By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas (19 Students, 2 Teachers Dead)

I realize that I never suggested what my "preferred gun policy" is. 

I think a tiered licensing system along these lines is probably ideal: 

Class #1: Any rim-fire weapon and ammunition| no license required, can't conceal carry 

Class #2: Ability to purchase center-fire weapons and ammunition | shall issue license upon completion of state-subsidized course, comes with nationwide concealed or open carry permit

Class #3: Automatic weapons, other Title II weapons, and other military small-arms | participation in gun club or state-militia with references, thorough background check, regular mental health checks subsidized at the state's expense. 

People who own a weapon in a class that they don't have a license for are given the opportunity to meet the requirements, retroactively, as an alternative to fines or jail-time in so much as they didn't commit a violent crime. 

Former felons get to own guns and get their voting rights back automatically upon completion of their sentence, unless there is reason to think they are at a high risk of recidivism. 

Nevertheless, I think solving the social maladies that we find in the U.S is a more comprehensive and thorough solution that has many more tertiary benefits. 



Around the Network

Bipoc people?



S.Peelman said:

Bipoc people?

Black, Indigenous and other people of color.

People who have ancestors that were colonized by settlers from Europe and are below whites in the American racial caste system, a system that people pretend has been deconstructed but actually hasn't been. 



sc94597 said:

I realize that I never suggested what my "preferred gun policy" is. 

I think a tiered licensing system along these lines is probably ideal: 

Class #1: Any rim-fire weapon and ammunition| no license required, can't conceal carry 

Class #2: Ability to purchase center-fire weapons and ammunition | shall issue license upon completion of state-subsidized course, comes with nationwide concealed or open carry permit

Class #3: Automatic weapons, other Title II weapons, and other military small-arms | participation in gun club or state-militia with references, thorough background check, regular mental health checks subsidized at the state's expense. 

People who own a weapon in a class that they don't have a license for are given the opportunity to meet the requirements, retroactively, as an alternative to fines or jail-time in so much as they didn't commit a violent crime. 

Former felons get to own guns and get their voting rights back automatically upon completion of their sentence, unless there is reason to think they are at a high risk of recidivism. 

Nevertheless, I think solving the social maladies that we find in the U.S is a more comprehensive and thorough solution that has many more tertiary benefits. 

I would personally ban Class #3, but otherwise I think that seems to be a pretty solid plan in regards to firearm legality, however I think it misses a lot of other avenues where we should be attempting to combat this crisis. Namely, universal background checks and restrictions on who can own guns. So, I would add the following:

-Every time a firearm changes possession, a background check must be conducted. No exceptions.

-Raise the age required to purchase a firearm to 21.

-Ban individuals with a history of substance abuse or non-felony domestic violence charges from firearm ownership for a period of time (Research would be necessary to determine how long this period should be). Additionally, violent felons should never get their firearm owning rights returned to them.

-All firearms must have a unique serial number.

I would also support a firearm registry in order to both improve enforcement and to help solve crimes, but this seems like more of a long term goal than a short term one. 

Additionally, we should seek to more holistically address crime by seeking to improve access to housing, improve schooling, improve wages, etc, but while I believe this is extremely important, I do think it is a bit of a different discussion. 



Pemalite said:


You don't loose the right. It's just made more difficult.

Having armed personnel just means the higher chance of a cross-shootout with casualties caught in the middle... And no child should grow up fearing if they are going to be murdered in what should be a safe, constructive, learning environment.



It's a school, not a prison?

If you are talking about license to bear firearms. Yes it's no longer a right, or at least a highly infringed right

Also... The more armed guards the more shootings?

Last edited by cyberninja45 - on 25 May 2022

My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
S.Peelman said:

Bipoc people?

Black, Indigenous and other people of color.

People who have ancestors that were colonized by settlers from Europe and are below whites in the American racial caste system, a system that people pretend has been deconstructed but actually hasn't been. 

Christ… O.O



Racial inequality is a real issue, what that has to do with gun control and protecting children is a mystery.



sundin13 said:

I would personally ban Class #3, but otherwise I think that seems to be a pretty solid plan in regards to firearm legality, however I think it misses a lot of other avenues where we should be attempting to combat this crisis. Namely, universal background checks and restrictions on who can own guns. So, I would add the following:

-Every time a firearm changes possession, a background check must be conducted. No exceptions.

-Raise the age required to purchase a firearm to 21.

-Ban individuals with a history of substance abuse or non-felony domestic violence charges from firearm ownership for a period of time (Research would be necessary to determine how long this period should be). Additionally, violent felons should never get their firearm owning rights returned to them.

-All firearms must have a unique serial number.

I would also support a firearm registry in order to both improve enforcement and to help solve crimes, but this seems like more of a long term goal than a short term one. 

Additionally, we should seek to more holistically address crime by seeking to improve access to housing, improve schooling, improve wages, etc, but while I believe this is extremely important, I do think it is a bit of a different discussion. 

The logic behind allowing Class 3 is that Switzerland and the Czech Republic have similar allowances with very low criminality. This strongly hints that other social factors, like income equality and relative social integration are pretty crucial in reducing violent crime. 

I can support a 21 year old age limit for Class 2 + in so much as the military also must be limited to 21 year olds or older to join. I think allowing supervised Class 1 for people under 21 years old is fine for hunting and game shooting. 

I don't think people with substance abuse issues should necessarily be banned because that creates a disincentive to seek help for one's substance abuse problem, but agree about non-felony domestic violence.

I think there is some fundamental issue with prisons if they don't actually do what their advocates say they do -- reform criminals. If people don't exit prisons reformed there is something fundamental that needs to change about them, as that is the entire ostensible basis for their existence. See: Prisons: A Social Crime and Failure

Personally I think the overwhelming majority of crime is based on people trying to meet their material needs through illegal means. If those material needs are met, the bulk of crimes don't happen. This is what I see as the major difference between the U.S and other developed countries. 



Chrkeller said:

Racial inequality is a real issue, what that has to do with gun control and protecting children is a mystery.

I've literally linked multiple sources explaining the connection and described the connection in multiple posts.

This tweet by a councilwoman in Denver explains it quite clearly though. 

"that'll justify racial profiling"

"No data backing this ban except that last year Black ppl had the highest rate of CCWs approved." 

Or this article which sources data on how gun charges disproportionately affect Black men, titled There’s a large racial disparity in federal gun prosecutions in Missouri, data shows

https://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/gun-violence-missouri/article258304878.html



Racial profiling isn't the same as gun control. With all due respect your argument non sequitur.

And we should fix both.  Using one to block the other is silly.