Governor Cuomo and 3 other governors joined together in a coalition to fight against gun violence.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/new-york-joins-neighbors-states-gun-...
Since the Senators and House members can't do the right thing these 4 states are actually taking action.
The fact is that it isn't just "school safety" that is the issue. Republican like to marginalize the real issue by calling gun violence school safety. Sure Schools need to be safe, but what about theaters, parks, public places? In the last two years, mass shootings have happened in more than just schools. The problem really is assault weapons, max capacity magazines, that are a threat to public safety. Not just bump stocks and people under 21. How old was the mass shooter in Vegas? He was 64 and he bought every weapon legally. Most mass shooters are angry white and conservative. There are outliers but overall that is the profile.
https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a12772832/stephen-paddock-l...
The problem is guns not just mental health. Stephen Paddock was never diagnosed as mentally ill. He was a wealthy successful real estate investor. The 5 things that are common are white, male, conservative, angry, and armed with a weapon that can inflict mass damage.
Instead of "hardening schools" and arming a bunch of amateur teachers that don't want to be armed anyway, it's time to get rid of assault weapons, max capacity magazines, do proper thorough background checks, end the gun show loophole, make every gun sale handled by a reputable dealer, register every firearm, and end this nonsense. That would not infringe on anyone's rights. It's just common sense!
Gov. Cuomo has taken the first REAL step in ending gun violence and it isn't costing the taxpayers a dime.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Its going to fail, just like the time before that and the the before that. These leftist governors can pass their dumb ass laws in their own fucking states. That wat only idiots who chose to live there will have to abide by them.
@The Grizzly Atheist
Dude, did you even read about it before you dismissed it out of hand as it is going to fail?
Obviously you did not.
"Under the plan announced by the governors Thursday, the four states will pool their data and intelligence sharing, including information on pending arrest warrants and orders of protection, to create a database that would be used to supplement the federal government's background check database."
"The plan also calls for the creation of a cross-state task force to combat illegal gun trafficking and a new research consortium to examine gun violence."
They are making no new laws here, they are simply sharing information and stepping up enforcement and cooperation of laws already on the books. There will be no vote for this, all that is needed is political will and support to set these up and direct already in place resources to point more towards dealing with the issue of gun violence/mass shootings.
The only thing they actually plan to add is a cross state task force to combat something that is already illegal.
If you object to this stuff, you are literally insane. But you do not even know what you go spouting off on. You are so fearful, and gun crazed you see boogeymen and shadows everywhere. This whole action on gun control has nothing at all to do with taking away your so precious (and insane) gun rights.
@Logic
It doesn't matter. Grizzly isn't part of the conversation. He wants to troll and that is it.
Yeah you are probably right, and I am wasting my time. I hope at least for anyone else reading this that is not aware of Grizzly, that I point out to them just how ridiculous, (putting it nicely,) his posting is.
Well I have to live with you scum fucks and abide by your dumb ass laws, so yes, I have a perfect right to exercise my First Amendment, that is until you decide we should repeal that too.
You do indeed have the right to your opinion and to write about it. Just as I have the right to strongly disagree with your opinion and point out why.
By the way it is not your laws, it is our laws. You are always free to move to an area that has laws you agree with. (If you can find any.)
Saying that we want to repeal the first amendment is flippant and combative. No one here has said that, and I highly doubt anyone here wants to repeal the first amendment at all. Heck, I think most people do not even want the 2nd amendment repealed just updated for the 21st century as technology and access has changed.
Like I pointed out before- my job has explicitly said that he wants to repeal the Second Amendment
"Like (sic) I pointed out before- my job has explicitly said that he wants to repeal the Second Amendment"
Try and leave the histrionics and ad hominem alone for a minute, and tell us exactly why you think he is wrong?
@The Grizzly Atheist:
You do not have a first amendment right on this forum.
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
You do not even know where these forums are hosted. Even if you did, it could easily be hosted somewhere else on a whim. Even if hosted in the US the first amendment does not apply here.
Wherever it is, chances are that country agreed to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. See Article 19.
I'll tell you again, you don't have a first amendment right here. Two people were banned and their posts deleted in the last 15 minutes because of what they posted. Don't try it.
No. Grizzly has his right to his opinion. Just deleting the posts isn't right either and we will get nowhere without listening to why he considers it essential for everyone to have guns.
So you think the constitution should not have been amended to abolish slavery?
Or are you simply saying that the constitution should only be amended if you agree with the amendment?
"CONGRESS shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech"
- US Constitution, 1st amendment
Forum rules are not laws passed by congress. The government can't censor you but a private forum can.
@ Grizzly:
why the "y" -- those laws are OUR laws, not "your" laws. as far as repealing First Amendment rights, that sounds like fundie projection to me, i.e., whatever the Grizzly-types would dearly love to do to everyone ... well, that's what they accuse the "evil" atheists of. one thing we atheists aren't, is stupid; one thing sheeple are, is ignorant. we learn; you ignore.
read it http://joygts.blogspot.com/2018/02/who-wants-tokeep-hisher-lips-shut-all...
Its going to fail, just like the time before that and the the before that. These leftist governors can pass their dumb ass laws in their own fucking states. That way only idiots who chose to live there will have to abide by them.
Please be advised.
No matter what "grizzly" says it doesn't matter. He isn't part of the conversation.
Finally common sense may prevail, for if not, what would be next?
Tanks to protect sports stadiums?
Machine gun nests around nurseries?
If you think the answer to mass murders is to essentially have more people carrying them, then clearly you have something seriously psychologically wrong with you.
@Myckob4
I strongly agree with your entire original post. It is good to see 4 different states actually attempting to do something about this problem. It is even better to hear this coming from you, someone that served in the US armed forces, and has real experience with these powerful weapons and their intended use.
