Easier said than done

Gun violence, and therefore gun control, is all over the news these days.

My understanding is that gun control advocates are demanding universal background checks on gun purchasers, raising the legal age for gun ownership...or is it gun purchase?...from 18 to 21, and I believe banning the future sale of AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles.  My question is, supposing they are 100% successful in having their demands met, what are they going to do 6 months or 2 years from now when there is another mass shooting?  Then what?  Does anyone really believe the firearms black market will somehow disappear?  Does anyone really believe there won't be another mass shooting some day?

Legislation didn't succeed in stopping alcohol abuse in the 1920's-30's.  Legislation didn't prevent abortion prior to Roe v Wade.  Legislation hasn't stopped human trafficking.  Legislation hasn't stopped drug smuggling or drug use.  Legislation hasn't stopped child pornography.  Legislation hasn't eliminated racism. 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think many of those things were much less prevalent in society than gun ownership is today.  And the two that come closest in number of Americans participating, alcohol and drug use, have been the issues where legislation has been the least effective.  We simply haven't been able to peddle fast enough to get ahead of those problems.

I applaud those who recognize we have a serious gun violence problem and are actively doing something.  But aren't we just treating the festering sores and not the underlying disease?  Are we being honest with ourselves?

S

And the poll says......

Have you ever been part of a Gallup Poll or maybe a Quinnipiac University Poll?  (Is that a real school?  Do they play football?  What conference are they in?)  According to the above poll of pollsters (haha!) they're in the believable category.  Political party polls and news media polls, not so much.

I'm always hearing about how the American people are in favor of or against blah blah blah, but if you look at how Americans say they feel about contemporary issues, and then look at how Congress is representing us with their votes, you'll see a definite disconnect. 

We say we want immigration reform, and our politicians nod and agree, and then passively do nothing, or worse, the exact opposite.

We say we don't want trade tariffs, and our politicians nod and agree, and then just sit on their thumbs.

We have opinions on various gun control measures, ditto.

We tell them how we feel about taxes, and health care, and they tippy toe around them and do nothing.

Here's a typical day for a Washington politician:  They meet for breakfast with a lobbyist who says his client wants X, then meets with a trade group from "back home" who says they do not want X.  He poses for pictures with his constituents, passes out ceremonial Congressional paper weights, thanks them for their opinion, promises to keep in touch, then goes out and votes for X, which is slyly buried in a bill promising to end puppy mills, 'cause, you know, everyone wants to end puppy mills, right?

Then two months later he's the speaker at an event back home, and they treat him as if he was royalty!  People are scared to speak up and hold his feet to the fire, or throw him in the fire, because....I have no idea why.

What's the point of public opinion polls if our public servants (wow....there's an oxymoron!) pay us no attention?

S

We might be on to something here

When discussing gun control these days it's almost like The Irresistible Force vs The Immovable Object.  It seems like we're in permanent gridlock....no one is budging.

FULL DISCLOSURE:  I own guns, enjoy shooting guns, and legally carry a gun.  I'm a threat to NO ONE, unless they threaten me or a loved one.  Then I feel I have the right to defend myself.

There are also people who own guns, enjoy shooting guns, and ILLEGALLY carry a gun, and they're a threat to EVERYBODY.  I've said and written many times that these are the people we need to agree to disarm.  And then we all smile, nod, say "great idea"....and do nothing.  Except California.

I can't believe I'm giving a thumbs up to a gun law originating in California, but I am.  I just saw a piece on TV about a program in CA that is cracking down on "armed prohibited persons".  Specifically, the California Dept of Justice has a task force that cross-references five databases to find people who legally purchased guns but are prohibited by law from doing so.  That's apparently how lax our current background check system is.  These "prohibited persons" include felons, individuals with a history of violence, those who have a restraining order against them, those with severe mental illness, and wanted persons.

How could we all not agree on that?  Seems to me these are the exact kind of people we need to disarm!  The anti-gun controllers, however, seem to have their panties in a wad.

I can understand how the sight of law enforcement knocking on doors and then entering to confiscate guns could be frightening to Second Amendment supporters, which includes me.  (Before the knock on the door the violators are notified by mail that they need to disarm and come clean.)  And I can understand how they might be scared of a database that identifies who has guns and who doesn't.  But we need to somehow balance that against the fact that 10,000 people have been hauled in for possessing 18,000 guns that they are already prohibited by law to have. 

These people have already demonstrated they are either mentally ill or are a menace to society.  It seems to me we need to find a way to reassure us law abiding gun owners that WE have nothing to fear, and then go after "armed prohibited persons" everywhere with a vengeance.  They are the problem, not us.

