Question for gun folks...

[mesha]

I conceal carry often and am very pro gun. Considering that, I still don't fully understand the whole open carrying thing. I have never really wanted to open carry. I feel safer if people don't know I have a gun. That is my opinion, and I am not saying others should not be allowed to open carry, just not my cup of tea. In the scenarios presented I would be comfortable with either the old white guy or the young black guy carrying. So long as they obtained the weapons legally and have the right to carry them......That being said, I can't tell just by looking at them which of them is following the law. I think that is the rub of this entire discussion.

It would be interesting to sit down with a group of logical, reasonable people that have actual data and look at what really would make a difference in gun control laws. logical and reasonable never go hand in hand when ANY law is passed.

We have laws to govern what level a person is considered too drunk to drive. Considering that, is there a level of too old and shaky to shoot a weapon? Even if he couldn't hit something does him carrying a gun maybe keep people from attacking him? I don't really know the answers. It is an interesting thing to think about.

 

[Houndoc]

Boy I sure do have a problem with both of these statements, but I know i'm talking to a wall so i'm not even going to dive in.

Dive in and share your thoughts, on both. I am especially interested on why you think gun owners should stay out of the discussions on crime, violence and gun related deaths (of all types.) That is the opposite of what we do as the motorized recreation community.

 

[Hickey]

You missed it.

 

[Pike2350]

I will throw out a little thought. What happens to a person's rights if they are found incompetent by a judge?

My father was never fully deemed incompetent by a judge bymut we had multiple Dr.'s assessment saying he was no longer congetivly competent. This means, as siblings we could remove many rights and privileges he had if we went in front of a judge. He had started making bad financial decisions(fell for a Jamacian scammer to the tune of $15-20k) he lost his DL license and fougt hard to still drive....but we had to step in. Luckily it only took 2-3 months for him to go along with us so we didn't have to make it legally binding....but what if somone is found cognatively incompetent? I am not exactly talking red flag laws....but age and competency. We have to do some legal challenges sometimes to protect people incapable of protecting their own best interests. Would/should this apply to gun ownership? You can lose your license if you can't pass certain requirements.... should that extend to carrying? Not prevent you from owning guns, just carrying them. Similar to how you can still own cars and drive them on private land...just not on public roads.

I agree this mostly falls under being responsible relatives and friends of said person.... but what if they don't have any, should bring found incompetent mean losing that right when it makes you lose other rights?

 

[TRD270]

Dive in and share your thoughts, on both. I am especially interested on why you think gun owners should stay out of the discussions on crime, violence and gun related deaths (of all types.) That is the opposite of what we do as the motorized recreation community.

Has been more than enough said on this topic by the gun supporting community. You say I as a gun owner should say more than "freedom" and constitution. I say the anti-gun crowd should shout more than "gun control"

Yes guns are the tool being used to kill people but ultimately its people killing people not guns. If someone wants to do harm other people they will find a way. I've been saying it for years but look what just happened in Canada. You give me a proper edged weapon in a large crowd I will cause way more fatalities than a gun and its concealed often more easily and doesn't run out of ammo. Also quiet you'll have a number of fatalities before anyone even notices. Knife/sword/insert edged weapon here trauma is often WAY more damaging to the human body than a bullet. Yeah I've seen it first hand a lot.

GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM, CONTROLLING THE GUNS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. The mental state of way too many citizens in this fine country in the last two decades IS THE PROBLEM. You could ban the sale of ALL guns tomorrow. Guess what THEY'LL still find one! News media outlets holding 24/7 coverage of these events IS THE PROBLEM. Why do they do it? They want attention? Who gives it to them? People that want the advertising bucks. YouTube is a problem but as sticky of a subject as "gun control" Get one nut job with a YouTube channel preaching to another nut job then he shows his nut job friends then they are glued to the channel and start making their own plans.

Pitting people against each other is ultimately the problem if its left vs right, red vs blue, nerdy shy kid vs the bully. Ultimately some people can only take so much and they snap. If they want to harm people when they snap they will find a way.

I'm sorry but I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect myself from a tyrannical group or government for a cause of death that is not even in the top ten in the US.

 

[Cody]

Couple actual thoughts here... On the premise, that we are proposing new laws to deal with the problem of old people being allowed to carry guns.

More or less. I think the idea is more along the lines of "should people who aren't able to safely operate a gun be allowed to carry guns into public places"

I proceed based on that premise, because that is the conclusion I jump to reading your thoughts Cody. Correctly or not, that's where my thought process goes.

So, laws to protect us from people too old to responsibly carry anymore...

My first, biggest blocker here, is responsibility. Right now, it's the responsibility of the old person and the people around him to make decisions and take actions for the good of the old person and the community he's a part of.

