Reducing gun violence WITHOUT gun control

Mar 2018
1,070
189
Grayson
#1
The gun haters have been reluctant to discuss how to reduce gun violence without gun control because they never know who may rise to the challenge. So, rather than waiting to be challenged, I'm going to start sharing some things I've learned over the last four decades of research in this area.

Back in the 1990s there was a cartoon called Rock A Doodle. It starts out with a rooster who thinks that because he crows, the sun automatically comes out. The rooster finds himself quite disillusioned when the bad guys prove to him he's wrong. Today, it will be the good guy showing the bad guys how delusional they are - OR how dishonest they are. If the anti-gun people bother to participate on this thread it will be to try and derail it or change the topic. The topic is going to be:

REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE WITHOUT GUN CONTROL

Far too many people think if we implement gun control, we will get the same, exact results that other countries have. This is delusional thinking for a number of reasons:

1) Not all countries were brought into existence by way of the citizenry over-throwing a tyrannical government

2) Not all countries are the size of America NOR do all of them have the numbers of people per square mile that we do

3) I don't know of a country that accepts as many foreigners as America does NOR allows a million people per year to become citizens

4) America is, most likely, the most integrated nation in the world. We have over three hundred religions and no religion preferred citizens. Every race, color, creed, sexual persuasion, political persuasion, religion, and economic viewpoint is represented in this country

5) We are the only country that, by law, guarantees the unalienable Rights of people.

For anyone to even think we can implement a single law and get the same, exact results that another nation gets believes in pure folly OR total dishonesty. Whereas many people are committed to making America a socialist nation, the latter seems most plausible to me. That is why, when pressed, the anti-gunners are pressed to crouch their argument in terms of "gun violence." Gun violence has nothing to do with the number of total deaths by any nation. Gun control statistics do not tell us about how many people the police and the militaries of the world murder. Additionally, many times the anti-gunners don't study the rises in other crimes once gun control is implemented: rapes, robberies, gang killings, stabbings, bombings, strangulation, people killed via drug overdoses, etc. etc. They just know fewer people are killed by firearms.

The numbers of people killed by firearms in the United States is inexcusable. Equally, in mind, divorce, drug use, dysfunctional families, and the government's disregard for the law are inexcusable. Pick any one of those issues (and a few more) and you can pretty much follow a path from a child's infancy to the time they commit a violent act and see that most gun violence is foreseeable. We have enough information to know with a high degree of accuracy WHO is most likely going to hurt of kill others. If we could virtually eliminate mass shootings without gun control, why wouldn't we? Because the pro-gunners have Donald Trump and the false promise that he won't implement gun control? Because gun haters don't hear that word control in the proposed solution? Like I said, I've had four decades of research and have worked with families, searching for the answers.

The one thing I can tell you is that over 95 percent of all mass shootings have commonalities. We know who is going to act before they do it. Yet, we don't do anything about it. That is a problem for me. With a few simple steps, we could identify these people years before they act. In the process, we could find a lot of dysfunctional families and and help them so that it would reduce not only a lot of violence (even domestic abuse), but poverty, dysfunctional households, and familial abuse. It's benefits numerous - it's cost relatively negligible (actually it would save tax dollars if implemented.) Curious? When I come back, I'll start down that road.
 
Mar 2019
2,574
576
Texas
#2
NOPE!

Keep your intrusive due process later out of society.

Screw your pre crime punishment ideas.

Also no gun control actually reduces gun violence. If you can not control your gun then you have severely less chance of hitting a target.
 
Jan 2018
72
13
In your head...rent free
#3
The gun haters have been reluctant to discuss how to reduce gun violence without gun control because they never know who may rise to the challenge. So, rather than waiting to be challenged, I'm going to start sharing some things I've learned over the last four decades of research in this area.