S

What to do?

I have a serious question for you, please.  I promise I'm not trying to bait anyone, but just looking for some opinions and options:

Gun control advocates seem to be settling on an agenda of making background checks mandatory on ALL gun sales, banning the future sale of "assault rifles", and finding a way to identify and treat those with dangerous mental issues.  They say this would be a very good start to reducing gun violence, and that over the years and decades ahead we might move away from our current gun-centric society.

Taking this vision at face value, what are we going to do to protect our schools and churches and shopping malls, etc, RIGHT NOW?  

What if next Wednesday a mentally deranged person walked into a middle school in a normally peaceful Indiana community and started firing.  There is one School Resource (police) Officer on duty during school hours to protect 1,500 students spread out over a 3-building campus.  What could be done RIGHT THEN to stop another massacre?  Would it take another person with a gun to stop the shooter or are there other options?

Your thoughts and suggestions, please.

S

Asleep at the wheel

We now know for a fact that we're being played by Russia.  The special counsel has documented in detail how Russian agents have been active in the US since at least 2014.  For years they've used various means to sow discontent here.  They've used social media to foment unrest and divisiveness between the races....look at Ferguson and Baltimore and Charlottesville for examples.  At the same time, they've fired up both the "Build The Wall" movement and the "Save the Dreamers" movement.  They want to radicalize us.

In our recent election they were, behind-the-scenes, supporting both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, thinking they were both destined to fail.  They're no doubt right now actively stirring up the Gun Control movement, while telling the 2nd Amendment supporters they're about to lose their guns.  In all these examples they probably don't care who wins, so long as we're fighting among ourselves.

The same is happening in Europe.  I'm sure they were heartened by the UK's Brexit vote to leave the EU.  They've supported Marine Le Pen in France, and other nationalist movements elsewhere in Europe.  Their hope is to weaken the European Union with the ultimate goal of seeing it break apart.  Driving a wedge between the US and our European allies would just be icing on the cake for them.

To be polite, through all this President Trump has been asleep at the wheel.  The closest he's come to pointing a finger at what the Russians are doing is to say, "I think the Russians did it, BUT I ALSO THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN CHINA, OR A 400 LB GUY SITTING ON HIS BED."  Not exactly a ringing endorsement of our intelligence community analysis, is it? 

To be less generous, you could say our President has been derelict in his sworn duty to protect us "from all enemies, foreign and domestic."  And make no mistake, RUSSIA IS OUR ENEMY.    Eight of the 10 men Vladimir Putin depends on to hold power are former KGB men, just like him.  We're solidly in the midst of Cold War 2.0.

It's crunch time, President Trump.  Our Congress has stepped up and voted overwhelmingly to punish Russia by imposing more sanctions.   (I can't believe I'm praising Congress!)  Now it's your turn.  If you don't act, if you don't aggressively implement Congress's will, I'm prepared to take the drastic step of labeling you a traitor.  

Yeah, that's pretty extreme.  Please don't make me say it.

S  

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem....

Millions of Americans across the country are demanding gun control in response to the new reality of seemingly monthly mass shootings, and just gun violence in general.  I'd like to ask those of you who agree with this sentiment to participate in a little exercise.  I'm not baiting anyone, but looking for some real (possible) answers to a real problem.

My exercise goes like this:  If you were a member of Congress and you wanted to introduce a bill relating to gun control, what would you include in your proposal?  For example, "Prohibit the future manufacture, importation, and sale of automatic / semi-automatic rifles", or "No handguns larger than ___ caliber", or "No magazines containing more than ___ rounds".  Would you address the 250-300 million guns that are already in public hands?

Question 2:  If enacted, how would you enforce it?  Would you leave it up to local / state law enforcement, or the ATF, or the FBI, or all the above?  Regardless, it would seem like they would have to take time away from other duties to enforce your new gun control law.  Do you think that's wise?  Or would you establish a new law enforcement body to police just this one thing?  Who would pay for this?  Would this be an "unfunded mandate" (requiring someone to do something, without providing them the funding to do it)?

Question 3:  What would you do with those brought in for violating your new gun control law?  Our Constitution allows everyone their day in court.  By all accounts our court system, at every level, already has a considerable backlog of cases waiting to be heard.  Would you provide for a new, single issue "Gun Violation Court"?  If so, this would require physical courtrooms and offices, clerks, bailiffs, judges, etc.  How would all those be paid for?