Pass a law and now, it's no longer the responsibility of the individual, nope. We've transferred that responsibility to the gov't. Just on general principle, across a wide spectrum of issues, my gut reaction to that is always - No Thank You.

But so, now we have a law. By definition, that means, pretty much, the decision to continue carrying, or not, is not voluntary. It's the law. Which means, somebody else, not the individual, not the people around him, somebody else with no connection to the situation, gets to make that decision. Effing Do Gooders... Take away the responsibility and take away the freedom to decide. Again, I say No Thanks.

Taking away the freedom to decide is kind of on the agenda for the both parties, as far as I can tell. The freedom to decide what books we can read, history we can teach, health decision that can be made for ourselves, places/times/types of weapons we can own and carry etc.

Then, there is the perceived threat, of such a law, of how it is actually written and selectively enforced and the unpleasant potential consequences. That's what makes ME uncomfortable. That's my Me problem.

But, but, but! The problem I have to this whole conversation, is that it's based around the assumption that there may be a problem here that we ought to do something about. People too old and feeble to be carrying guns anymore, being a public safety concern. I just don't believe that. Show me the data - if this is actually something anyone should be willing to give a couple craps about, there ought to be some data showing the dire consequences of failing to take action? Truly, I just, don't see it. At all.

I'm more than willing to agree that this is likely a very isolated case. I think I already said so much, but I don't think it should be an offensive dialogue to have about whether someone who has any severe mental or physical impairment that would impact their ability to safely carry a fire arm in public. Should blind people be able to carry? What about people freshly out of a 72 hour max stint at the involuntary mental-hotel?

Tangent... One of the things I hate about watching the news, any flavor. Stories are always put in a context that assumes a flavored bias. For instance, I can easily imagine a CNN or NPR report segue "Our reporter Do Gooder has a report tonight on the national problem of old people with guns". Not, "we are reporting on whether old people with guns are actually a problem or not". It's never presented that evenly.

- DAA

The media is only there to sell to it's demo. I can see the other side with a headline saying "reporter American Patriot X has a report tonight on Joe Biden personally removing a gun from the hands of 99 year American War hero who was single handedly defending a bible from an angry mob of gay men in front of the State Capital building"

Tangent of my own: is there any one of us that would trust Biden to safely operate a gun in a public place? Ha, not me.

 

[Cody]

Who gets to play God?

God being simply whatever BS political party is currently running this asylum I guess.

Who gets to choose exactly when someone's mental or physical deficiencies void their constitutional rights? Does that safety-net cover voting rights?

I don't think being old or physically handicapped takes away voting rights, but I do think if you have dementia, or suffer from some other mental illness that your right to take part in elections might need to be questioned. This one for sure is real slippery though ha ha.

Free speech? What other liberties does this god figure get to censor?

In recent history... history, choice, and books?

It's a shit sandwich, I think any sane human agrees there are other humans that shouldn't have access to a firearm. But how and to whom that is applied is extremely scary.

Yes, it is a shit sandwich and as DAA mentioned, it would almost certainly get laced with all sort of loopholes and contingencies that are open for interpretation and further litigation. I'm simply saying that if common sense says someone shouldn't be carrying that weapon, then why can't it even be discussed? It is scary and it is also more scary to be so afraid of the subject that you don't/can't at least have the dialogue; that instead of having a discussion about it like an adult, you just accuse everyone of trying to rob you of your freedoms. It's a tired cliché, but "freedom" is not free. There is a price we all must pay to live in our communities, cities, states, countries, and modern world.

Back to thinking out loud, maybe it's not a law at all, maybe it's a gun-owner's ethos to create a culture of honest self enforcement. To be able to admit when you probably no longer ought to be carrying in public, and for those around you to have some personal responsibility to say that to their friends and families. Not that you don't have the "right" to carry, but that you probably shouldn't. In our off-road community, we try to self enforce when we see people irresponsibly driving off trail, littering, etc. It's the same, except the other person has a gun.

Honest question: where does the "right" to bear arms extend? Is it universal? Can a blind guy walk around the local mall yelling that they think everyone with brown hair is evil while carrying (freedom of speech too)? I think we've already established that the right in many states is contingent upon a license that is meant to ensure a super basic level of understanding. Isn't there a law saying how many actions your weapon has to be from being able to fire? If the constitution is the end all of any gun laws, then any and all law restricting the gun owner's rights seems to be anti-constitution then. I'm sure people all over the spectrum on this...some would say any gun law is an infringement upon their freedoms, and some might say some reasonable and common sense rules should probably apply to gun ownership.

I really don't know the answer, but the knee jerk "taking my freedoms" just doesn't totally stand up when there are so many other instances of constitutional rights being restricted under very specific circumstances.

 

[Cody]

I will throw out a little thought. What happens to a person's rights if they are found incompetent by a judge?

