A Serious Question -not sure where we go

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • wildcatfan.62

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Jan 9, 2011
    273
    43
    South Bend
    I'm really asking a serious question about where do we go from here? With the two mass shootings, at least 5 killed and 42 wounded in Chicago this weekend, and the fact that a kid my son played basketball with at Notre Dame last weekend was shot and killed last week -I'm for the first time really questioning what the do we do? Does anyone have a real answer as to how to address the gun violence?

    I've been a gun owner, hunter, sport pistol shooter in various forms for more than 40 years so I'm firmly on the 2nd amendment side. I've taught my two sons gun safety and they both have completed at least hunter safety. They've each shot at least one IDPA match. I write that to let you know I'm 100% pro-gun ownership and feel that teaching safety is key. My sons and I know we own whatever is sent downrange.

    My son (aged 19) and I shot sporting clays on Saturday early afternoon at Deer Creek in Three Oaks Michigan. There was an event going on so there say 50-60 people all armed at least with shotguns (some of us more than that I'm sure) and no one got hurt or shot. So there can be sensible gun ownership and use. Then we heard about the El Paso shooting. Then Sunday I get up to make coffee before church and get hit with the Dayton shooting. At this point I'm at a loss.

    I asked my 19 YO what he'd do. He's becoming a backer of no AR/AK's or anything like them. We went thru a list of issues from how would you confiscate, the slippery slope it starts, how do you get them all, how do you make sure the 'bad guys' give them up. etc. etc. It was a great conversation but no answer. Only more questions.

    I've almost resigned myself the new normal, while looking for an answer I can support. I do think constantly about my two sons at school, my wife at work and I try to stay vigilant while carrying. I've decided I'm not going to give into any fear. While I hope that it never happens I hope that I'd not go down without a fight if the worst happened.

    This forum has been a great place to share and learn over the years. So I'm asking serious question. How do we address these mass incidents without giving up all our freedoms? I don't want to allow the anti's to own this issue, and I think we as gun owners need to be vocal in an answer.

    Thanks for letting me vent.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Having kids of the same age, with some personal connections to both incidents over the weekend, I hear what you're saying, loud and clear.

    For one thing, timing is important. A variation of 'pick the battlefield.' In the immediate aftermath of incidents like this, we should genuinely and authentically support those affected and have thick skin about the emotional response against something we believe in.

    The right forum for polite, reasoned discussion is in the halls of legislatures around the country. Interpersonal responses should also be given time to process. Let the information come out so we don't meet empathetic impassioned responses to tragedy with callously emotional responses in defense.

    I'm a process guy, so I'm all about trying to learn from successes and failures. Always try to do better. I absolutely agree with those who say mental health, and even social issues, are the biggest weaknesses in our system. But, that presents tricky cases in terms of whether a single counseling session for depression would trigger a red-flag seizure of firearms forever, or other extreme examples. We also need to carefully guard everyone's private medical information from government intervention, along with 2A freedoms.

    I don't have many responses for this, either. Not right now at least.

    For as much as I also prefer to be proactive, I think it is necessary to wait for whatever is proposed and invite the discussion of that. Let's not be afraid of reasoned discussion. Generally, I think "our" side fares well with that.

    What is to be done? Let's talk about it and see what we agree about.
     