Question 4:  Assuming you could resolve Question 3, what would you do with those convicted?  I'm going to assume that in your new gun violation roundup you would also automatically include those you find who are already prohibited from possessing a firearm, such as previously convicted felons.  I would also assume you would go after black market sellers, too.  Do we have enough state and / or federal prisons & jailers to handle them all?  I've heard it costs tens-of-thousands of dollars to incarcerate one prisoner for just one year.  How would these costs be funded?

One final rule:  You can't just say, "I don't know how they'd do it, but they'd just have to find a way", or "I dunno, they're smart guys up there in Washington.  Let them figure it out."  Put on the table some concrete ideas that real lawmakers could build on.  Even if you can only contribute a little, you'll be light years ahead of those who are just perpetual whiners.

Now, independent of this exercise, tell me....what do you think the odds are a real bill similar to what you've suggested would have of garnering the votes of 50% +1 in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and be signed by the President?  (Forget for a second the NRA exists.)  

Thanks for participating.

S

Are we really this inept? (correct answer: yes we are)

Instead of showing the face of the murderer who killed 26 people using an AR-15 in a small town church in Texas yesterday, I'd rather show the photo of this good, brave citizen, Stephen Williford, who retrieved his AR-15 and returned fire, by all accounts saving many other lives.

The evil shooter was an Air Force veteran who was given a "Bad Conduct" discharge after receiving a Court Martial and spending a year in the brig (prison) for abusing his wife and child.  Also, in 2014 the evil shooter was arrested for misdemeanor animal cruelty in Colorado and given a differed probationary sentence.  

Now we learn the Air Force failed to notify the FBI of his court martial for spousal abuse.  Why?  Did Colorado notify the FBI of his recent misdemeanor conviction?  Apparently not.  Are we really this inept?  Either would have prevented him passing a background check and buying a gun through normal, legal channels.

Meanwhile the Texas Department of Public Safety (our State Police), during their standard vetting process, learned something and refused to issue him a license to legally carry a weapon.  What did the Texas DPS learn, and how did they learn it?  (Kudos DPS.  This is why our Texas firearm license holders have such an exemplary record of responsible gun ownership.)

The Federal Instant Criminal Background Check System won't work if felonies and recent misdemeanor convictions (and a few other disqualifiers) aren't reported.

But even if he had been legally disqualified from buying a gun, with an estimated 1,000,000 guns stolen every year, there is a thriving black market in cash-and-carry firearms transactions, and this is where most bad guys get their guns.  The system is full of holes that let bad people obtain guns.  "Black markets" pay no attention to laws....never have, never will. 

There are no more blatant examples of people who should NOT have guns than this Texas church shooter.  Those convicted of family violence, and anyone who would cruelly harm an animal, IMO don't deserve a second chance to prove they can handle something as deadly as a gun.   

Meanwhile we need to see to it that good people like Mr. Williford get the recognition they deserve for stepping up and confronting active shooters and saving lives.  This is a classic example of guns in the hands of good people doing good things. 

S

Ahhh....America....we have a problem

We seem to be a very odd bunch.  By "we" I mean the upset, disillusioned, gun toting Americans among us.  First the "upset, disillusioned" part:

We have a lot of societal issues.  Minorities feel the deck is stacked against them, and they want fairer treatment.  White supremacists feel that if minorities receive better treatment, it will be at their expense.  

Every kid who can strum a guitar thinks he's going to be a rock star, and every kid who has any athletic ability thinks he's destined for professional sports stardom.  Virtually all hit the reality wall eventually and find their life's work will instead be on a loading dock or at the paper mill. 

Too many seniors had expected a comfy retirement, only to find their life savings vanish when they found themselves with unexpected and overwhelming medical bills, or their 401K's cratered, along with the company they worked 40 years for.  At least they still have their Medicare and Social Security, right?  Umm...maybe not.  Hungry tax-cut vultures are eyeing them both. 

It's been a given that each generation of Americans will be better off than their parents.  Not so fast.  The middle class has been losing ground for the past several decades.  Kids are told they need a good education, then find themselves saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in student loans they have trouble paying back.

Blue-collar middle class Americans have been especially hard hit.  Many have seen their jobs outsourced to Mexico or Asia, and the replacement jobs they can find don't pay nearly what they need to maintain their former lifestyle.

Even comfortable white-collar Americans, who seem to have it all, say they feel overwhelming, intense pressure trying to keep it all.

Obese / short people know they'll never make it to a company vice-presidency.  Those offices are reserved for beautiful / handsome people.

And then we have our addictions....alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc, all impairing our ability to attain the good life.  Even those who take legitimately prescribed medicines....have you read the side effects today's meds bury in the fine print?  Besides the ever popular constipation and / or diarrhea, they often include "violent reactions and suicidal tendencies".  Yikes!