Back in the 1990s there was a cartoon called Rock A Doodle. It starts out with a rooster who thinks that because he crows, the sun automatically comes out. The rooster finds himself quite disillusioned when the bad guys prove to him he's wrong. Today, it will be the good guy showing the bad guys how delusional they are - OR how dishonest they are. If the anti-gun people bother to participate on this thread it will be to try and derail it or change the topic. The topic is going to be:

REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE WITHOUT GUN CONTROL

Far too many people think if we implement gun control, we will get the same, exact results that other countries have. This is delusional thinking for a number of reasons:

1) Not all countries were brought into existence by way of the citizenry over-throwing a tyrannical government

2) Not all countries are the size of America NOR do all of them have the numbers of people per square mile that we do

3) I don't know of a country that accepts as many foreigners as America does NOR allows a million people per year to become citizens

4) America is, most likely, the most integrated nation in the world. We have over three hundred religions and no religion preferred citizens. Every race, color, creed, sexual persuasion, political persuasion, religion, and economic viewpoint is represented in this country

5) We are the only country that, by law, guarantees the unalienable Rights of people.

For anyone to even think we can implement a single law and get the same, exact results that another nation gets believes in pure folly OR total dishonesty. Whereas many people are committed to making America a socialist nation, the latter seems most plausible to me. That is why, when pressed, the anti-gunners are pressed to crouch their argument in terms of "gun violence." Gun violence has nothing to do with the number of total deaths by any nation. Gun control statistics do not tell us about how many people the police and the militaries of the world murder. Additionally, many times the anti-gunners don't study the rises in other crimes once gun control is implemented: rapes, robberies, gang killings, stabbings, bombings, strangulation, people killed via drug overdoses, etc. etc. They just know fewer people are killed by firearms.

The numbers of people killed by firearms in the United States is inexcusable. Equally, in mind, divorce, drug use, dysfunctional families, and the government's disregard for the law are inexcusable. Pick any one of those issues (and a few more) and you can pretty much follow a path from a child's infancy to the time they commit a violent act and see that most gun violence is foreseeable. We have enough information to know with a high degree of accuracy WHO is most likely going to hurt of kill others. If we could virtually eliminate mass shootings without gun control, why wouldn't we? Because the pro-gunners have Donald Trump and the false promise that he won't implement gun control? Because gun haters don't hear that word control in the proposed solution? Like I said, I've had four decades of research and have worked with families, searching for the answers.

The one thing I can tell you is that over 95 percent of all mass shootings have commonalities. We know who is going to act before they do it. Yet, we don't do anything about it. That is a problem for me. With a few simple steps, we could identify these people years before they act. In the process, we could find a lot of dysfunctional families and and help them so that it would reduce not only a lot of violence (even domestic abuse), but poverty, dysfunctional households, and familial abuse. It's benefits numerous - it's cost relatively negligible (actually it would save tax dollars if implemented.) Curious? When I come back, I'll start down that road.
How to stop gun violence. If you use a gun to commit any crime, you automatically get seven years hard labor.
If you discharge your weapon in the commission of a crime and injure someone, life without parole.
If you kill someone, you get the death penalty. No exceptions. 90 percent of violent crime is the result of repeat offenders. Deal with them, and you reduce crime by 90 percent. Simple.
 
Mar 2019
2,574
576
Texas
#4
How to stop gun violence. If you use a gun to commit any crime, you automatically get seven years hard labor.
If you discharge your weapon in the commission of a crime and injure someone, life without parole.
If you kill someone, you get the death penalty. No exceptions. 90 percent of violent crime is the result of repeat offenders. Deal with them, and you reduce crime by 90 percent. Simple.

That has a great chance of doing the opposite of what you want if that was implemented. It would not work as long as people had guns cause they would just more frequently go all out in an attack cause they would know there is no chance for redemption.
 
Mar 2018
1,070
189
Grayson
#5
How to stop gun violence. If you use a gun to commit any crime, you automatically get seven years hard labor.
If you discharge your weapon in the commission of a crime and injure someone, life without parole.
If you kill someone, you get the death penalty. No exceptions. 90 percent of violent crime is the result of repeat offenders. Deal with them, and you reduce crime by 90 percent. Simple.
Ineffective - that is like closing the barn door after the cows got away. Stay tuned. I will give you REAL solutions.
 
Jan 2018
72
13
In your head...rent free
#6
That has a great chance of doing the opposite of what you want if that was implemented. It would not work as long as people had guns cause they would just more frequently go all out in an attack cause they would know there is no chance for redemption.
If you eliminate those who commit violent crime, they can no longer commit violent crimes.
 
