Potential Solutions to Gun Violence

[finehoe]

"-I realize that this option is crazy talk to the liberal left, but certain environments could have armed guards. As was the case in the FedEx shootings, Navy Yard shootings, Aurora and Sandy Hook, the psycho gunmen knew that they were walking into an area where they would encounter no resistance. In all except for Aurora, the gunmen turned the gun on themselves when authorities closed in. I tend to think that if these headcases who are amateurs with firearms knew that they had to get by a trained professional (or professionals) whose sole purpose is to prevent something bad from happening, that they would think twice about it. You think that Holmes would have stood up in a dark movie theater and started shooting if he knew 3 people with concealed weapons were somewhere in the theater and could fire back at him? I don't think so. "

I could not agree more.

Are you agreeing with the armed guards or the concealed weapons?  Jameson post makes them sound like one and the same, which they are not.

[BridgeTroll]

So what happens when someone purchases a gun and then gets diagnosed with a serious mental disorder months (or years later).

Is there a tracking system that monitors this?

What about additional precautions for people who are living in the same house as a person with documented violent felonies?

Fair points and questions.  To me this goes back to a national mental health database.  Doctors would be required to submit information on their patients.  The purchase is in the database and when at a future date a name is entered into the mental side it would be flagged.  Now what happens?  Is the weapon confiscated?  Not sure how this part would work...

Suggestions?

[RMHoward]

More forms, bureaucrats, databases, etc. are not going to fix the problem.  The demise of the stable family unit in this country has been degrading since the end of WWII.  We are seeing the results.  No right, no wrong, just areas of gray.  We deserve it.   This won't be fixed over night or ten years from now, assuming this country survives that long.

[BridgeTroll]

More forms, bureaucrats, databases, etc. are not going to fix the problem.  The demise of the stable family unit in this country has been degrading since the end of WWII.  We are seeing the results.  No right, no wrong, just areas of gray.  We deserve it.   This won't be fixed over night or ten years from now, assuming this country survives that long.

How would you suggest we fix this?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Interesting discussion.

To the point of the medical / mental screening requirement and Stephen's counterpoint, I think a renewal period between 2-4 years would make sense.  Sure, it wouldn't catch every nut that cracked, but it would definitely harvest a few. 

What is the renewal period on a concealed permit?

With regard to a people living with others that wouldn't pass screening, I would also be for more liability for the gun owners in the event that their registered firearm was used in a crime.  Unless the gun is properly reported as stolen, then I believe if the owner is just as liable as the person committing the crime, then it would provide more incentive to be a bit more cautious when storing the gun. 

[RMHoward]

More forms, bureaucrats, databases, etc. are not going to fix the problem.  The demise of the stable family unit in this country has been degrading since the end of WWII.  We are seeing the results.  No right, no wrong, just areas of gray.  We deserve it.   This won't be fixed over night or ten years from now, assuming this country survives that long.

How would you suggest we fix this?

Although I am under no obligation to "fix this", I can see the BS (for lack of a better term) solutions previously offered. Its a moral rot problem in this country. Until we teach our children right from wrong, reestablish the strong family unit, bring religion/church back into our lives, loose the selfishness in our society, loose the PC culture, stop demonizing the "thing" and demonize the offender, we are not fixing anything no matter how many forms you print or databases you bring on-line.   Having said all that, we are always going to have crazies in this country who are willing to commit atrocities.  The 24 hour news cycle makes sure we hear about every one of them ad nauseum.

[Jameson]

Are you suggesting an additional form to be submitted along with the background check at time of purchase?  So someone with no history of mental health issues would have to seek out a psychologist to be evaluated as "Fit or unfit to Own"?

Something of the sort, yes. I'm not quite sure of the right way to go about it though.

[NotNow]

So what happens when someone purchases a gun and then gets diagnosed with a serious mental disorder months (or years later).

Is there a tracking system that monitors this?

What about additional precautions for people who are living in the same house as a person with documented violent felonies?