And scorned lovers, and lost promotions, and...

Which leads us to the "gun toting" part:

We do have a LOT of guns in America.  An estimated 300,000,000 plus.  The problem comes when some of those mentioned above just snap, unable to contain their anger.  Then they go after those who they feel are responsible for their misfortune, such as what happened in Las Vegas last week.

Now we're hearing calls once again for gun control.  "Stop making and selling 'assault rifles'", they say, "and we'll see less gun violence."  OK, fine.  Outlaw "bump stops", and suppressors, and even new AR-15's.  (Note: an AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle, legally speaking.)  With 300,000,000 guns already out there, does anyone really believe a disturbed person won't be able to get one?  (Another note: 1,000,000 guns are stolen and presumably resold every year on the black market.)

The fact is, unless we can get a handle on these (and other) societal issues we face, we're just putting a tiny band-aid on a sucking chest wound with gun control.  Once again, as has become the American Way, we're looking for a quick, easy way out.  We're in denial.

S

Reverse psychology

Remember back when you were a teenager, under intense social pressure and loaded with raging hormones, and your parents told you you couldn't see "that boy" or "that girl" because blah blah blah?  What did you do?  You probably fabricated an elaborate scheme, maybe with the help of your friends, to see him/her anyway.  That's an example of reverse psychology, and it pervades our society today more than ever.  When someone tells us we MUST do something, we'll fight to NOT do it.  If someone tells us we CAN'T have it, we'll go to great lengths to GET it.

The day after the recent horrible massacre in Las Vegas, MGM (they own the Mandalay Bay hotel) stock was down substantially, while Smith and Wesson stock was surging.  Investors knew there would be an immediate call for gun control, and they knew the result would be the public, even those who had never desired to own a gun before, would rush to buy one before they were outlawed.  *guns outlawed in America...hahaha!*

But reverse psychology can be more subtle, too.  For example, the NFL players "take a knee" movement was originally meant to publicize the social injustice Black Americans face every day in America.  It has no doubt brought attention to the subject and attracted many supporters, but it has also driven a wedge into society and alienated many who might have otherwise been on board.  

The "I have a constitutional right to protest" position (absolutely true) was also sometimes paired with "and if you oppose my right to 'take a knee' during the National Anthem, you're un-informed, ignorant, un-American and/or a racist".  (Yes, this happened...I heard commentators actually say that on national TV.)

The reverse psychological effect was that many ordinary people, often of a generation who grew up reciting the Pledge of Allegiance the first thing every morning at school, and stood with their hand over their heart and sometimes even sang the National Anthem at football games, recoiled and dug in their heels.  

As I tried to subtly say in a previous post, apparently unsuccessfully, sometimes you need to find a way to get your message across while not stirring up a reverse psychological reaction. Take a group knee before the National Anthem, or right before the kickoff at mid-field, for example.  

Gen Dwight Eisenhower led a diverse group that defeated the Nazi's by building a cohesive coalition, not by pitting one group against another.  Build coalitions, don't drive wedges.  (I can already imagine the reactions I'll get over those five words!)

Our society is becoming more rough edged, more confrontational, more "in your face", and I see that as ultimately counterproductive.  

Just my opinion.

S

"We need to come together for the good of the country...."

....said the Republicans and the Democrats.  "So just do exactly what I say and everything will be fine."

We Americans are pretty much evenly split between our preference for liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans.  You'd think our politicians would sit down, haggle some, bang on the table some and swear, then eventually agree to split the difference.  "I'll give some here if you'll give some there."  That's how you get things done.  Doesn't that seem reasonable?

But Nooooooo!  The ultra-conservative (Tea Party) Republicans and the ultra-liberal wing of the Democratic party (do they have a catchy name?) won't give an inch.  "My way or the highway" they say.  If I were to sum up the Republicans with one word or phrase it would be "tax cuts".  They resent spending a penny of their upper-class money on anything the Democrats might want.  And the one word that sums up the Democrats would be "gimme".  They want all kinds of benefits, and want the Republicans to pay for it.  Dream on!  Those two extremes are like oil and water....they're never going to mix.

This leads to pissed off, violent followers who take their guns to baseball fields and try to kill Republicans.  It might just as easily be disgruntled hotheads who tried to kill Democrats at     fill in the place__. 

Listen up you knuckleheads....work it out!  Democrats:  $15 an hour for unskilled labor can't be justified.  If you want to make $15-$20 an hour you need a skill.  Republicans:  Agree to fund apprenticeships and trade schools so the unskilled can learn and work and pay taxes. 

Republicans:  Lack of healthcare is killing people, mainly poor people whose employers seldom offer benefits.  Your proposed healthcare replacement plan is, to use Prez Trump's word, "mean".  Show a little heart.  You want to round up all the "undocumented workers" and send them somewhere, anywhere else but here.  But we need their labor!  Find a way to bring them into the system where they can raise their kids without fear, work, and pay taxes.  Democrats:  Work together to devise a plan that guarantees "registration" will NOT be the first step to deportation as so many fear.  Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Democrats:  More gun control laws won't work any better than the old gun control laws.  Face facts. Republicans:  Grow some balls....quit cowering to the NRA.  You can work with Democrats to get help for the mentally ill who are too often the ones who get hold of guns and go on killing sprees.  Spending some money on mental health care now will pay dividends later.  And both of you should surely be able to agree to get guns out of the hands of known felons who are prohibited from having them in the first place.  Our laws have no teeth!  Fix it.

See, it isn't that hard.  Compromise.  Neither will get everything they want, but no one will feel like they were kicked to the curb, either.  Politicians got us into this mess, and they can get us out of it, too.  Let's try pragmatism for a change, because God knows extreme ideologies have done us more harm than good.

S

A calm look at guns in America

I saw Donald Trump on the news today talking about the tragedy in Orlando, saying it would have ended much differently if there had been some armed good guys in the crowd able to shoot back. I've never heard a more naive statement in my life!

First of all, it is extremely difficult to hit a target, even a man-sized target, at more than 15-20 yards with a handgun.  I've seen people at the gun range shooting at a stationary paper target who miss as often as not from that distance.  Go try it for yourself and see what I mean.  

Now throw in a real live crazed person, armed, shooting back, and hundreds of people screaming and running in every direction.  Mix in a healthy shot of adrenaline, and perhaps more than a little alcohol (remember, it was a nightclub/bar), and your odds drop to near zero.  

What does go up are your chances of hitting innocent bystanders, and if that happens you are responsible for where your rounds abruptly stop.  Dumb idea Donald!  He obviously has never been shot at, and probably has never even fired a gun.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There are competing bills before Congress right now seeking to prohibit those on the "no fly" list from being able to buy firearms.  Neither side is being honest with us.  Despite what they say they are NOT sincerely wanting such reforms.  Both the Democrats and Republicans have attached some of their pet partisan causes to their respective bills that they know the opposition will shoot down.  (Oooo....sorry.  Bad pun.)  

If they would both put aside their politics and put forth a stand-alone "no fly-no buy" bill,  they might possibly make a deal.  The fact that they won't, in the wake of the Orlando massacre, says all you need to know about Washington politicians.  They're more interested in vying for political advantage than working for us.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Despite what we hear on the 24/7 news, our country is NOT becoming more dangerous as more guns get into the hands of more Americans.  (FYI...according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, gun production is up 140% during the Obama presidency.)

Comparing 1993 to 2009 (I couldn't find a more current chart) you'll see that the homicide rate by firearm, the suicide rate by firearm, and the accidental death rate by firearm are down 44%, 19%, and 69%, respectively, all while the population increased by 18%.  While even one death is one too many, my point is the trend is down, not up.  We are NOT sinking into anarchy!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For some reason many people still think of my Texas as a land of tumbleweeds, rattlesnakes, and gunslingers.  They're only slightly wrong.  *wink*  Here is a fact you might find interesting about us Texans and our guns:

Through the end of 2015, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety (who issues "right-to-carry" handgun licenses) there were 937,419 citizens actively permitted to carry a gun.  I'm one of them.  That sounds like a lot of people running around with guns on their persons, doesn't it?  But despite this, with 43,924 total violent felonies of all types committed in Texas that year, only 108 were committed by right-to-carry license holders.  This is a minuscule .2459% committed by gun toters.  The vetting process works!

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Those who are strong proponents of gun control often point to Australia and the UK as examples of how the state can outlaw (virtually all) guns and all will soon be well.  Those are not good apples-to-apples comparisons with the US.

In 1996 Australia prohibited almost all citizens from owning guns.  Through a buy-back program, approximately 700,000 guns were sold back or voluntarily turned in to the government, and another 260,000 were suspected still clandestinely held.  At the time Australia's population was 18.3 million people.  Statistically that means 960,000 guns were in the hands of private citizens, or .0524 guns per person.

In 1988 the UK (not including Northern Ireland) prohibited their citizens from owning most types of guns.  Through a buy-back program, approximately 162,000 guns were sold back or voluntarily turned in to the government.  At that time the population of the entire UK was 56.7 million people, which translates to .00028 guns per person.

