Skip to main content

View Diary: Normalizing Gun Violence In Our Society (806 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The issue I take with drug decriminalization (8+ / 0-)

    however is that I think total decriminalization on all drugs is insane. The hardest of the hard need some criminal punishment for distribution and sale while users need mandatory treatment programs and social assistance since a disproportionate amount of users are poor and wracked with emotional issues.

    But thats like asking for a Unicorn, I just don't see how we will ever get there.

    I disagree with your position that using technology would make it unreliable for your home user. Does the technology make that new Lincoln Town Car unreliable?

    No the issue is that its new to the particular object and people are resistant to change. Reliability is born out of use and adoption not rejection.

    And who cares if it takes years to filter down, lets institute massive gun buy back programs on a scale never seen. Get the old stuff out of circulation, and new stuff in.

    And yes, increase funding for enforcement I totally agree there, but still feel that nationalized gun law that covers all states is needed.

    --Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day. - Thomas Jefferson--

    by idbecrazyif on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 09:20:25 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't generally need to jump in my Lincoln (5+ / 0-)

      Town Car and start its motor suddenly, having been surprised and mentally unprepared, to save my life; nor do I have to keep my car fob on me at all times to do so.

      Furthermore, what specific problem does this technology purport to solve? Criminals using a gun they've just taken off someone? Not common. Accidents? Also less common than portrayed, and better dealt with through training. If there is any delay between when a criminal acquires a gun and uses it in a crime, the technology can be defeated at a machine shop.

      As for decriminalizing all drugs being insane, this was in fact the state of affairs prior to the various prohibitive laws that came into effect in the 20th century, all of which were passed with racial animus. I can't think of a single drug that's more dangerous than the organized criminals that peddle it.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 09:29:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  "the technology can be defeated at a machine shop" (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SilentBrook, DruidQueen, oldpunk, ByTor

        Were that the case then there would be massive car thefts, the technology works and is terribly difficult to bypass or fool.

        Make the fob a ring, or necklace, or something similar that one would always keep near.

        And as far as the jump into suddenly, a gun can jam just as much as a car may not start.

        Things fail, it happens. Still no reason to not adopt.

        --Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day. - Thomas Jefferson--

        by idbecrazyif on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 09:37:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Guns are not cars. The striking mechanism (6+ / 0-)

          of a firearm is surprisingly simple. You can put blocks in the way, and you can machine those blocks out.

          Unless you propose to invent a purely electronic weapon, at which point I will embrace my new Laser/Plasma Rifle/Needler wielding overlords.

          Needless to say, you propose a safety measure that has no clear prevailing problem it intends to address, which puts an unreasonable burden on lawful users of an arm which can be defeated by unlawful users, for no clearly defined purpose.

          What, again, would souping the trigger mechanism with such complications purport to actually achieve?

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 10:11:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  One huge issue is straw purchasing (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SilentBrook, oldpunk, coquiero, ByTor

            Guns landing in hands that had not been registered.

            So address that by nationalizing a standard gun law so that every state has a uniformity to enforce. So that people are not driving to say Arkansas, loading up on weapons driving back to say Illinois selling said weapons illegally.

            Gun advocates always say enforcement, but what enforcement can there be when there is just a huge disparity of laws between states?

            Say for instance at a gun show, how sales can be be handled literally in the parking lot between two folks with nothing more than a drivers lisc, that doesn't even have to be recorded.

            Hows that make any sense?

            --Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day. - Thomas Jefferson--

            by idbecrazyif on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 11:02:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  There are LOTS of car thefts. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          theatre goon

          You're really not paying attention.....

        •  If this would work so well... (0+ / 0-)

          Why does no police force anywhere consent to adopting it?

      •  I can (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coquiero, ByTor
        I can't think of a single drug that's more dangerous than the organized criminals that peddle it.
        The generational havoc of passing on a dependency on crack, meth or heroin is more dangerous to society than the organized  criminals who peddle them.

