What if...politicians were actually trying to accomplish something useful...

bisleybisley Senior MemberPosts: 10,623 Senior Member
What if all the screeching gun control advocates were to calm down, take a deep breath, and set about assessing what they claim as their goal, and how to achieve it?

Let's pretend that they are all sincere in their desire to reduce gun violence, rather than accomplishing their real goal of further corrupting the 2nd Amendment and removing guns from the hands of everybody except the people they want to have them (government and elite ruling class, for the most part).

What could a hard-core political activist do, in the way of government legislation, that might actually reduce gun violence, yet not trounce on the rights of law-abiding gun owners? I have a couple of half-baked ideas that seem sensible, at a glance. I'm sure that my logic is flawed in some way, but it could be an interesting discussion, so I'll share them and take my lumps.

Suppose that the gun control activists came to the conclusion that with an estimated 300 million guns out there, and with public opinion against them, they were never going to succeed in getting rid of the guns. Then, suppose that they had enough sense to come up with alternative ideas that might actually reduce gun violence, without restricting the ability of a law-abiding citizen to buy whatever gun he wanted, whenever he wanted it, and enjoy it in any legal fashion he desired. How could this be done?

They could come up with a plan for better educating gun owners, strictly on a voluntary basis, that would have as it's incentive low-cost, hands-on and classroom training. The curriculum could be set up so that it could be taught in any college setting, and would result in some kind of universally recognized certification. That certification could then be used as a prerequisite for furthering one's career, based on idea number two:

Schools, businesses, or whatever could start allowing armed employees, with this certification, to carry their weapons in previously prohibited places. Obviously, the certification would have to be on the same approximate level as what a law enforcement officer would be required to have, but without all the extra training needed to be a policeman. It would be hard to get, if done properly, but there would still be thousands of people who would jump through the necessary hoops to get the certification, and the result would be many, many more competent citizens out there who could potentially stop some of the senseless killings. But more importantly, it would take more places away from the predators who are seeking soft targets.

That's the basic idea, and it will never happen from the left side of the aisle, but could it ever achieve enough popular support to work, if it did somehow get presented, and legislation did get passed to support it?

Replies

  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,640 Senior Member
    The idea is sound. Really good, actually.

    I think passing such legislation would be akin to what happened with CCW in every shall issue state. The press will scream about blood in the streets, how it will endanger cops, ad nauseum.

    In spite of all the press smears and Brady bunch antics, CCW passed and continues to do so. States are dropping more and more restrictions from licensees. I think it would have a shot, but the political reality is the proposal you suggest would be diluted or constricted to a shell of the original intent.
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    The idea is sound. Really good, actually.

    Thank you. The idea is not new, really. In my grandfather's generation, lots of communities would appoint what they referred to as 'peace officers,' who had no sanctioned authority to arrest, but were respected members of the community who would intervene when law enforcement officers were not available. They would forcibly stop major problems, and turn the culprits over to the sheriff, while mostly ignoring minor problems that didn't endanger others. My own grandfather's oldest brother was one, and my grandfather frequently accompanied him, armed with the Bisley Colt in my avatar.

    Something that informal would not really be possible, today. But having a government sanctioned certification, while not being a practical substitute for an actual law enforcement professional, might be respected by some local school boards and businesses, if properly organized and promoted. If successful early on, it could grow into something useful.
  • QuinianQuinian Senior Member Posts: 707 Senior Member
    IT never hurts to try. Send the idea to all of your state Rep and Sen and see if they go with it. I actually just emailed, faxed and wrote mine asking them to make a bill that would make it illegal to slip an amendment into a bill that has nothing to do with the original topic of the bill.

    What's the worst that could happen? They write back and say "Thanks for contacting us but um.. NO!" which is pretty much the responce I get to most of my letters to them.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    Quinian wrote: »
    IT never hurts to try. Send the idea to all of your state Rep and Sen and see if they go with it.

