(02-15-2018, 02:02 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote:

(02-14-2018, 11:08 PM)TJBender Wrote: 2. The jury holds the ultimate power, and "self defense" is a common defense. Not to mention that the DA is under no obligation to prosecute, ever, as we see so often in cases like those you cite of offenders being let off with a slapped wrist. If a jury believes that someone charged with a crime didn't commit it or was faced with circumstances that excuse their crime, that's what "not guilty" is for.

Those are more of exceptions than the rule. Besides, I'm referring to the judges or prosecutors that simply dismiss cases because they don't want to risk tarnishing their record which happens frequently. I know that the prosecutors aren't required to try cases, but when you have repeat offenders getting off scot-free then there's a problem.

3. If the gun was sold legally and the buyer later used it illegally, the seller has nothing to worry about. If the seller ignored or broke the law and the buyer used that gun illegally, yes, the seller should be held accountable. Hell, if a seller is caught skirting the law they should be held accountable regardless of whether or not guns they sold were used illegally.

That didn't seem to be what you were talking about. I'm fine with punishment for sellers that sell weapons illegally, just not those that sell it legally. But they're already held accountable. 

4. Bill failed to secure a deadly weapon, and a member of his immediate family was able to get their hands on it and use it against another human being. He absolutely bears a large degree of responsibility for the crime. Ever seen anyone try to rob a Stab-N-Go with a baseball bat? Here's a hint: the clerk is legally in possession of a firearm.

I don't secure my weapons. When I need them, I don't need them secured. Don't get me wrong, my infant child doesn't have the ability to reach them or they would be more secured, but they certainly wont be inaccessible or difficult to get to. If it's time to use a gun in defense of your person, you don't have time to waste. I don't think we'll ever agree that someone should be held accountable if their gun is stolen (even by family).

No, the punishment should not be exclusive to gun crimes. I could go into a whole diatribe about how the for-profit prison system in the United States has resulted in more and more nonviolent drug offenders being sent to prison, which diminishes the amount of room available for the people who actually belong there. Many of those nonviolent drug offenders are in there because they have severe mental health issues, which comes back around to the inevitable point. Yes, we have a mental health problem, and fixing that will solve lots of other problems.

It isn't so much of an opinion on what we should do with drug offenses, but the presence of drug offenders wont deter prisons from housing violent suspects. Until we can get appropriate care for people with mental issues, they shouldn't be on the streets. If they use stupid drug laws to accomplish that, I simply don't have a problem with it. It isn't an ideal solution, however.

(02-14-2018, 11:31 PM)JackCity Wrote: Just a question. Would it help at all if all gun owners were required to go for a psych exam twice a year? I know it's already part of the process in places and it wouldn't stop people getting unlawful guns but it might help some.

Then again where do you draw the line for the mental capacity required to own a gun in the first place?

That's the problem. Who decides who is unfit to possess a gun? If there was a 100% reliable test that showed when someone had a propensity for violence, then you'd probably be able to pass this as law. But how do we know when someone isn't kept from owning a gun because the the examiner simply doesn't like him, or if the government doesn't want to hand out as many permits? We've already seen the IRS target conservative groups; do we not think this would happen too?

And let's say someone had depression 10 years ago , should that render them unable to have a gun? I don't think so, but who knows what standard would be set. 

I think I've started to realise there is no magic wand or easy fix to any of this. Probably quite tiresome to hear foreigners opining about guns every time something happens too. 

Trying to stop young men from being disenfranchised would probably have more effect than any gun law would. But again the the solution to that isn't apparent nor is it easy.

---