In the US today, with a population of 323.8 million people, there are estimated to be between 310 and 350 MILLION guns in private hands, or (statistically) one gun per person.  Honestly now, what do you think the odds are of getting American gun ownership numbers down to levels even remotely close to the levels of Australia and the UK pre-ban, much less post-ban?  

Of course we can try to clean up our act, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking we can pass some new gun control laws and then launch into a rousing chorus of Kum Baya.  This is why I realistically say we need to focus first of all on getting guns out of the hands of those (relative) few who are causing most of our problems.  Such a plan would cause minimal inconvenience to the majority of people who are causing no problems in the first place, likely gaining their support for more targeted measures later on.  Think this through, friends.  We're chasing windmills.

Knee jerk reactions seldom work out well.  Just sayin'.

S  

   

Come on, punk. Make...my...day!

Yes, the massacre in Orlando was truly tragic, but the knee jerk reactions coming out of this sad affair are just getting ridiculous.

"A few good guys with guns inside that night club could have ended it really fast!"  Umm....easier said than done.  The right person, with the right training, positioned in just the right place, might have been able to stop it.  But the odds of all those stars lining up juuuust right are somewhere between slim and none.

First of all, when faced with the threat of imminent death, and with bullets flying, otherwise brilliant people will suddenly display the IQ of a gerbil.  Panic trumps clear thinking.  And despite what you see on TV and in the movies, it is extremely difficult to accurately shoot a defensive handgun past 25 yards.  

Unless you've received intensive training and have nerves of steel, and with adrenaline pumping, thinking you can pull your gun and pop a cap in a bad guy to become an instant hero is simply delusional.  And who could ever think allowing guns in bars could be a good thing?

"More gun control!"  Call me skeptical.  A dedicated jihadist/crazed person will get a gun, laws be damned.  With enough guns of all types, including millions of "assault rifles", already out there to arm every man, woman, and child in America, I'm afraid that genie can not be squeezed back into the bottle.  

Gun control might sound like a proactive, commendable thing, but I think it would be a futile effort, unlikely to stop those we want stopped.  I would rather see us concentrate our efforts on getting guns out of the hands of felons who are already prohibited from having them (but do anyway), and keeping guns out of the hands of those who have demonstrated they are too mentally troubled to have them.

"Ban Muslims from coming to America."  Too late, folks.  There are already approximately 3.3 million Muslims living in America right now, many of them born here.  They are the ones being radicalized/recruited by ISIS and others to attack us.  Thoroughly vett all new immigrants, of course, but lets not think that will be some magic fix.

"No fly, no buy!"  Yes, it does seem ironic that we can prohibit someone (on a watch list) from getting on an airliner, but we can't stop them from buying a gun.  That's because no one has a constitutional right to fly, but (to the consternation of some) most of us do have the constitutional right to buy a gun.  To get on a "no fly" watch list could require little more than an anonymous call to the FBI saying someone was up to no good.  Isn't that what the German people were urged to do by the Nazis....spy/report on their neighbors?  Yes, do watch out for things out of order, but that in itself doesn't constitute guilt.  Lets not crawl into that gutter, OK?

So what should we do to be safe?  Just stay home?  Just pull the curtains closed and cower?  Oh HELL NO!  If we do that, they win!

I say go about your business.  Go to work, to school, shopping, out for dinner, etc, but pull your head out of your arse and pay attention to what's going on around you.  

Don't walk down the street texting on your iPhone or reading email.  Bad guys don't just pull rifles out of their pants pockets.  If you see someone walking down the street trying to be discreet about the AR-15 at their side, or walking with a gun visible across a parking lot towards a mall or a business, run, call 911, yell.

When you go into a restaurant, theater, auditorium, etc, pay attention to where the exits are.  Know in advance where your escape routes are if it all hits the fan.  I don't mean you need to become all paranoid about everyday life, but be calmly aware of your options, just like you (should) be aware of where the exit doors are on your airline flight to visit grandma.

The old thinking was that in such dire circumstances you should "run, hide, fight"....run away if you can, hide if you can't, and as a last resort, fight.  Now the experts are advising us to either run or fight.  Trying to hide, especially in a place with only one way in/out, isn't likely to fool a gunman.  Most hiding places, such as public restrooms, are dead ends.  And if you are able to run, and get out in the open, run low and left.

They say if you can't run, position yourself so that when/if the door is kicked in, a mob can instantly gang tackle the bad guy.  In the time it would take you to close 8 feet, for example, a shooter is unlikely to be able to see what is happening, react, and swing his gun around.  Although it sounds counter-intuitive, running towards a gun can make sense....if you have the presence of mind to do it.

