Solutions

[fatsy]

Legal guns not firing in public just means criminals using illegal guns don't have to worry about a gun-wielding public. I believe there were already several incidents in the US where people shot down mass shooters. Imagine if you actually have to wait for the police to come.

Sure you can make it so that in the event that a mass shooting happens all the other guns unlock but there will be a delay between the center receiving information that one is indeed happening and them being able to deactivate the block.

Not to mention they'd probably spend even more time "confirming" the incident before being forced to unlock guns coz "Guns Bad!".

Since criminals follow the law and don't do things that are illegal, that sounds great!

Wait...

Wait they don't follow the law? I'm shookt!

Taking down a shooter in public is the job of cops; not fellow bystanders. Law enforcement don't need preauthorization to fire their guns. Unless, we change the law so that cops can't just shoot anyone when they feel like it. Maybe they should get an "ok" from a superior before they can shoot.

Look, this is far from being a reality because of too much red tape and organizations like the NRA. No one has the balls to initiate change. We will continue to have mass shootings and accidental gun deaths. This is the world we live in unless we truly want change.

[1713576100]

1713576100

[1713576100]

1713576100

[1713576100]

1713576100

[1713576100]

1713576100

[1713576100]

1713576100

[Sadlife]

The best practice is for schools/government/parent and even television companies to properly educate the children mostly those people who loves violence is the people who are less educated and we all know, schools in the united states are so bad they even let the children bully other children and the school does nothing about it even shows in television promotes violence, sex and murder. Why not, teach them science and reason. The problem really is the environment they live to, once the US government successful implements this, then there's no need for a gun.

[PopoJeff]

Legal guns not firing in public just means criminals using illegal guns don't have to worry about a gun-wielding public. I believe there were already several incidents in the US where people shot down mass shooters. Imagine if you actually have to wait for the police to come.

Sure you can make it so that in the event that a mass shooting happens all the other guns unlock but there will be a delay between the center receiving information that one is indeed happening and them being able to deactivate the block.

Not to mention they'd probably spend even more time "confirming" the incident before being forced to unlock guns coz "Guns Bad!".

Since criminals follow the law and don't do things that are illegal, that sounds great!

Wait...

Wait they don't follow the law? I'm shookt!

Taking down a shooter in public is the job of cops; not fellow bystanders. Law enforcement don't need preauthorization to fire their guns. Unless, we change the law so that cops can't just shoot anyone when they feel like it. Maybe they should get an "ok" from a superior before they can shoot.

Look, this is far from being a reality because of too much red tape and organizations like the NRA. No one has the balls to initiate change. We will continue to have mass shootings and accidental gun deaths. This is the world we live in unless we truly want change.

This is not just about "mass shootings" or "taking down shooters".  A very large percentage of violence includes weapons and situations other than guns.  This is about ones ability to defend themselves.

You want to wait for the cops to handle everything?   Good job, you just increased the death rate in the US. You just killed that old man biking on the trail when he got jumped by 3 thugs and almost beaten to death ( true story)(he pulled a gun after being knocked off his bike).  

When seconds matter, the cops are minutes away.

The NRA isn't your issue, they're not the demon here.  They are the the only ones that have enough money (donations) to be able to present an argument to the political crooks who need to be "lobbied."

We will continue to have mass shootings, as long as the majority of the populace are sheep who are naive enough to think the govt can protect them from everything. We will continue to have mass shootings for as long as they're glorified in the media. We will continue to have gun violence as long as the criminal/thug lifestyle is glorified in the entertainment industry. Society is the issue here, not the existence of fast moving metal.

Enact more gun laws. Have the strictest gun laws in the nation. See how that worked out for NJ, CA, Chicago.

[fatsy]

What about my solution for Universal Basic Income for all? Maybe if people made more money, there would be less crime.

[PopoJeff]

What about my solution for Universal Basic Income for all? Maybe if people made more money, there would be less crime.

I believe I expressed my opinion on that in my first post. 

Maybe if more people worked for their money, there'd be less dependency on the government running everyone's lives and using my taxes to fund it.