    Well, if the response to this type of idea can only generate two responses in 24 hours, on a 'guns only' type forum, no politician is going to waste his time and political capital on it. There has to be strong support among many, many voters to get any attention whatsoever from career politicians. They do not stick their necks out, period, without assurance that their constituency is going to reward them with their votes.

    Gun issues are tricky, for politicians who want to keep their jobs, for life. They know that the majority of citizens are fairly ignorant of the importance of 2nd Amendment issues, and that they don't necessarily relate the need to preserve it with all the other constitutional guarantees. Even among gun owners, there is disagreement over what the right to keep and bear arms is supposed to defend them against. The idea that the framers may have intended it to help the public defend against tyranny from their own government is pretty frightening to a lot of folks, and politicians won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

    My point in making this post was just to see if anybody had ideas about what 'good government' could accomplish, if it functioned the way it was intended to. Personally, I think government should do practically nothing, unless the public demands it, but the fact is that it's pretty hard to figure out 'who' the public is, any more.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Hey bisley I started to reply a couple of days ago but got side tracked.. Any way:
    What if all the screeching gun control advocates were to calm down, take a deep breath, and set about assessing what they claim as their goal, and how to achieve it?

    We can only wish that might happen. I don't think that anti-gun advocates, or anti-gun politicians who have been so conditioned, and brain-washed about the evils of gun ownership are ever going to be convienced otherwise. However there have been a few converts in the past. The bottom line for them, and I think that most would agree is that their goal is to totally disarm the American citizens.
    Let's pretend that they are all sincere in their desire to reduce gun violence, rather than accomplishing their real goal of further corrupting the 2nd Amendment and removing guns from the hands of everybody except the people they want to have them (government and elite ruling class, for the most part).

    And here in lies the basic problem. A sincere cause to reduce gun violence. It has been said that: "The strength of a law is determined by it's punishment" This can be interpreted a number of different ways. If stiffer penaltys for cold blooded murder, using a gun, would be passed this would be a deterrant to further gun violence, in my way of thinking. The plan worked with the crack down on the nation's drunk driving, so why wouldn't it work in this manner?
    They could come up with a plan for better educating gun owners, strictly on a voluntary basis, that would have as it's incentive low-cost, hands-on and classroom training. The curriculum could be set up so that it could be taught in any college setting, and would result in some kind of universally recognized certification. That certification could then be used as a prerequisite for furthering one's career, based on idea number two:

    It's not us law abiding gun owners who need the education, rather the uneducated, lawless products of our society who are born and raised,with violence instilled in them as a way of life, from a very early age. These folks end up at a very young age of crime, drugs, and taking matters into their own hands with a blantant disregard for the law, other people's property and life, etc. They are going to take what they want, from whom ever they want, whenever they want until the LEO's and court's of this country finally catch them, and convict them. These folks like the Holmes, idiot don't just wake up day, and say: HUM I think I will go and shoot up a movie theater with 70 people in it,, no, no, no, somewhere, in there past they were truly misguided, either by parent's or relatives, society, peer pressure, and by lack of education on their part. Violence is a tool of the ignorant. Self-defence is not.
    Schools, businesses, or whatever could start allowing armed employees, with this certification, to carry their weapons in previously prohibited places. Obviously, the certification would have to be on the same approximate level as what a law enforcement officer would be required to have, but without all the extra training needed to be a policeman. It would be hard to get, if done properly, but there would still be thousands of people who would jump through the necessary hoops to get the certification, and the result would be many, many more competent citizens out there who could potentially stop some of the senseless killings. But more importantly, it would take more places away from the predators who are seeking soft targets.

