Assault Weapons Ban Before U.S. Supreme Court

[Berkut]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

[Admiral Yi]

The only serious solution I can see is to require people who want to have access to firearms to undergo a mental health screening.  Even then there would be a massive problem with false positives and false negatives.

People who did pass and bought a firearm would be criminally liable for not securing their weapon from people who didn't pass.

I imagine what we'll see instead is some cosmetic limitations on magazines and/or assault rifles along with steadily increasing militarization of school security.  No idea what theater owners will do.  Maybe the whole industry will just die.

[DGuller]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

[The Brain]

There are 300 million guns in the country, but the vast majority of them are only owned by a small percentage.

Fucking 1%.

[DGuller]

The only serious solution I can see is to require people who want to have access to firearms to undergo a mental health screening. 

I don't think that's all that serious of a solution in terms of results, unless your real goal is to make purchasing firearms a pain in the ass.  Or if you're screening not just for mental illnesses, but also dangerous personality types.

[The Brain]

raciss

[The Minsky Moment]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

Plus a basic licensing scheme (a la drivers license) - raises same issue as 2.

[The Brain]

How much can you tax guns before it gets unconstitutional?

[The Minsky Moment]

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

There are hundreds of mass shooting events annually.  It isn't insignificant.

[Berkut]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

I don't disagree, but they do have a social impact well out of proportion to their actual contribution to gun violence. It may not be entirely rational, but that doesn't mean that it is rational to ignore it.

[DGuller]

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

There are hundreds of mass shooting events annually.  It isn't insignificant.

Still a tiny percentage of preventable gun deaths.

[jimmy olsen]

Gun store found liable for selling a straw purchase when they should have known better.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/badger-guns-found-liable-negligence-milwaukee-police-shooting-n443951

[garbon]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

I don't disagree, but they do have a social impact well out of proportion to their actual contribution to gun violence. It may not be entirely rational, but that doesn't mean that it is rational to ignore it.

What social impact exactly?

[Berkut]

I think if we presume some political will to actually do something, there are a few ideas that are perfectly reasonable and doable given politicians willing to buck the NRA a bit.

1. Magazine capacity restrictions. Limit all magazine capacities to some nominal number of rounds, like 8 or so. This could help make mass shooting less lethal, while clearly not being a restriction on the basic ability of responsible gun owners from providing for their own self defense.

2. Immediately end the selling of firearms except through registered dealers and all transactions must be tracked. This would obviously be a very difficult sell, but I cannot possibly see how anyone can argue that, for example, there is a mental health issue if there is not some means to deny the mentally unhealthy the ability to purchase a weapon, absent some ability to actually track how guns are sold.

In my opinion, 1 is not worth the cost in political capital.  Mass shootings to gun violence are what plane crashes are to transportation safety:  public and terrorizing, but ultimately an insignificant killer.

I don't disagree, but they do have a social impact well out of proportion to their actual contribution to gun violence. It may not be entirely rational, but that doesn't mean that it is rational to ignore it.

What social impact exactly?

Outrage, fear, over-reaction, political fallout, etc.