YTD deductions out of my paycheck are over $35,000. And I haven't even looked at my capital  gains taxes yet.  We've thrown tea in a harbor and started a war for less than this

[TECSHARE]

There are plenty of topics on UBI (and how much of an utter failure it is) in this section. Maybe pick a topic and stick to it. Your "solutions" are hair brained half baked marketing schemes to enact what is in effect a gun ban while pretending not to. No one is buying it, even people who want more gun restrictions. Your plan as described has so many problems I could go on for hours about them. It is not going to happen.

[eddie13]

Adding any sort of unnecessary mechanism that may impede a gun from firing can only reduce its reliability and therefore is stupid..

Not to mention added weight and bulk..
Glue a cell phone to some gun with some respectable recoil and see how many rounds it survives just from recoil.. 

And you want the "authorities" to just be able to turn everyone guns off? Hell no..  


I would also contend that all of the gun deaths that occur are worth the right to bear arms, and I would be on the side of committing many many many more lives than that if it was what's needed to ensure it's continuation..

War for oil? Neh...
War for freedom? Absolutely..

[fatsy]

Adding any sort of unnecessary mechanism that may impede a gun from firing can only reduce its reliability and therefore is stupid..

Not to mention added weight and bulk..
Glue a cell phone to some gun with some respectable recoil and see how many rounds it survives just from recoil.. 

And you want the "authorities" to just be able to turn everyone guns off? Hell no..  


I would also contend that all of the gun deaths that occur are worth the right to bear arms, and I would be on the side of committing many many many more lives than that if it was what's needed to ensure it's continuation..

War for oil? Neh...
War for freedom? Absolutely..

Again, gun owners do not want to give up the power to kill anyone whenever they feel like it. That's the bottom line. Unless the firing of guns continues to go unchecked, this will never change.

Here's another benefit from the the technology: How about putting biometric technology on the grips of handguns so that only the owner or a trusted family member can fire the gun? As a gun owner, I would want that especially if I had small children.

Don't you think with today's technology this can be accomplished without hindering the performance of the gun?

The technology could also record the last time the gun was fired , how many rounds were shot, etc. This could help convict or exonerate someone standing trial for a crime they may or may have not committed.

My solution for UBI doesn't involve government, banks, or Wall Street. Its pure crypto:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KGQtmbhF8AOjWFlEO0Tr6K-PpkGTNBhYsufL1ZNx95E/edit

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5199651.0

https://medium.com/@fatsyabad/why-do-we-steal-fe060422bde8

[fatsy]

I don't want to ban guns. I think they are necessary.

I believe in a modified and modernized 2nd amendment.

[eddie13]

Don't you think with today's technology this can be accomplished without hindering the performance of the gun?

Not for a single second.. No..

Another thing, even if you did make these guns with these electronic disablers, how do you figure you are going to keep even your average hobbyist gunsmith from removing these features?
You have a design idea drawn up? Lets see it..
Do you even know how firearms work?

[TECSHARE]

Don't you think with today's technology this can be accomplished without hindering the performance of the gun?

Not for a single second.. No..

Another thing, even if you did make these guns with these electronic disablers, how do you figure you are going to keep even your average hobbyist gunsmith from removing these features?
You have a design idea drawn up? Lets see it..
Do you even know how firearms work?

Of course he doesn't. Gun control freaks are totally ignorant about firearms and are motivated by emotions and fear, not logic. They are afraid and they seek to feel in control by controlling others, and of course they know best and can make life or death decisions for you. Unfortunately no matter how much they control the lives of others they will still be fearful little pathetic creatures, it will never be enough.

[eddie13]

I believe in a modified and modernized 2nd amendment.

So do I..
Their needs to be more protection for the "shall not be infringed" part because all of the short barreled, fully automatic, armor piercing, silencers, etc. stuff that is illegal now without a NFA tax stamp is bullshit..
Basically all of the NFA act is bullshit..

Everyone should be able to have full autos with silencers without question IMO..

[fatsy]

Don't you think with today's technology this can be accomplished without hindering the performance of the gun?

Not for a single second.. No..