My father was never fully deemed incompetent by a judge bymut we had multiple Dr.'s assessment saying he was no longer congetivly competent. This means, as siblings we could remove many rights and privileges he had if we went in front of a judge. He had started making bad financial decisions(fell for a Jamacian scammer to the tune of $15-20k) he lost his DL license and fougt hard to still drive....but we had to step in. Luckily it only took 2-3 months for him to go along with us so we didn't have to make it legally binding....but what if somone is found cognatively incompetent? I am not exactly talking red flag laws....but age and competency. We have to do some legal challenges sometimes to protect people incapable of protecting their own best interests. Would/should this apply to gun ownership? You can lose your license if you can't pass certain requirements.... should that extend to carrying? Not prevent you from owning guns, just carrying them. Similar to how you can still own cars and drive them on private land...just not on public roads.

I agree this mostly falls under being responsible relatives and friends of said person.... but what if they don't have any, should bring found incompetent mean losing that right when it makes you lose other rights?

Ya, this is what I'm getting at. I'm not saying we take guns away, or restrict the types of guns you can own. If you want to own a ****ing Gatling gun and 100 silenced automatic uzi's, I honestly don't care. I'm just saying carrying them in public should probably come with a set of expectations regarding competency, and if you can't pass that, then you just can't carry in public places.

I agree with @TRD270 that law breakers and people intent with doing hard will find a way to do harm regardless of the "legality" of their choice. I also agree that mental illness is a huge part of the problem (and some/most of his other points I'd agree with (I actually question whether these mass shooters really care about the exposure. I think they're just unhinged for some reason and being a youtube star probably isn't their motivation...but I digress)). But if we agree that mental illness is a contributing factor, then why can't we do anything to make mental health care more available? Why can't mental competency be one of the factors for gun ownership? Physical competency? Blind people need to be carrying? They have the right, but is that really smart? Does the question just boil down to giving the government some "License" to start checking in on people that are carrying, and that is the violation of rights we're trying to avoid?

Can you carry a sword in public? lol, is that legal?

 

[anderson750]

Tangent of my own: is there any one of us that would trust Biden to safely operate a gun in a public place? Ha, not me.

if he was that old man in the diner who had been carrying one on his side for 50 years and using it for whatever legal reason ……..absolutely


But as an old city living politician who has probably only shot a gun a handful of times in his life who cannot even identify what caliber it may be……probably not.

 

[TRD270]

(I actually question whether these mass shooters really care about the exposure

Exposure no, attention from someone yes

I think they're just unhinged for some reason and being a youtube star probably isn't their motivation

Poorly written on my part as usual. They themselves not the youtube star, just listening to some chuckle head on youtube spout nonsense that leads them down the rabbit hole of becoming unhinged.

 

[Houndoc]

Has been more than enough said on this topic by the gun supporting community. You say I as a gun owner should say more than "freedom" and constitution. I say the anti-gun crowd should shout more than "gun control"

Yes guns are the tool being used to kill people but ultimately its people killing people not guns. If someone wants to do harm other people they will find a way. I've been saying it for years but look what just happened in Canada. You give me a proper edged weapon in a large crowd I will cause way more fatalities than a gun and its concealed often more easily and doesn't run out of ammo. Also quiet you'll have a number of fatalities before anyone even notices. Knife/sword/insert edged weapon here trauma is often WAY more damaging to the human body than a bullet. Yeah I've seen it first hand a lot.

GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM, CONTROLLING THE GUNS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. The mental state of way too many citizens in this fine country in the last two decades IS THE PROBLEM. You could ban the sale of ALL guns tomorrow. Guess what THEY'LL still find one! News media outlets holding 24/7 coverage of these events IS THE PROBLEM. Why do they do it? They want attention? Who gives it to them? People that want the advertising bucks. YouTube is a problem but as sticky of a subject as "gun control" Get one nut job with a YouTube channel preaching to another nut job then he shows his nut job friends then they are glued to the channel and start making their own plans.

Pitting people against each other is ultimately the problem if its left vs right, red vs blue, nerdy shy kid vs the bully. Ultimately some people can only take so much and they snap. If they want to harm people when they snap they will find a way.

I'm sorry but I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect myself from a tyrannical group or government for a cause of death that is not even in the top ten in the US.

View attachment 152132

I don't disagree with much of anything that you said- which is precisely why gun owners (and the organizations that claim to represent them) need to engage is discussions on gun deaths.

I also think we need to more willing than we are to admit there is a real problem of gun deaths in the US. (keep in mind that majority of the suicides on your chart above are with firearms.). I don't care how strongly we feel about the Second Amendment we should all be very bothered by school and other mass shootings.

That does not mean that we surrender our guns or rights to own them but I believe our rights are better protected when we become part of the solution (i.e. admit there are problems and discuss areas of agreement to address them, support mental health care (although that likely means government spending on health care) etc.)