Fair points and questions.  To me this goes back to a national mental health database.  Doctors would be required to submit information on their patients.  The purchase is in the database and when at a future date a name is entered into the mental side it would be flagged.  Now what happens?  Is the weapon confiscated?  Not sure how this part would work...

Suggestions?

I would suggest the same method that is currently used in domestic violence cases.

[NotNow]

Interesting discussion.

To the point of the medical / mental screening requirement and Stephen's counterpoint, I think a renewal period between 2-4 years would make sense.  Sure, it wouldn't catch every nut that cracked, but it would definitely harvest a few. 

What is the renewal period on a concealed permit?

With regard to a people living with others that wouldn't pass screening, I would also be for more liability for the gun owners in the event that their registered firearm was used in a crime.  Unless the gun is properly reported as stolen, then I believe if the owner is just as liable as the person committing the crime, then it would provide more incentive to be a bit more cautious when storing the gun. 

Then you better be willing to do the same thing with automobiles and any other property.  Perhaps even children.  That is a slippery slope.

[NotNow]

More forms, bureaucrats, databases, etc. are not going to fix the problem.  The demise of the stable family unit in this country has been degrading since the end of WWII.  We are seeing the results.  No right, no wrong, just areas of gray.  We deserve it.   This won't be fixed over night or ten years from now, assuming this country survives that long.

How would you suggest we fix this?

Although I am under no obligation to "fix this", I can see the BS (for lack of a better term) solutions previously offered. Its a moral rot problem in this country. Until we teach our children right from wrong, reestablish the strong family unit, bring religion/church back into our lives, loose the selfishness in our society, loose the PC culture, stop demonizing the "thing" and demonize the offender, we are not fixing anything no matter how many forms you print or databases you bring on-line.   Having said all that, we are always going to have crazies in this country who are willing to commit atrocities.  The 24 hour news cycle makes sure we hear about every one of them ad nauseum.

RM makes a good point, in the long run.

[NotNow]

I would be interested in whether you had anything to ADD to this thread.  Per the title, what would StephenDare! propose as a solution to gun violence?

[Charles Hunter]

Why is the gun violence rate in the USA so much higher than other industrialized countries?
"Lack of religion" is offered - but most European countries are more secular (lower levels of attendance at services and lower reported levels of belief in a supreme deity) than the US, but have much lower gun violence rates.  What are they doing that we are not?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Interesting discussion.

To the point of the medical / mental screening requirement and Stephen's counterpoint, I think a renewal period between 2-4 years would make sense.  Sure, it wouldn't catch every nut that cracked, but it would definitely harvest a few. 

What is the renewal period on a concealed permit?

With regard to a people living with others that wouldn't pass screening, I would also be for more liability for the gun owners in the event that their registered firearm was used in a crime.  Unless the gun is properly reported as stolen, then I believe if the owner is just as liable as the person committing the crime, then it would provide more incentive to be a bit more cautious when storing the gun. 

Then you better be willing to do the same thing with automobiles and any other property.  Perhaps even children.  That is a slippery slope.

Are they not already?  I hate to use an extreme as an example, but since it's the only one I can think of....

There is a case of a young man who has served 10ish years of a life sentence because his roommate took his car to commit a murder while he was supposedly sleeping on the couch.  Seems a bit far-fetched and I can't validate the truthfulness of it, but it's one that stands out in my head.

If someone were to come onto my property, legally or illegally, and hurt themselves because they fell into my half-full pool, or bitten by my dogs or any myriad of situation, then I'll be held liable and will be facing, at the minimum, a civil suit and the possibility of a criminal suit. 

And the same may be true with firearms, I don't know, I'm just posing a question and an opinion.

[NotNow]

Interesting discussion.

To the point of the medical / mental screening requirement and Stephen's counterpoint, I think a renewal period between 2-4 years would make sense.  Sure, it wouldn't catch every nut that cracked, but it would definitely harvest a few. 

What is the renewal period on a concealed permit?