Another thing, even if you did make these guns with these electronic disablers, how do you figure you are going to keep even your average hobbyist gunsmith from removing these features?
You have a design idea drawn up? Lets see it..
Do you even know how firearms work?

Nope. Just ideas swimming around in my head.

[PopoJeff]

Again, gun owners do not want to give up the power to kill anyone whenever they feel like it. That's the bottom line.

This is the second time you've used this statement,   You are wrong, just flat out wrong. 

You're thinking you can interchange the words 'gun owner' and 'criminal' anytime you want. Thats literally what your statement does.

At this point, its obvious you know very little about guns, gun safety, common sense and society as a whole.  You have an amazing naivety to the situation you want to correct.

[fatsy]

I believe in a modified and modernized 2nd amendment.

So do I..
Their needs to be more protection for the "shall not be infringed" part because all of the short barreled, fully automatic, armor piercing, silencers, etc. stuff that is illegal now without a NFA tax stamp is bullshit..
Basically all of the NFA act is bullshit..

Everyone should be able to have full autos with silencers without question IMO..

I agree. You should be able to have any modification under the sun on YOUR gun.

It's the firing of guns that needs to be checked; as to not harm the innocent.

[TECSHARE]

I believe in a modified and modernized 2nd amendment.

So do I..
Their needs to be more protection for the "shall not be infringed" part because all of the short barreled, fully automatic, armor piercing, silencers, etc. stuff that is illegal now without a NFA tax stamp is bullshit..
Basically all of the NFA act is bullshit..

Everyone should be able to have full autos with silencers without question IMO..

I agree. You should be able to have any modification under the sun on YOUR gun.

It's the firing of guns that needs to be checked; as to not harm the innocent.

You are delusional and your ideas are neither new nor fully formed. Your plan is garbage no matter how much you want it to be effective.

[coolcoinz]

I agree. You should be able to have any modification under the sun on YOUR gun.

It's the firing of guns that needs to be checked; as to not harm the innocent.

And who is going to decide who that innocent person is? You block guns from being able to fire without a green light from the authorities and you're giving your life in their hands.
Really, who is going to be innocent? A child? What about a child trained to kill by ISIS, holding a grenade? There's no way for your idea to work.
As for your universal basic income proposal it begins with someone buying shares, so that someone has to invest first. Poor people who can't afford it will be excluded. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of UBI?

[fatsy]

Again, gun owners do not want to give up the power to kill anyone whenever they feel like it. That's the bottom line.

This is the second time you've used this statement,   You are wrong, just flat out wrong. 

You're thinking you can interchange the words 'gun owner' and 'criminal' anytime you want. Thats literally what your statement does.

At this point, its obvious you know very little about guns, gun safety, common sense and society as a whole.  You have an amazing naivety to the situation you want to correct.

I was talking about when the owner uses his gun to commit murder. Don't you think that's wrong? Btw, in my book self defense is NOT murder.

I know that there are responsible gun owners. That's not the problem. The problem comes from when the gun ends up in the wrong hands.

[fatsy]

I believe in a modified and modernized 2nd amendment.

So do I..
Their needs to be more protection for the "shall not be infringed" part because all of the short barreled, fully automatic, armor piercing, silencers, etc. stuff that is illegal now without a NFA tax stamp is bullshit..
Basically all of the NFA act is bullshit..

Everyone should be able to have full autos with silencers without question IMO..

I agree. You should be able to have any modification under the sun on YOUR gun.

It's the firing of guns that needs to be checked; as to not harm the innocent.

You are delusional and your ideas are neither new nor fully formed. Your plan is garbage no matter how much you want it to be effective.

What's your plan then? Let's hear it.

[coolcoinz]

I was talking about when the owner uses his gun to commit murder. Don't you think that's wrong? Btw, in my book self defense is NOT murder.

And what if he uses a pencil? Are you going to ban pencils?
Murder is wrong of course, but a gun is only one of many deadly weapons you can buy or make at home. Why focus on firearms? Ban people from owning knives, molotov cocktails, powerful fireworks, bows and crossbows...

It's impossible to have a foolproof weapon that will know when you're using it for self defense.