia you think you're gonna have. 

[Born To Slay 10,996]

1 hour ago, geopang said:

The burden of proof is on you. Otherwise, I don’t believe your “empirical evidence” exists. 

You clearly don’t understand where I’m coming from. Not once did I say crazy people should still have access to guns. They’re always going to get it illegally. I said law abiding, mentally sane citizens should have access to guns. This logic of “let’s completely get rid of legal access to guns” is nothing but a win for terrorists and psychopaths. Should there be alterations to the gun laws? Sure. But I also believe that more guns in the right people’s hands will do more good than bad.

So what provisions of Harris’ proposed executive order would u say takes guns away from law abiding citizens?

[Evolve 571]

3 hours ago, geopang said:

When people can go into schools and public areas and shoot people, and yet no one has a gun to defend themself or kill the attacker, sounds to me like we are still at war and we have a severe problem. 

How many times does the victim get the chance to shot, though? Lol. Regular people shouldn't have guns.

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

3 hours ago, geopang said:

The burden of proof is on you. Otherwise, I don’t believe your “empirical evidence” exists. 

You clearly don’t understand where I’m coming from. Not once did I say crazy people should still have access to guns. They’re always going to get it illegally. I said law abiding, mentally sane citizens should have access to guns. This logic of “let’s completely get rid of legal access to guns” is nothing but a win for terrorists and psychopaths. Should there be alterations to the gun laws? Sure. But I also believe that more guns in the right people’s hands will do more good than bad.

Never did I say let's completely get rid of guns. I said sensible gun control to make create a vetting process that makes it harder to obtain one and prevent people who shouldn't have one from obtaining one legally.

 

As for the more guns in the "right" hands, that simply flies in the face of scientific research on the topic which demonstrates that more guns brings only more gun violence, not less. Which from logical standpoint makes sense.

Btw, believing the empirical evidence doesn't exist doesn't really mean anything, and certainly doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That's called confirmation bias. It's not my responsibility to educate you. Go educate yourself before you form an opinion about something you obviously haven't done your homework on it.