And yes, if you are licensed to legally carry a firearm, do so, but don't think this will provide some sort of impenetrable protective bubble around you.  Know its/your limitations.

If you repeatedly do these things every day, everywhere you go, you should be able to react instinctively in an emergency, without having to think about it.  Lets not make things more difficult than they need to be.  KISS*

S

*Keep It Simple, Stupid

Sandy Hook school shooting anniversary....

It was three years ago today that Adam Lanza, a mentally disturbed 20-year-old man, stole guns from his mother's house and went to Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT where he shot and killed 20 innocent little children and 6 adults. 

Sadly there have been numerous other mass shootings since then across the country, several involving schools.  The question that is front and center on the news, particularly on this anniversary date, is, what can we do to stop this from ever happening again?

The most common answer, in fact the ONLY answer I've yet heard, is to pass some sort of firearms legislation.  Specifically, the prohibition of the manufacture/importation of new assault-style rifles and high capacity magazines.

Suppose for a moment such a law could be passed and signed into law.  I hope I'm wrong, but I honestly don't think it would stop many/any new mass shootings.  Why?  Just as in Adam Lanza's case, existing assault-style guns could still be stolen.  (We would never know for sure how many people were NOT killed thanks to such a law....you can't prove a negative.)

But if I'm right, what then? After the next mass shooting, and the next, and the next, what would be the next logical thing we could try to put a stop to the madness?  So far, some sort of "gun control" is the only idea I've heard put forward.  Is there anything else?

If anyone has any other thoughts/suggestions, I'd like to hear them.  (No, there is no way the government is going to go door-to-door and confiscate everyone's guns.  The resistance would be extreme and likely violent.)  Any ideas?  Please be as specific as you can.

S

NOTE:  Interesting fact I just heard on da news (not researched for accuracy):  26% of all guns purchased in the US every year are by the military, and 38% are purchased by federal/state/local law enforcement.  Together, government purchases from one source or another account for 64% of all sales.

And it's only going to get worse....

I've been giving the terrorist attack in California considerable thought, and to me it's becoming more and more clear how things will play out.  (Note....you can redeem this commentary along with $4US at any Starbucks and receive a delicious hot beverage  :)

It's said the US has been spared much of the unrest between Muslims and non-Muslims that they've seen in Europe because, unlike there, we've done a relatively good job of welcoming and assimilating Muslims into our society.  (FYI, 65% of the 2.35 million American Muslims are foreign born.)  They feel they have a vested interest in our country and our economy, and enjoy the same unlimited chance for success that everyone else has.  But I sense that is changing in a big way.

In recent years Muslims seem very proud of the attention they've been getting on the world stage.  In my area (D/FW) for example, our 43 Mosques are very well attended.  I see many more Muslim women wearing head scarves, and even burkas, on the street.  Muslim families are proudly giving their children names that leave no doubt their religion.  They seem to be wearing their religion "loud and proud".

Meanwhile, non-Muslim Americans have been becoming more and more aware of and even resistant to their Muslim neighbors after the rise of international terrorism, which seems to be overwhelmingly orchestrated by radical Islam.  And it's not just confined to places like Lebanon or Palestine or North Africa.  Now it's becoming almost common in the UK and France, Sweden and Denmark and Germany, too, to people who "look like us".  And our politicians have noticed, too, and are milking it for all they can....think Trump, Cruz, and friends.

Now we've had a full-blown radical Islamist attack in OUR country.  We've made the big league.  The suspicion of American Muslims is high, and frankly, it's not without cause.  While only a tiny minority are thought to be true violent jihadists, polls say there are a surprising number of jihadist "sympathizers" and "supporters".  Would they call the FBI and speak up if they knew of an impending terrorist attack, or would they sit back and watch it happen?  And since you can't just look and tell which are which, people seem to be walking wide of ALL Muslims.  (So much for assimilation!)

The natural reaction of Muslims is to "circle the wagons".  It's rapidly becoming an "us vs them" situation, and this is where Islamic radicalizers (if that's a word) will find increasingly receptive converts.  A bad situation is noticeably beginning to accelerate.  Look for more San Bernardino's.

Wanna see a feeding frenzy?  Go to a gun show today.  And they aren't being attended just by Bubbas, either.  There are lots of people there who look JUST like me.  *wink*  The more talk there is of "gun control", the faster guns fly off the shelves.  I can only imagine how many guns are being sold under the radar!  We've come to feel our government has let us down and can no longer protect us, and with every new "incident", that feeling will intensify.

Where/when/how will it "hit the fan"?  Beats me, but don 't be surprised when it does.  Interesting times we live in, for sure.

