Strategies for another kind of gun control

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • femurphy77

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Mar 5, 2009
    20,286
    113
    S.E. of disorder
    now that is a common sense approach. go after the cause, not just the symptom


    We need to strike the phrase "common sense" from our vocabulary. I agree with the sentiment of the article and the response but over the last few months it has become painfully obvious that this particular phrase is nothing more than an overused politcal pawn now.:xmad:
     

    jve153

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 14, 2011
    1,022
    36
    bargersville, in
    the problem with "common" sense is that it is anything but "common" these days. too many people lack sense that sense is no longer a common trait. i think we should strike the word common from common sense to where it is simply called sense.
     

    cosermann

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Aug 15, 2008
    8,393
    113
    So it's the drug war that creates most of the violence??

    Yes, just like Prohibition caused the first wave of it, way back when, and led to the National Firearms Act of 1934. [1]

    [1] - Gun politics in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Saint Valentine's Day Massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    With the drug war, we have a lot of the same elements in terms of turf conflict between gangs and dealers, and we also have crimes committed to support the habit on the consumer end (which I don't think we had during Prohibition).

    Edit: Here are a few quick references from the DoJ/FBI study, "Violent Encounters, A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation's LEOs":

    "Ten of the 33 offenders admitted to committing criminal acts, such as robberies, burglaries, and thefts, to obtain funds for drugs. By committing these crimes, these offenders placed themselves in situations that could result in violent encounters with crime victims and Jaw enforcement officers. These offenders reported that they had committed an average of 16 or more criminal offenses to support their drug habits." p39

    "Several gang members experienced problems reading interview documents. One otiender commented on his poor reading skills by stating, "I didn't need to read to sell drugs. I make more money than those people who write books." p40

    "All of the gang members participated in the lowest level of gang commerce, such as selling street-level drugs and engaging in various other low-level crimes. Those who served as gang enforcers always carried weapons and stood ready to protect the drug sellers and the gang's territory from outsiders." p41

    "Eliminating competing drug dealers from the neighborhood helped keep the local drug market open, ensuring profits for the neighborhood gang." p46

    Other studies can be cited. Take out the profit motive, the high cost of supporting the habit, and remove the stigma so people can get help - and might we see a significant reduction in crime? I think so.
     
    Last edited:

    jerryv

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Apr 8, 2013
    290
    18
    Evansville
    Great article. To stop violence involving guns, we need to focus on who's doing it and where it's happening.

    Of course that would be called 'profiling'. Of COURSE it's profiling .. that's exactly what we need to do. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck .. etc etc.

    I read a study a couple of years ago that took a similar approach to rising health care costs. They found that a very small minority (around 5%) were perpetual patients .. relying on emergency rooms for all their health care, and showing up regularly/routinely at the first sign of ANY problem, no matter how trivial. These few people had a huge effect on the average cost of care. By identifying those people and assigning each one to a particular team of health professionals, they were able to reduce the number of visits, promote a more sensible use of care (by the patients) and radically reduced the costs.
     

    Hornett

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Sep 7, 2009
    2,580
    84
    Bedford, Indiana
    Good article, but it calls for a type of profiling.
    And we all know that profiling is not politically correct.
    They would just end up arresting a bunch of old ladies, housewives, and men with suits (ie jobs) so as to not appear racist or against the poor.
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom