ProgressiveProfessor
ProgressiveProfessor's JournalCounsel the teacher and keep an eye out for retaliation
There is no requirement to stay within the school chain, never has been. Here is an unrelated case of why going outside can be a better approach: http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/2013/02/27/california-high-school-principal-orders-student-to-delete-video-of-teacher-stealing/
All public employees should conduct themselves with a view to what is called the Washington Post test (what if this was featured on the front page of the Washington Post). I always tried to.
Actually there are a number of things I think should be tightened
I support all of the President's executive actions, including checks on all transfers, better data collection, and increased enforcement of existing laws (though Biden has disclaimed the latter). I support some things he should have included, like safe storage requirements.
In terms of hardware, I think that handgun magazines should be limited to what fits in the grip. For those rare handgun designs with the magazine elsewhere, the historic magazines (for old designs) and 10 otherwise sound reasonable. I also support mandatory training for owners, mandatory safety training for children and waiting periods with some reservations.
I do not support cosmetic feature bans, bans of semi autos, and the like. I could support future manufacturing bans of magazines larger than those supplied by the manufacturer or generally available in the case of generic magazines. That should take care of the 100 round magazines and other useless bling that gets things spun up.
I do not support the reopening of the roster to allow additional machine guns in private hands. I think suppressors should be handled as they are in Europe...safety equipment.
Many of the pro gun control posts here consist of F-bombs. That is not dialog. Most people are ignoring the stats. The number of mass shooting is dropping. What is not being looked that (though a few here post about it) is the daily numbers, which are not good. The best way forward on this appears to be the President's executive actions.
Its a pretty simple chain...
- Guns are technical
- With technical stuff, details matter
- If you don't understand the details on technical stuff, you are going to screw it up.
Same with computers, airplanes, etc
Most pols are lawyers who don't get technical stuff nor that kind of detail. A group of them once declared Pi=3 to make math easier. It really is hard for the techies to take them seriously.
If people want to discuss practical ways to limit something, they need to understand it. Pointing out that they are wrong on critical details is not NRA talking points, its basic facts and physics. If people claiming to design the solutions or pushing for changes do not understand the those basics, why should they have any credibility, either on DU or in Congress? The level of knowledge needed is fairly low, some basics will do, and its not just terminology.
That is not true...what follows will slow down the illegal weapons traffic in this country
without doing stupid and meaningless things.
Things I support
NICS checks or equivalent on all transactions, even private party transaction, inheritance, and gifts. My approach would be a Federal FOID that you would automatically get at 18yo so they are not a "firearms ownership licenses", a common objection to that approach. The check is then if the FOID is still valid for the sale to proceed. This is easy from the IT perspective. Note the NRA rejects the FOID approach.
Limitation of pistol magazines to what fits inside the grip of the gun. Require that new designs not support magazines that extend beneath the handle (BATF already has authority to force design changes). This is readily demonstrated by the Ruger line of .22LR handguns and the Astra 400/600. Grandfather or buy back at retail price non-conforming magazines. This approach also slows down magazine changes. Note that the NRA has rejected magazine limitations
All firearms must be secured when not in use, being cleaned, transported, etc. While California got stupid on parts of this, its the right thing to do. Some will miss their old time glass front display cases or wall rack, but proper security is a must. Would consider an exemption for non-functional devices. I believe the NRA has fought mandatory safes. It adds costs to gun ownership, but this has to be done.
Mandatory reporting of theft or loss. This is a no brainer. A number of pro gun people say they will report theirs missing to avoid registration etc. That should be felony country.
Enforce the existing Federal laws about false paperwork by purchasers. Bloomie and I even agree on this one
Somethings I have mixed feelings about/no definitive solution
Mandatory owner training. It is not required to exercise any other enumerated right, but I have seen some very scary stuff over the years. Not sure what the standards should be, but I come down on the side of some training being required. The NRA has fought this.
Mandatory safety training for children. Enough for them to overcome their natural curiosity and get an adult should they find an unsecured firearm. While some would find that more offensive than the fundies find sex ed, until things change, its basic safety and needs to be done. Not sure the best way, but it is clearly called for. NRA has not taken a stand on this but does offer such classes. I don't see it as a talking point.
Waiting periods. For someone who already has firearms, not sure what purpose they serve. For first time owners I support them. Overall I think they are a good idea. Not sure what the right time length should be. 1 weeks seems good. There are reports that Lanza tried to buy a rifle but was stopped by the mandated waiting period (if the media reports are to be believed). NRA opposes waiting periods
Better mental health reporting and supervision. Seen a number of posts on that here. Clearly something is called for, but how to do it is not clear. Loughner never should have been allowed to have a gun. Also we cannot and should not demonize the mentally ill and the people who serve them as some have done. The NRA has fought additional reporting of some types of problems yet is trying to blame the "crazies". Go figure
===============================================
That's my current working list. Still thinking about long guns, and have some thoughts, but not enough to post yet. Those will address some of the concerns. Clearly it is not enough based on your prior posts, but its a fair start.
I know of one active zombie now and suspect a few others. Yet another has owned up to it.
They all remain active for now. I intent to do a lengthy meta post about real-soon-now. I had forgotten about glacier bay and will now cite that as an example as well.
What would you have them do, just accept being attacked, terrorized, beaten, and killed?
Handguns are the most effective means of self defense and self defense is a legitimate reason to use deadly force.
I teach firearms mostly to GLBTs and women for that reason. They are often reluctant gun owners but have come to the realization that until things change in the US, they have little choice. The police cannot be there in real time, and are sometimes part of the problem. These are not people in bad neighborhoods participating in questionable activities. Sometimes it follows them home. T*s are being slaughtered in some cities and NOTHING IS BEING DONE. These are not gun nuts. They will probably never by any kind of long gun, AR, AK, or otherwise. They will disarm when the threat passes.
Maybe you can be the one standing over them telling them that it was better they get their brains bashed in or got tortured and shot rather that own an evil pistol. I however, will continue to help them until the threat passes. It seems the progressive thing to do.
The car analogy fails both ways...
The classic refutation is:
What other enumerated constitutional right does one have to
- Demonstrate need
- get mandatory training
- licensing
- periodic re-licensing
- pass a test
- pass a psych evaluation
- pay high taxes on
- pay for insurance on
- canned be banned by the executive branch
to exercise?
Posts on DU have called for all of the above in some measure without any concern for the legality. In all fairness I support mandatory training and other restrictions, but some of the posters are well over the top.
It should also be noted that where cars are effectively required for people to get to work (most of SoCal) the high gas taxes in CA are regressive and have been discussed as such.
As a lawyer you should also understand the historical stand in the EEO community about defacto even if unintended impacts. When the effect of a program falls disproportionately on the poor and minorities, back when we had real EEO in this country, that kind of disparate impact got you sued by the Federal government.
When the government forces the pricing on something artificially so only the well off can afford it, that's classim and often racist in impact. Backdooring gun control through a mandatory insurance program is a false flag and the courts would see through it. Articles like the one cited make that an easy case to prove. The right answer is to take the issue head on, feature by feature. The results would be much less attackable in the courts.
I would point out that this is already that way in Bloomberg territory. Want a handgun and you are well off, no problem, poor and minority, not so much.
My suggestions for some changes to the current gun laws
As someone who was just declared the most evil Gungeoneer, I figured it was time to add my views. This started earlier today when someone demanded that I name one thing that I would change...you can thank WS for it. Its not all inclusive, but its a place to start. Please feel free to point out any NRA talking points.
Things I support
NICS checks or equivalent on all transactions, even private party transaction and gifts. My approach would be a Federal FOID that you would automatically get at 18yo so they are not a "firearms ownership licenses", a common objection to that approach. The check is then if the FOID is still valid for the sale to proceed. This is easy from the IT perspective. Note the NRA rejects the FOID approach.
Limitation of pistol magazines to what fits inside the grip of the gun. Require that new designs not support magazines that extend beneath the handle (BATF already has authority to force design changes). This is readily demonstrated by the Ruger line of .22LR handguns and the Astra 400/600. Grandfather or buy back at retail price non-conforming magazines. This approach also slows down magazine changes. Note that the NRA has rejected magazine limitations
All firearms must be secured when not in use, being cleaned, transported, etc. While California got stupid on parts of this, its the right thing to do. Some will miss their old time glass front display cases or wall rack, but proper security is a must. Would consider an exemption for non-functional devices. I believe the NRA has fought mandatory safes.
Somethings I have mixed feelings about/no definitive solution
Mandatory owner training. It is not required to exercise any other enumerated right, but I have seen some very scary stuff over the years. Not sure what the standards should be, but I come down on the side of some training being required. The NRA has fought this.
Mandatory safety training for children. Enough for them to overcome their natural curiosity and get an adult should they find an unsecured firearm. While some would find that more offensive than the fundies find sex ed, until things change, its basic safety and needs to be done. Not sure the best way, but it is clearly called for. NRA has not taken a stand on this but does offer such classes. I still don't see it as a talking point.
Waiting periods. For someone who already has firearms, not sure what purpose they serve. For first time owners I support them. Overall I think they are a good idea. Not sure what the right time length should be. 1 weeks seems good. There are reports that Lanza tried to buy a rifle but was stopped by the mandated waiting period (if the media reports are to be believed). NRA opposes waiting periods
Better mental health reporting and supervision. Seen a number of posts on that here. Clearly something is called for, but how to do it is not clear. Loughner never should have been allowed to have a gun. The NRA has fought additional reporting of some types of problems.
===============================================
That's my current working list. Still thinking about long guns, and have some thoughts, but not enough to post yet. There are other issues as well but this is what I have worked up so far. Some are clearly more ready than others. Open for comment and discussion.
===============================================
Some background:
My focus is in most of this is protecting the ability of those who need it to have access to effective self defense, and today that means a semi automatic handgun. There was a time I was much more pro gun control, not surprising given my background. What changed my mind was when my late wife was part of the shelter movement after she retired. She started teaching women only classes without any sanction or insurance. It was and remains controversial in the shelter movement. Later I became deeply concerned about GLBTs being bashed and killed. T*s are getting killed in our cities and damn few seem to give a damn, including the police. I have skin in that game. These are not people going into bad areas and doing questionable things, these are just people living their lives under threat. Sometimes it even follows them home. That is why they arm themselves and they will gladly disarm when the threat goes away. That is why I support handguns for self defense. Its not for the rude toters, it is for those facing real threats of violence that the police cannot abate and sometimes do not ever care about. Those who would disarm those under threat need to consider how they would tell someone lying there bleeding and bashed, tortured or shot that somehow that is better than if they had the ability to defend themselves and used it. I for one think it is the liberal and progressive approach to help them, not leave them to the predators, YMMV.
What kind of gun nut are you?
The term gun nut is tossed around here quite loosely. The problem is no one can agree on what the qualifications are and what separates a "good gun owner" from a gun nut. As the recently appointed worst Gungeoneer, this is my take on it. Though it may not be all inclusive, IME, gun owners fall into distinct groups but share some common features.
==============================
Accidental/Casual: Inherited it, used to hunt 20 years ago etc. Firearm is inactive, in a closet somewhere (unsecured) no one knows where the ammo is.
Self Defense Only: Generally a newer owner, most likely a modern semi automatic handgun. One per adult, with the occasionally a .22LR pistol for low cost practice. No long guns. Meticulous about safety and securing weapons. Likely to have a CCW and carry at least part of the time.
Hunter/Outdoorman: Shotgun(s), hunting rifles which may include semi autos depending on the age of the owner. A hand gun or two, mostly older. A .22LR would be expected. Not always secured well. Might have an AR. Maybe a self defense hand gun or shotgun. Unlikely to have a CCW
Shooting Sports: Long guns depend on the sport, shotguns for clays, rifles for other kinds of shooting. An AR format rifle would be expected. Lots of handguns if a competitor there, otherwise 2-3 would be about the norm. .22LR rifles and pistol would also be there. Maybe a historic piece or two. Cowboy shooters also have a different mix, mostly reproductions of antique designs. Tend to be organized and keeps thing secured. May or may not have a CCW
Collector: Lots of weapons, mostly older, depends on the period of interest. Instead of 44Magnum with a laser sight, you might find a Webley or a SA Colt. Like most shooters .22LR and an AR would not be unusual. Tends to have some in display cases vice safes. Unlikely to have a CCW
Survivalist: Heavy focus on military style weapons with multiple copies within a family. Would also have shotguns, long range rifle, and .22LR weapons. Tend to secure things well and often wants to fly under the radar. Many hide it from friends and even family. Will have a CCW if its available and carries.
Gun Nuts: Different from the above since they focus on guns and not other activities. Rarer than some here think in that their lives revolve around guns. A Hunter type might wear camo in the field. These guys wear camo underwear. These types tend to have diverse and growing collections, without a lot of duplicates. Very big into accessorizing in addition to getting lots of firearms. Tends to secure them but also distributes a few for easy reach. Scary to most other gun owners. Will have a CCW if its available and carries.
Thugs/Criminals: Guns are integral to gang life, they are not called gang bangers for nothing. Guns are a statement of who they are but there goal is respect etc. They have modern pistols, mostly of better quality. Occasional semi auto rifles. All weapons possessed illegally and either stolen or straw purchased. Carries without a CCW. Poorly trained. Most dangerous of all groups and responsible for most gun violence in the country.
I am sure there are more groups that I could enumerate, but that is what comes to mind at the moment.
====================
Some thoughts on the above: Current numbers of households with firearms are mostly based on self identification, which is always questionable. I am comfortable with about 40-60% of American households having firearms, somewhere close to half. However the number of ones with active shooters is no more than 30%, quite possibly less. This is as much based on my experience than any scientific polls.