With regard to a people living with others that wouldn't pass screening, I would also be for more liability for the gun owners in the event that their registered firearm was used in a crime.  Unless the gun is properly reported as stolen, then I believe if the owner is just as liable as the person committing the crime, then it would provide more incentive to be a bit more cautious when storing the gun. 

Then you better be willing to do the same thing with automobiles and any other property.  Perhaps even children.  That is a slippery slope.

Are they not already?  I hate to use an extreme as an example, but since it's the only one I can think of....

There is a case of a young man who has served 10ish years of a life sentence because his roommate took his car to commit a murder while he was supposedly sleeping on the couch.  Seems a bit far-fetched and I can't validate the truthfulness of it, but it's one that stands out in my head.

If someone were to come onto my property, legally or illegally, and hurt themselves because they fell into my half-full pool, or bitten by my dogs or any myriad of situation, then I'll be held liable and will be facing, at the minimum, a civil suit and the possibility of a criminal suit. 

And the same may be true with firearms, I don't know, I'm just posing a question and an opinion.

No.  They are not.  I have never heard of the case you quote, and I know of no statute that would apply in such a situation.  As for someone "on your property", you are speaking of civil liability only.  You could not be held criminally negligent in almost any circumstance.  A more accurate description of the current legal climate is that your friend/relative takes the keys to your car from the table in your entryway where they are unsecured.  He/she then uses your car to murder 12 people by running them down in the street.  You can not be held criminally responsible.  Even if your friend/relative just left the mental health facility after an involuntary admit.  But,  it that were a firearm, you must be able to prove that the firearm AND the ammunition were secured appropriately, no matter the circumstance. 

I would ask any of our attorney posters to correct me if I have misrepresented anything here.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Interesting discussion.

To the point of the medical / mental screening requirement and Stephen's counterpoint, I think a renewal period between 2-4 years would make sense.  Sure, it wouldn't catch every nut that cracked, but it would definitely harvest a few. 

What is the renewal period on a concealed permit?

With regard to a people living with others that wouldn't pass screening, I would also be for more liability for the gun owners in the event that their registered firearm was used in a crime.  Unless the gun is properly reported as stolen, then I believe if the owner is just as liable as the person committing the crime, then it would provide more incentive to be a bit more cautious when storing the gun. 

Then you better be willing to do the same thing with automobiles and any other property.  Perhaps even children.  That is a slippery slope.

Are they not already?  I hate to use an extreme as an example, but since it's the only one I can think of....

There is a case of a young man who has served 10ish years of a life sentence because his roommate took his car to commit a murder while he was supposedly sleeping on the couch.  Seems a bit far-fetched and I can't validate the truthfulness of it, but it's one that stands out in my head.

If someone were to come onto my property, legally or illegally, and hurt themselves because they fell into my half-full pool, or bitten by my dogs or any myriad of situation, then I'll be held liable and will be facing, at the minimum, a civil suit and the possibility of a criminal suit. 

And the same may be true with firearms, I don't know, I'm just posing a question and an opinion.

No.  They are not.  I have never heard of the case you quote, and I know of no statute that would apply in such a situation.  As for someone "on your property", you are speaking of civil liability only.  You could not be held criminally negligent in almost any circumstance.  A more accurate description of the current legal climate is that your friend/relative takes the keys to your car from the table in your entryway where they are unsecured.  He/she then uses your car to murder 12 people by running them down in the street.  You can not be held criminally responsible.  Even if your friend/relative just left the mental health facility after an involuntary admit.  But,  it that were a firearm, you must be able to prove that the firearm AND the ammunition were secured appropriately, no matter the circumstance. 

I would ask any of our attorney posters to correct me if I have misrepresented anything here.

Emphasis added.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holle

Ryan Joseph Holle (born November 17, 1982) was convicted in 2004 of first-degree murder under the felony murder rule for lending his car to a friend after the friend and others at the party discussed their plans to steal drugs, money and beat up the 18 year old daughter of a marijuana dealer.[2][3][4] A former resident of Pensacola, Florida, United States, he is now serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole at the Graceville Correctional Facility.[2]