    I am all for that as stated above!!!!! Did you ever watch the TV movie that came out a long time ago,it was called Proposition G. This very idea of allowing all citizens carry openly, was the theme of the movie. Propostion G a law passed by the state allowed all citizens to openly carry, and as far as the movie went it reduced crime to almost nothing. I wish I could get a hold of a copy of that old movie, it goes along these same lines as you are proposing.
    Gun issues are tricky, for politicians who want to keep their jobs, for life. They know that the majority of citizens are fairly ignorant of the importance of 2nd Amendment issues, and that they don't necessarily relate the need to preserve it with all the other constitutional guarantees. Even among gun owners, there is disagreement over what the right to keep and bear arms is supposed to defend them against. The idea that the framers may have intended it to help the public defend against tyranny from their own government is pretty frightening to a lot of folks, and politicians won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

    Your right again bisley, gun issues are tricky for politicians, but not for folks like us here on the board, or all the other gun owners, in the USA. Bill Clinton and John Kerry , politicians like that, heck they can tell you just how tricky they are for them. What the average person doesn't realize is the 2nd Amendment protects all the rest of the Constitutional Amendments, and the sooner everyone, and I mean everyone acknowledge's this the better off we will be as gun owners. Anti-gun politicans, realize this, that is the exact reason why they continuously, and constantly try in vain to chip away at our 2nd Amendment rights. On the other hand humans have congenitally rights, such as own and bear arms, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,self-defense,free speech, etc., etc., etc., It's not that we humans need a written document to own a gun or the other things I mentioned, it's the 2nd Amendment that prevents our Government, from taking these things away from us, at least for now anyway.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,003 Senior Member
    The first thing you need to do Bis, is get the term "gun violence" out of your vocabulary, as it implies that (a.) the gun is the primary problem in this equation, and (b.) other types of violence are preferable. Someone can still be quite nuts and quite dangerous with no gunpowder involved. Thinking they'll be safe because (in theory) there's no guns around is a big part of the anti's problem in the first place. You taking the tack that that your plan will end "gun violence" is flawed (from the sheeple/liberal point of view) in that the gun is still in the equation, and that it will be whispering in the dark to its trained, certified owner to go out and do evil things.

    Semantic BS, I know, but it does matter in these discussions.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    Good point, Bigslug. I have always been resistant to tippy-toeing around on the details. But when you have powerful opponents out there that make their livings by intentionally misunderstanding the main point of any subject, as a strategy, then, your language must be more precise. Some variation of "violence against innocent citizens' would be better.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    It's not us law abiding gun owners who need the education, rather the uneducated, lawless products of our society who are born and raised,with violence instilled in them as a way of life, from a very early age. These folks end up at a very young age of crime, drugs, and taking matters into their own hands with a blantant disregard for the law, other people's property and life, etc. They are going to take what they want, from whom ever they want, whenever they want until the LEO's and court's of this country finally catch them, and convict them. These folks like the Holmes, idiot don't just wake up day, and say: HUM I think I will go and shoot up a movie theater with 70 people in it,, no, no, no, somewhere, in there past they were truly misguided, either by parent's or relatives, society, peer pressure, and by lack of education on their part. Violence is a tool of the ignorant. Self-defence is not.

    You may be missing the point, here.

    What I'm talking about would in no way be designed to educate or rehabilitate criminals, nor would the point of it be to rescue parentless children from a lifetime of crime.

    It would plainly and simply be a way to get more trained people in the way of criminals that prey on the functioning members of society, and on children. It would not be government funded and it would be completely voluntary. It would not affect anyone else's right to defend themselves, nor would it place any burden on gun owners that did not choose to get a certification. The only contribution needed from government would be incentives for colleges to offer the courses, and guidelines to be followed that would be recognized by government agencies, schools, etc., who could benefit from hiring people with such a certification. By outlining what would be required to allow armed citizens into now forbidden areas, the government would be setting the curriculum.
  • Dr. dbDr. db Senior Member Posts: 1,541 Senior Member
    I'm Dr. db and I approved this message. It concentrates on kids because I teach.

    There is a small black evil place in my heart or soul. Maybe it isn't small but I would like to think that it is. I would hope that it isn't the larger part of my soul. Perhaps that is why I try to keep it wrapped up, gagged, blindfolded, and shoved completely down out of sight.
    When I am in the light, I can write about how we can forgive the man who came to shoot my kids. I write about how my daughter said she hopes his family won't abandon him. When I am in the light I would like to meet his father to tell him I understand his struggle with his son and I don't bear him any ill will.
    But the blackness. The suck all the light out of the world part sometimes gets out enough so that it sits chattering and raving on my shoulder pulling on my hair with both hands and prehensile feet. Straddling my ear. Screaming to be let loose. If I listen, if I don't shove it down, the blackness flows out of it into my ear, in front of my eyes, and suffuses my brain.
    In that black world, I think about a school or a public place ready for the monster who is coming to shoot kids. Not ready to lock him out or call the police, ready to kill him. I think about it being like Michael Gross' and Reba MacIntyre's basement in Tremors. I think about it being like the Unit when a group of people tried to assassinate them at a party. You remember the episode? The Unit members were all carrying concealed and they just kept moving forward taking out the trash. Supporting each other aware of their fields of fire until all of the bad guys were dead. In my black world, the attempted monster is shot down before he hurts a single kid. As he dies I walk up and say, “You broke into the wrong school. You tried to hurt the wrong kids.” And I enjoy saying that.
    What do you think? A bit over the top? Yeah, just a tad I know but maybe the monsters would think twice. At least they wouldn't think it was going to be easy. At least the cowards who come to public places to shoot innocents would know they were going to die and not after killing. But what if that is what the perverts want? What if dying is primary and hurting kids is secondary for these repositories of pestilential evil? Am I complicit in a suicide?
    Then the whisper voice inside says, “That's not right. You cannot let them remake you. You can defend but you can't be happy about it.” So I wrap evil up in its darkness, shove it back in the hole, and try to stay in the light.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    Dr. db wrote: »
    Then the whisper voice inside says, “That's not right. You cannot let them remake you. You can defend but you can't be happy about it.” So I wrap evil up in its darkness, shove it back in the hole, and try to stay in the light.

    There's your answer.
  • NomadacNomadac Senior Member Posts: 890 Senior Member
    Politicians have not been able to win the war on poverty, or the drug war with $$Billions spent for decades, so how do you think they can stop violence or any crimes?

    Consider the training and education given to new driver's, and the ongoing accidents, speeding, DWI and the fatalities daily, do not seem to be dropping. Personal responsibility is not evident in our society today, as placing the blame for what happens seems to be the result of others, etc.

    I never saw the TV movie Proposition G but have seen Minority Report with Tom Cruse that stopped violence before it was committed. I doubt that anyone on this forum will still be alive by the time that technology could be developed.

    There are strong measures that could be taken but the ACLU would stop them before they could be implemented. Even with increased CCW's available and Castle Doctrine's in place any use of firearms by honest citizens will always come under media criticism and Liberal attack resulting in publicity for the citizen and concern for retaliation from criminal's friends or family.
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,582 Senior Member
    What do you mean? every single thing a politician does is mean to be nothing but useful, to them,their $$$ contributors and their party, not to us. Divide and conquer...
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    bisley wrote:
    You may be missing the point, here.

    What I'm talking about would in no way be designed to educate or rehabilitate criminals, nor would the point of it be to rescue parentless children from a lifetime of crime.

    I hope I didn't miss your point,bisley I think your on to something here, its a wonderful idea,and if there is anyway I can be of assistance to you in this let me know.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    bisley wrote:



    I hope I didn't miss your point,bisley I think your on to something here, its a wonderful idea,and if there is anyway I can be of assistance to you in this let me know.

    It was only an idea I had when trying to imagine what it might be like to have 'good government.' It seems that a person who criticizes the government for doing too much should have some ideas about the kind of things it should should be doing, instead.