 

[TRD270]

I don't care how strongly we feel about the Second Amendment we should all be very bothered by school and other mass shootings.

You say this like just because I’m pro gun I’m not bothered, incorrect sir.

keep in mind that majority of the suicides on your chart above are with firearms.)

Yes, and I’d argue the same as I do with mass shootings. Guns not available and someone wants to hurt themselves they’ll find a way (I’ve also had a firearm suicide to someone very close in my family)

support mental health care (although that likely means government spending on health care) etc.)

Lots of (free) help out there, person has to be willing to seek it or work with it. Again I saw this a lot in my former career. Just like the “cure” for homelessness and drug addiction can’t help the unwilling.

 

[mesha]

Whatever the method, it is sad that our society is closing in on 2 percent of deaths are happening by suicide. That stat bums me out.

 

[Houndoc]

You say this like just because I’m pro gun I’m not bothered, incorrect sir.

Yes, and I’d argue the same as I do with mass shootings. Guns not available and someone wants to hurt themselves they’ll find a way (I’ve also had a firearm suicide to someone very close in my family)

Lots of (free) help out there, person has to be willing to seek it or work with it. Again I saw this a lot in my former career. Just like the “cure” for homelessness and drug addiction can’t help the unwilling.

Honest assessment- comes across (intended or not) as a lot of "not my problem".

While I do not pretend to have the solutions, all forms of gun deaths seem to be common enough that we should be looking for answers. Those who choose to stay out of the discussion run the risk of steps being forced on them they don't like.

 

[anderson750]

Honest assessment- comes across (intended or not) as a lot of "not my problem".

While I do not pretend to have the solutions, all forms of gun deaths seem to be common enough that we should be looking for answers. Those who choose to stay out of the discussion run the risk of steps being forced on them they don't like.

Lets shift some of this discussion of to one of the root causes of this and that is the "mental health issues" that seem to be so prevalent in today's society. I use the quotes because I feel that a lack of accountability and coddling to the last 20 years of kids that have been born plays a huge role in the victimhood and lack of ability to cope with life. Most have not been taught to deal with "stress" properly and productively. They have been taught to play victim and say its not my fault. Then we start down this path of I am going to kill you or life is to hard and I am going to kill myself.

I know I have just opened a can of worms, so lets see where they crawl to.

 

[Coco]

No one is saying it, and it is driving me nuts!

Mag or magazine NOT clip!

Ahhh, so much better.

 

[jeeper]

I feel that a lack of accountability and coddling to the last 20 years of kids that have been born plays a huge role in the victimhood and lack of ability to cope with life. Most have not been taught to deal with "stress" properly and productively. They have been taught to play victim and say its not my fault. Then we start down this path of I am going to kill you or life is to hard and I am going to kill myself.

I whole heartedly believe this to the major factor.

1,000 likes and a mic drop for you.

 

[Rot Box]

I use the quotes because I feel that a lack of accountability and coddling to the last 20 years of kids that have been born plays a huge role in the victimhood and lack of ability to cope with life. Most have not been taught to deal with "stress" properly and productively. They have been taught to play victim and say its not my fault.

Guilty for me and my daughter. We both have chronic depression/anxiety and no matter how hard I try to pull us out of the dark abyss I rarely feel like I get a win for the both of us at the same time.

I don’t intend to play victim I never have. I try to find the joy in every moment and live life to the fullest as life is fan-f#%cking tastic ‘most’ of the time and I try to share the joy with everyone I know family or not.

I dunno I wasn’t going to post anything but figured I would—kinda goes back to the mental health thread more than anything but there’s two sides to that coin.

 

[jeeper]

Guilty for me and my daughter. We both have chronic depression/anxiety and no matter how hard I try to pull us out of the dark abyss I rarely feel like I get a win for the both of us at the same time.

I don’t intend to play victim I never have. I try to find the joy in every moment and live life to the fullest as life is fan-f#%cking tastic ‘most’ of the time and I try to share the joy with everyone I know family or not.

I dunno I wasn’t going to post anything but figured I would—kinda goes back to the mental health thread more than anything but there’s two sides to that coin.

I think this is completely different than what Paul was saying. You may have an issue.. but you know it. You address it. You cope with it. You work on it. You know how to handle adversity. You are an active player in your kids life. You are a productive member of society.


Paul is talking about the kid who was getting evicted from his apartment so he decided to shoot up a mall.

 

[anderson750]

I whole heartedly believe this to the major factor.

1,000 likes and a mic drop for you.

No that is just the start. Next we will discuss how video games and Hollywood glorifies and desensitizes our kids to what the consequences of killing people.

If anybody on here can get to the end of that conversation and still say we need to regulate guns and not hold any of those other things accountable then we can drop the mic