        The choice of our lifetime: Mitt Romney, It Takes A Pillage or President Barack Obama, Forward Together.

        by FiredUpInCA on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 11:17:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  "I can't think of a single drug . . ." (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coquiero

        Then you haven't seen a person truly in the throes of addiction to opiates or meth.  

        If you have, then you have seen a person killing themselves before your eyes without consciously intending to do it - or really intending do much of anything else for that matter.  To get free of such drugs, once a person is hooked, takes years of very concerted and very difficult effort.  Most just don't make it, relapse, and eventually succumb to overdose or longer term health problems.      

        So, while drug peddlers do present a special problem, the mere characteristics of some (note, not all) drugs makes them especially dangerous.   Such that even they were sold only by little old church-going ladies on Sunday, they would still be extremely dangerous and worthy of being regulated or outright banned.    

        "[L]et us judge not that we be not judged." Abraham Lincoln, March 4, 1865

        by ByTor on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 12:20:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And it's because of this flawed reasoning (5+ / 0-)

          we have failed narco-states throughout Latin America, and the highest crime rate in the developed world.

          Congratulations. You have a sad, and make a bigger disaster because of it. The Temperance people said much the same as regards the demon drink, vis a vis the mob violence their public moralizing caused.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:08:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Its not "moralizing" at all (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            coquiero, glorificus

            I duly respect your free speech right to advocate for the abolition of all regulation intended to ensure the safe and beneficial use of pharmaceuticals and other ingestable substances.

            You are correct that have a "sad" because I have watched more than one family member die from addition to these drugs.  Oh, and that was not from lack of medical and psychological treatment - I suppose it was just the flawed nature of my family members.  Their mental illnesses, for instance.  I'm sure if they only had your fortitude and moral composition, they would be alive today.

            Yes, I will likely have a "sad" for the rest of my life.  Sorry I have burdened you and insulted your superior intellect, learning, and generally superior nature.  You are truly their (and my) better.  Thank you so much for your omniscient knowledge and judgment you are so graciously pouring out upon the world, and your overwhelming compassion.  

            I have few other things I would say to you relating to the content and tone of your response, but I'll keep them to myself.  

            "[L]et us judge not that we be not judged." Abraham Lincoln, March 4, 1865

            by ByTor on Thu Dec 13, 2012 at 08:47:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  biometrics (4+ / 0-)

      I'll support biometrics on my guns once the military and police start using them.

      But oddly enough the laws in this area that exist now exempt the police.

    •  Criminalisation of any ingestible substance... (0+ / 0-)

      is insane.

      We learned that in Prohibition I.

      So we repeated it with Prohibition II.

      Longer, harder, faster, deeper isn't working.  It's time to try something else.

      •  Sure. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coquiero

        Lets have people treating themselves for cancer with poisonous chemotherapy drugs - maybe because they can't afford treatment by medical professionals.  But who cares, they will eliminate themselves soon enough anyway, right?  And, why these onerous restrictions on ingestable radioactive agents used in medical procedures like CAT scans?  Why not let anyone that wants to make a homemade device that might rely on these agents for imaging, sell their services and ply their wares with the general public?  Why should we regulate thalidomide?  After all, the birth defects it causes will make the next generation not viable for reproduction, right?

        Or are you saying that we should have some regulation of drugs, but only for those that do not cause euphoria such that they are particularly subject to abuse?  That sounds like regulation to me, though, which it seems you are categorically against.  Or maybe you are saying that there is some difference between criminalization and regulation.  If so, please enlighten us as to what that difference is.    

        You sound like you are full of libertarian, Ayn Randian, crap to me, but then again, maybe I just don't understand what you are saying.

        "[L]et us judge not that we be not judged." Abraham Lincoln, March 4, 1865

        by ByTor on Thu Dec 13, 2012 at 09:36:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (151)
  • Community (59)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Elections (29)
  • Culture (29)
  • Economy (28)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Labor (19)
  • Environment (19)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Education (18)
  • Racism (17)
  • Politics (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site