S

More gun debate

We had a thriving conversation going yesterday on how to stop gun violence in America.  The prevalent opinion was to just pass another law, and good things would soon happen.  I say don't waste your time and energy or get your hopes up that this will have any meaningful affect on gun violence.  So what will?

I remember hearing of a program a few years ago somewhere on the east coast (in Virginia, I believe) that was aimed squarely at this problem.  The police were authorized at the time of a traffic stop, if the driver was a prior felon, to search his/her vehicle to look for firearms they were prohibited to have.  It was wildly successful.  As the weeks and months wore on, lots of bad guys were ACTUALLY SENT BACK TO PRISON and their guns confiscated and destroyed.  Local crime plummeted, and soon other bad guys got the word and disposed of their guns in order to avoid the same fate.

Yea!  Keep up the good work, right?  No.  Word came down that the prison was too full of these returning felons and they couldn't take any more.  It cost a fortune to incarcerate a prisoner, and the taxpayers couldn't afford the bill.  So the program was terminated, and I would imagine things eventually returned to the way they were.  (On a side note, didn't President Obama just order the release of thousands of non-violent inmates from federal prisons?  See the problem?)

For any law to work it must be complied with, either voluntarily or by threat of enforcement.  Most people pay their taxes, and for the few who don't, the Feds will step in and enforce it with threat of jail time if necessary.  The same with gun laws.  Most people buys guns legally, following the law. But for the few who don't....it's apparently more than "a few"....there is really no widespread enforcement.  The bad guys aren't afraid of getting caught, and the profit incentive to sell guns illegally is enormous.

So to those who place their faith in passing new gun laws, this is why I say you're chasing a windmill.  If you want to see a meaningful decrease in gun violence, find those ineligible to own guns yet are in possession, and LOCK THEM UP!  It's gonna be expensive, but it will work.  Then we can have the debate over incarceration vs rehabilitation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don't think many people who are not gun owners fully understand the requirements for purchasing a firearm through a federally licensed firearms dealer (the normal route).  

A one page "Yes" or "No" questionnaire must be filled out, and the dealer then sends the data on to the FBI for validation.  Their National Instant Criminal Background Check System quickly (?) checks the name of the prospective buyer against federal and state criminal records to see if he/she is disqualified from buying a gun.

So what is a disqualifier?  You can not buy a gun if you have been convicted of a felony, or if you have a warrant out for your arrest, or have used drugs within the past year (honors system?), or were ever committed involuntarily to a mental institution or were ruled to be mentally incompetent by a judge, are living in the US illegally, have been convicted of domestic violence or have a domestic-violence-related restraining order against you, have been dishonorably discharged from the military, or have renounced your US citizenship.  Run afoul of any of those, and it's "no gun for you!"

But what if one or more of these disqualifiers applies to you, but you still want a gun?  You can try buying from an individual without a check so long as the seller reasonably believes the buyer is law abiding and will not use the gun in the commission of a crime.  This sounds rather loosie-goosie (Southern term) to me.  

So lets just tighten this up, you might say.   Yes, that's an option, but you'll be working against a very powerful sellers profit motive, and you'll just drive more buyers right into the hands of the scum bags who live and work in the shadows. "Pssst....Hey buddy.  Wanna buy a gun?"  THIS is the secret  back door to gun ownership that we can't seem to get a handle on.

Most of these cash only, no questions asked, firearms are stolen.  Have you ever had one of those door-to-door salesmen try to sell you their new miracle cleaner?  They will want to come into your home and clean your sink or counters or floor to show you how great their stuff is, but in reality what they're doing is discretely looking around your house to see if you have any telltale signs that guns might be present, like hunters trophies on the wall.  Our local police have told me this is an organized crime activity that moves from town to town for several weeks at a time.  If your home looks like a promising target, someone will come back a week or so later and break in and get your guns.

Home burglars today are looking first and foremost for firearms, followed by electronics such as laptops and tablets.  (TV's are out...it's hard to walk out with a 65" flat screen.)  Firearms are easy to carry, bring top dollar on the underground market, and have lots of willing buyers.  Organized crime has long been involved in this illegal gun trade, and just as with their drug trafficking, they are very hard to catch in the act.  

Unless we can somehow get a handle on these back door transactions, we'll continue to experience gun violence.  We already have numerous laws on the books that in theory should shut down this trade, but they obviously haven't worked.  That's why I say to those who want to enact yet more (unenforceable) laws, have at it, but don't kid yourself into thinking they will make any appreciable difference.  I hope I'm wrong, but people who should know (law enforcement) have told me that we'll just be spinning our wheels.

S