Its clear to me than numbers alone or the possession of one kind of firearm or another is not a primary indicator of gun nuttery or which group a person falls into. Its a fair bet that a trap or skeet shooter has many shotguns, but what else they have is impossible to tell. A collector with every WWI bolt action every made probably has an AR as well. Just about every gun owner has has some kind of .22LR.
One thing is clear, is that outside of the first two groups, anyone who is comfortable with firearms and likes using them is going to have a growing collection over time. Most don't sell anything they own. I fall into that category. I have never sold a weapon once I owned it. Its a hassle and I did not want the responsibility and liability. Easier just to move it to the back of the safe. That is changing for me now.
So in summary, there are many different types of gun owners, and most of them IME are not gun nuts (which clearly do exist). The issue is not number, or kind, but intent and attitude.Those not familiar with the different groups lump them all together. That is dumb, but it is happening with increasing frequency ("all gun owners have blood on their hands"
. It polarizes the debate and ultimately reduces the opportunity for effective dialog and reform.
=============================
I believe that this is topical for this forum since it address the kinds of gun owners there are and their preferences. I will gladly repost in GD is our hosts request it.
The article is flaky, the thrust is correct.
Sugarman, Lizotte and the VPC are scarcely neutral sources.
Who owns what and more importantly what is in active use are clearly unknown. However, IME, gun owners fall into distinct groups but share some common features. I'll take a risk and enumerate what I tend to see:
Accidental/Casual: Inherited it, used to hunt 20 years ago etc. Weapon is inactive, in a closet somewhere (unsecured) no one knows where the ammo is.
Self Defense Only: Generally a newer owner, most likely a modern handgun. One per adult, with the occasionally a .22LR pistol for low cost practice. Meticulous about safety and securing weapons.
Hunter/Outdoor: Shotgun(s), hunting rifles which may include semi autos depending on the age of the owner. A hand gun or two, mostly older. A .22LR would be expected. Not always secured well.
Shooting Sports: Long guns depend on the sport, shotguns for clays, rifles for other kinds of shooting. An AR format rifle would be expected. Lots of handguns if a competitor there, otherwise 2-3 would be about the norm. .22LR rifles and pistol would also be there. Maybe a historic piece or two. Cowboy shooters also have a different mix, but mostly reproductions of older designs. Tend to be organized and keeps thing secured.
Collector: Lots of weapons, mostly older, depends on the period of interest. Instead of 44Magnum with a laser sight, you might find a Webley or a SA Colt. Like most shooters, .22LR and an AR would not be unusual. Tends to have some in display cases vice safes.
Survivalist: Heavy focus on military style weapons with multiple copies within a family. Would also have shotguns, long range rifle, and .22LR weapons. Tend to secure things well and often wants to fly under the radar. Many hide it from friends and even family.
Gun Nuts: Different from the above since they focus on guns and not other activities. Rarer than some here think in that their lives revolve around guns. A Hunter type might wear camo in the field. These guys wear camo underwear. These types tend to have diverse and growing collections, without a lot of duplicates. Very big into accessorizing in addition to getting lots of firearms. Tends to secure them but also distributes a few for easy reach. Scary to most other gun owners.
I am sure there are more groups that I could enumerate, but that is what comes to mind at the moment.
====================
The prevalent numbers seem about right, but they are based on self identification, which is always questionable. I am comfortable with about 40-60% of American households having firearms, but the number of ones with active shooters is no more than a 30%. This is as much based on my experience than any scientific polls.
The real issue is what group are then in and there is simply no way to tell. Its a fair bet that a member of the ATA has several shotguns, but what else they have is impossible to tell. A collector with every WWI bolt action every made probably has an AR as well. Just about every gun owner has has some kind of .22LR.
One thing is clear, is that outside of the first two groups, anyone who is comfortable with firearms and likes them is going to have a growing collection over time, and most don't sell anything they own. I fall into that category. I have never sold a weapon once I owned it...its a hassle and I did not want the responsibility. Easier just to move it to the back of the safe. Sometimes I have joked about how they breed like paperclips in a desk drawer.
So in summary, there are many different types of gun owners, and most of them IME are not gun nuts (which clearly do exist). The issue is not number, or kind, but intent and attitude.Those not familiar with the different groups lump them all together. That is dumb, but it is happening with increasing frequency. It polarizes the debate and ultimately reduces the opportunity for effective reform.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Hawaii
Home country: USA
Current location: Californoa
Member since: Sun Dec 28, 2008, 01:18 AM
Number of posts: 22,144