    I just thought it might be an interesting topic. I appreciate your input.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,348 Senior Member
    Dr. db, that "darkness" you so eloquently describe is simply common sense. Some of those festering carbuncles on the Gluteus Maximus of society need to be exterminated, quickly, efficiently, and with extreme prejudice. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with your tendency to embrace the demon on your shoulder. I, too spent a large part of my lifetime nurturing kids, but most of my students were the misfits, troublemakers, "special needs" kids, and anyone else the counselors didn't want associating with the "good" kids. Yes, I was a vocational teacher, the guy down the hall who only gets noticed when something needs fixing, and the snobs in the other part of the building who normally wouldn't give me the time of day suddenly became my best buddies. I think it chafed that I could actually do something with an observable indication of success- - - -like repairing a car, picking a lock, changing a light switch, etc. I was able to take more than a few of society's rejects and guide them along to careers with earnings that the over-educated, under-skilled elite looked upon with envy.

    Do you recall H.G. Wells' story, "The Time Machine" where the people like me, the Morlocks, were forced to exist underground in perpetual darkness while the Eloi enjoyed the benefits of the sunlight? The Eloi paid dearly for their idyllic life, didn't they? That story was required reading for my students. We discussed it in detail, and I always made the point that technical skill will always trump some abstract idea of "education" that serves no purpose in the real world. Some of us embrace that concept- - - -and we enjoy the delicious taste of Eloi flesh!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,973 Senior Member
    Well written Doc...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    Nomadac wrote: »
    Politicians have not been able to win the war on poverty, or the drug war with $$Billions spent for decades, so how do you think they can stop violence or any crimes?

    Consider the training and education given to new driver's, and the ongoing accidents, speeding, DWI and the fatalities daily, do not seem to be dropping. Personal responsibility is not evident in our society today, as placing the blame for what happens seems to be the result of others, etc.

    I never saw the TV movie Proposition G but have seen Minority Report with Tom Cruse that stopped violence before it was committed. I doubt that anyone on this forum will still be alive by the time that technology could be developed.

    There are strong measures that could be taken but the ACLU would stop them before they could be implemented. Even with increased CCW's available and Castle Doctrine's in place any use of firearms by honest citizens will always come under media criticism and Liberal attack resulting in publicity for the citizen and concern for retaliation from criminal's friends or family.

    The idea I suggested is obviously a fantasy, because it requires good government, run by people who know how to use the resources that are available to them, without creating a new bureaucracy or levying any new taxes. All they have to do is adjust the rules to allow for some common sense. They would simply be increasing the efficiency of violent crime prevention measures, at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer...any decent engineer could figure this out, if party politics were removed from the equation.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    The idea I suggested is obviously a fantasy, because it requires good government, run by people who know how to use the resources that are available to them, without creating a new bureaucracy or levying any new taxes. All they have to do is adjust the rules to allow for some common sense. They would simply be increasing the efficiency of violent crime prevention measures, at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer...any decent engineer could figure this out, if party politics were removed from the equation.

    Hey bisley, I don't think over 200 million American citizens yearning for good Government is a fantasy at all, no,no,,quite the contrary. I believe it is the wish of the law abiding tax paying citizen to want good government. I think you just hit the nail on the head with adjusting the rules increasing the efficiency of violent crime prevention measures, lowest cost to the taxpayer, and above all Party Politics removed from the equation.