Mar 2018
1,070
189
Grayson
#7
NOPE!

Keep your intrusive due process later out of society.

Screw your pre crime punishment ideas.

Also no gun control actually reduces gun violence. If you can not control your gun then you have severely less chance of hitting a target.
You should STFU and pay attention. You're about to read what has never been addressed.
 
Jan 2018
72
13
In your head...rent free
#8
You should STFU and pay attention. You're about to read what has never been addressed.
There is a city in America, can't remember the name, that has the highest guns per capita of any other city. You can carry concealed without a permit or background check. You can even buy guns over the internet. It also has one of the lowest crime rates. It's population is mostly white middle class.
 
Likes: LTP
Mar 2018
1,070
189
Grayson
#9
Rather than a laundry list of mass shootings, let's look at some of the most significant ones:

Columbine shooting - 12 dead - Eric Klebold and Kevin Harris 1999

Eric Harris was taking Luvox (a Prozac-like drug) at the time of the Littleton murders | Psychiatric Drug Facts

Every Mass Shooting Shares 1 Thing In Common, NOT Guns

Sandy Hook - 27 dead Adam Lanza 2012

Sandy Hook school shooter had 'scorn for humanity,' according to newly released documents

Texas church shooting - 26 dead - Devin Patrick Kelly 2017

Devin Patrick Kelly | SSRI Stories

Texas Church Shooter's Psychotropic Drug History and Treatment at Universal Health Services Behavioral Facility | CCHR International

Orlando night club shooting 49 dead Omar Mateen

FOX News Cuts Off Reporter When She Links Psychotropic Drugs to Florida Shooter

Over and over and over again, those who keep score see a link between SSRIs and mass shootings. So, the guys who like instant answers would say we need to ban SSRIs. They would be wrong. There are commonalities between mass shooters and SSRIs. SSRIs can be the tipping point for a lot of shooters, but the root cause goes much deeper.

America is an overly medicated society. Our culture has been taught that if you have a problem, you can fix it with a pill. When a child is young, the parents and sometimes school officials will complain that a child is "hyperactive." And, so, children are put on Adderall or Ritalin where the cycle of dependency begins. Adding insult to injury, ADD / ADHD are imaginary conditions for the most part. If you have a child you think is "hyperactive" it is, most likely due to an improper diet, improper sleeping habits, lack of exercise, not enough time devoted to study and not enough face time with the parents. Instead of resolving the issue at home, we allow the schools, government in general, doctors, and Big Pharma to over-medicate children.

As time progresses, the notion that a pill helps every bad feeling, children find themselves on opioids (whether legal or illegal - and sometimes both t the same time.) Many others will advance from having been "hyperactive" to suffering emotional disorders where they are given SSRIs (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) for anxiety, depression, etc. Psychotropic drugs are the most common among mass shooters AND can be found present in violent teens that may hurt people, but not commit a mass shooting. So, for right now, let us consider SSRIs as a marker or an indicator of a deeper problem. If simply banning SSRIs were a solution, some group would be working on just that aspect of the issue.

Having worked with many teens over the years as a DFACS asset (Dept. of Family and Children Services) the story - and the outcomes have been more predictable than professional wrestling matches. Children go from Ritalin to Adderall - then from opioids (legal and illegal) to SSRIs and / or illegal drugs. By the time they are 18 or so, they have dropped out of high school, have no job skills, no initiative, a drug habit and a criminal record. What's worse is that during their growing years and even after these people become adults, the parents either ignore the warning signs or don't give a rip. Many times mommy lets her "baby" live in the house, free of all responsibilities. It's easier to give their baby access to drugs; let them live rent free; escape the responsibilities adults should have. Between that, divorce, dysfunctional homes, and an apathetic society we are creating these monsters as if the home were a factory for these Zombies. It's time to start understanding the problem.
 
Mar 2018
1,070
189
Grayson
#10
There is a city in America, can't remember the name, that has the highest guns per capita of any other city. You can carry concealed without a permit or background check. You can even buy guns over the internet. It also has one of the lowest crime rates. It's population is mostly white middle class.

I live close to a city like that. That city requires (though does not enforce) that everybody have a firearm in the house. There is very little crime there.
 

Similar Discussions