@ All interested readers:
Stephen Paddock case, as we all know is the perpetrator in the largest mass shooting in US history, worked almost entirely by himself. He flew under the radar of nearly all possible surveillance and preventive measures. As best as we can tell, he grew angry at casinos when he realized he lost large amounts of money stupidly trying to "beat the system" with slot machines.
The only real solution we have to prevent another Stephen Paddock is to make powerful assault rifles with the capability to be easily modified with bump stocks and large ammo magazines to be very restrictive and difficult to get. As they should be, as there is no good reason for 99+% of all civilians to own such a gun beyond wasting lots of money shooting at stuff at a gun range. It also certainly makes sense to limit such deadly guns to 1 per owner if the owner even can demonstrate a viable need for such an effective mass human killing tool.
Update:
Governor of Oregan takes action signs a bill that makes so much sense!
http://www.guns.com/2017/08/17/oregon-governor-signs-gun-confiscation-bi...
Without due process? That's unconstitutional. But you don't care about the constitution so...
@ mykcob:
excellent! it appears that we are, as Sarah Vowell says, the Somewhat United States, after all. the NY+3 agreement, and this OR bill, all actually reflect a great deal of critical thought. that reassures me.
as to the NRA claim that the people closest to those who potentially pose danger are not "professionals," well, they most definitely know their own better than the strangers do. look at how effective the pros were in the case of the MSD killer.
in that case, the system failed, too; this OR bill bolsters the system and includes those intimately acquainted with the subjects. makes sense to me.
Ok so I'll say right off the bat that I don't know much about the current gun laws and checks and all that. I do however totally agree that a real solution to gun violence is needed. So i have no idea if my idea would work, but here it is. Keep in mind, this idea does NOT apply to military or law enforcement, just civilians.
1st step, government should do a nationwide gun buy back program, but make it actually worth it. Give a substantial amount to the people who turn in guns.
2nd step is to completely shut down all gun sellers, and make it illegal for pawn shops and the like to sell them also.
3rd step is to require ALL gun purchases to be issued through the government, via 1 or 2 select facilities, kind of like how money is minted in only a few specific facilities. Maybe have 1 on each coast, and maybe 1 or 2 in the middle of the country.
Step 4 is to only allow hunting-type guns to be purchased, and then only a limited amount, let's say 2 per person.
Step 5 is to apply for a gun permit, but it would be an extensive background check application, kind of like what law enforcement does for all new applicants. They practically ask for the last time your cousin 4th removed sneezed too hard, and proof of how much snot came out.
If your background check passes, Step 6 is to require an IN-PERSON visit to the facility to purchase the firearm, where all documents would be double checked. All firearms sold would have a government ID number on them, or even some sort of tracking device.
Step 7 would be to require owners to physically present the guns for inspection and verification of ownership at local facilities, maybe every 2 years. This would discourage people from giving guns to others. If the gun owner died, law would require that his firearms be returned to the facility within a set period after death, and could not be given or sold to anyone else.
Step 8 would be to have legal repercussions for anyone owning a gun outside of the regulations. Meaning if someone reported that you had an unauthorized weapon, the police could come knocking at your door and cart you off to the slammer if they found any contraband.
I know this would take a lot of effort, but in my mind, if the government actually had the balls to enforce something like this, gun violence would decrease dramatically.
You'll have to pass an Amendment that no one is going to support. Good luck.
No. The second amendment itself calls for restrictions on firearms.
Have you read it?
“A WELL REGULATED militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
WONDERFUL! – Join the National Guard, police auxiliary, etc. I don’t hear any of the Second Amendment rights group talking about the “well regulated” caveat, just about how many guns can be flooded into society. The NRA is actively FIGHTING the well regulated requirement and stress the weapons are needed for protection AGAINST THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT.
If you want to have bump stocks, have them registered and for rent at properly designed and regulated facilities UNDER ADULT SUPERVISION with medical staff standing by. It is required to pass a competency test and carry insurance for damages to drive a vehicle. Firearms are more dangerous and less useful to the general population; why not require testing, registration, and insurance on them?
“In the beginning God created man in His own image, and man has been trying to repay the favor ever since.” Voltaire
“Man created God in his image: intolerant, sexist, homophobic and violent.” George Weinberg
I am sick of the 2nd and 1st amendments being used to defend those who recognize no higher power than automatic rifles and vast quantities of explosives, ie. ISIS, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Al Qaida, the Trump Evangelicals, and the NRA.
Per 69 News – Sanctuary Church in Newfoundland is part of the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary and is having a gun blessing Wednesday.
If you want to read the soul of a person, watch how they treat those weaker than themselves and their image of God.
I worship the being who says we are the holiest when we serve one another.
@ CA girl:
sounds strict and expensive. definitively excludes the monetarily challenged. but then, firearms are expensive, to begin with. if you want to play, you have to pay ... and if the want is bad enough, you'll find a way to pay to play.
you left out a crucial step -- certification/training. anyone who dares to own a death-dealing weapon -- for essentially that's what a firearm is and does -- MUST undergo proper, rigorous, training; the kind of training sufficient to master the care of the weapon as well as its use. the user ought to be able to shoot accurately and maintain the weapon properly.
let's get one thing straight -- gun ownership is a responsibility as much as it is a right. it ought to be treated seriously and conscientiously -- no cavalier cowboy antics, no macho shooting-into-the-skies celebrations that can and do end up harming/killing, no using a weapon and then putting it away without first breaking it down and cleaning it properly and safely, no irresponsible storage habits.
add those caveats to yours, and i'm a happy gal.
Hollis Evon Ramsey,
I hope they get better training than this cop got = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1_EoRZOVes
Pages