    Small good government will have to be accomplished at all three levels of government, Local, State,Federal. We need to look at the underlying causes and history of our Government during the 235 yrs, we have been a nation, and determine what and where we let our US Government get so huge and out of control. For example we know that over the course of this nation we have seen the creation of US Government organizations that are usless, mis-managed, over staffed, and over budget. Yet they continue to sap the life out of us with more usless regulations, higher taxes, and burden the American people, with useless restrictions to no end. Again like you said the party politics have interfered more so than none, with the passing of good and bad legislation. Political corruption is rampant in this country yet, a lot of folks whom I have talked to about it don't even seem to realize it, much less acknowledge it, so what is one to do? We could do what Teach says and Throw the Bums out at election time I guess. I just hope its not to late to save this country from total political and economic disaster, and failure.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,623 Senior Member
    Our government was at it's best when it had no money, and therefore had to appeal to private citizens to help solve the problems. Low budgets forced them to find efficient solutions, and more importantly, forced them to forgo intervening in things that they knew absolutely nothing about.

    If you really examine government spending, I'm quite certain you would find that most of the things that they spend huge sums on are things they botched in the first place. If you listen to liberals, you will hear that their programs failed becuse they were underfunded, and the solution is to double down on their failures. Being clueless about how to fix anything does nothing to discourage them from throwing more of other people's money at it, and somehow ending up rich in the process.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,973 Senior Member
    Dr. db wrote: »
    I'm Dr. db and I approved this message. It concentrates on kids because I teach.

    There is a small black evil place in my heart or soul. Maybe it isn't small but I would like to think that it is. I would hope that it isn't the larger part of my soul. Perhaps that is why I try to keep it wrapped up, gagged, blindfolded, and shoved completely down out of sight.
    When I am in the light, I can write about how we can forgive the man who came to shoot my kids. I write about how my daughter said she hopes his family won't abandon him. When I am in the light I would like to meet his father to tell him I understand his struggle with his son and I don't bear him any ill will.
    But the blackness. The suck all the light out of the world part sometimes gets out enough so that it sits chattering and raving on my shoulder pulling on my hair with both hands and prehensile feet. Straddling my ear. Screaming to be let loose. If I listen, if I don't shove it down, the blackness flows out of it into my ear, in front of my eyes, and suffuses my brain.
    In that black world, I think about a school or a public place ready for the monster who is coming to shoot kids. Not ready to lock him out or call the police, ready to kill him. I think about it being like Michael Gross' and Reba MacIntyre's basement in Tremors. I think about it being like the Unit when a group of people tried to assassinate them at a party. You remember the episode? The Unit members were all carrying concealed and they just kept moving forward taking out the trash. Supporting each other aware of their fields of fire until all of the bad guys were dead. In my black world, the attempted monster is shot down before he hurts a single kid. As he dies I walk up and say, “You broke into the wrong school. You tried to hurt the wrong kids.” And I enjoy saying that.
    What do you think? A bit over the top? Yeah, just a tad I know but maybe the monsters would think twice. At least they wouldn't think it was going to be easy. At least the cowards who come to public places to shoot innocents would know they were going to die and not after killing. But what if that is what the perverts want? What if dying is primary and hurting kids is secondary for these repositories of pestilential evil? Am I complicit in a suicide?
    Then the whisper voice inside says, “That's not right. You cannot let them remake you. You can defend but you can't be happy about it.” So I wrap evil up in its darkness, shove it back in the hole, and try to stay in the light.

    I've had the evening to read your post a few times and ruminate on it....I can only add this...Too many people, even those that tote guns for self protection, believe that all human life is sacred...and they are wrong...My father summed it up well when he said..."Some people just need killin"...there are aberrations out there, the takers in our society, those who prey on our children, our elderly and the weak, whose existence brings nothing but pain and misery to the world , parasites who live at the expense of others...and that while alive are simply a waste of good oxygen and scarcely worth the bullet that it takes to put them them down. My vet once told me that "There are too many good dogs in the world to put up with a bad one" I agree, and believe that it applies to people as well...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Dr. dbDr. db Senior Member Posts: 1,541 Senior Member
    J: Don't get me wrong. I would take out the trash, but I would be regretful later. Not so much for what I had to do but for a life, hopefully his, gone. As for my life I would hope it wasn't a waste but his life probably would have been. Glad I gave you something to think about.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.