    eldirector

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 29, 2009
    14,677
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    - address mental health in the US. Back in the 80's and 90's we closed most of our "institutions" and pushed folks back out into the world. Either with their families, who are ill-equipped to deal with the issues, or into the homeless and/or working poor population. The services available to those in need are poor at best, expensive, and exceptionally difficult to navigate. I am not sure how to "fix" this, but I see mental healthcare as a root issue.
    - Stop with the divisiveness. This is mostly on our so-called "leaders". All the race baiting, us vs. them attitudes. We need to force these folks OUT of power. Be active in your local primaries. Politely, but firmly, call out bull**** when you see it. Let's find some leadership that actually gives a **** about their JOB, and not about the POLITICS. Don't feed the machine.
    - I am normally anti-government involvement in social issues, but today the .gov is very, very involved, and seem to ENCOURAGE bad behavior. At the least, reign this in. Possibly find incentives to encourage strong nuclear families that live within their means. I am kinda of a "tough love" person. Making bad choices should be painful. Hunger is a great motivator. Promote opportunities, not handouts.
    - Be active, super active, in your child's life. Show them the RIGHT WAY.
    - Be active in your child's school. Don't let them get away with anything. Example: even our local public school has a bullying problem. They brush it all under a rug, rather than deal with it. Throw it right back on the "victim". And this is a so-called A+, 4-star school. A bunch of parents butted heads with the school admin, and ended up pulling their kids out. MORE parents need to do the same. Either force a change, or be the change. DO NOT ACCEPT bull****.
    - I know "if you see something, say something" sounds all big-brother and nosy, but seriously. There are often warning signs. PAY ATTENTION to the people around you.

    - Carry. Every day, every where.
    - Get some training. Self defense, first aid, etc...
    - Encourage others to do the same. Take them to the range. Buddy up for some training.

    - Be smart. Avoid crowds. Avoid sketchy areas of town. Don't associate with sketchy folks. Nothing good happens after midnight. Don't do drugs. Don't drink to excess. Don't act a fool. Have some self respect. Take pride in your work. Take time for your friends and family. Be involved in your community. Volunteer a little. Donate to a charity. Participate in your local government. Write your congressman and state rep. Be polite, but be vocal. Limit social media. Limit national "news". Limit TV in general.

    - Don't be afraid. Statistically, we are safer today then any time in history. Don't get caught up in the fear-mongering and hype.

    - No matter what government programs we have, what laws are passed, how compassionate we are, and how well we raise our kids... there will always be evil in this world. You do not get to choose when Evil visits, but you CAN choose your response. Be Prepared to take action.
     

    Hop

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jan 21, 2008
    5,084
    83
    Indy
    Look at other countries around the globe and you will see that the rifle is the weapon that keeps people free from .gov oppression. It's not handguns nor shotguns.

    A .gov that can become tyrannical should NEVER be allowed to remove arms that prevent a free people from fighting back that same tyranny. That's the true meaning of the 2A. Not the sporting clays, not the hunting.

    Governments have a long and unwavering history of killing people that can't fight back.

    If a mall or large crowded event doesn't want armed people in attendance then it needs to provide ARMED active security & be responsible civilly for any injuries to legal law abiding citizenry. Let people defend themselves or you better make damn sure nothing happens on your watch.

    I'm 100% for getting rid of any barriers to CCW (or open carry) at any facility that accepts any form of public $.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,914
    113
    Avon
    Does anyone have a real answer as to how to address the gun violence?

    The first step is to recognize that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever unique about violence perpetrated with guns, much less, violence perpetrated with some arbitrary subset of guns.

    My son (aged 19) and I shot sporting clays on Saturday early afternoon at Deer Creek in Three Oaks Michigan. There was an event going on so there say 50-60 people all armed at least with shotguns (some of us more than that I'm sure) and no one got hurt or shot. So there can be sensible gun ownership and use.

    Right. You are describing the difference between the estimated 100 million, law-abiding gun owners, and deranged, evil, madmen (and other violent criminals). Given that homicides are committed by the latter, and not by the former, why would it ever be reasonable even to suggest that the former have somehow contributed to the latter, or that putting more restrictions on the former would somehow affect the latter?

    I asked my 19 YO what he'd do. He's becoming a backer of no AR/AK's or anything like them.

    Did you ask your 19 y/o if he is also in favor of no blunt instruments, given that they are used in more homicides each year than rifles of all types (including but not limited to scary black rifles)?

    Did you ask your son, if he is so worried about homicides committed using scary black rifles, why he doesn't express far greater concern for homicides committed using handguns, given that they are used to commit more homicide by an order of magnitude?

    This forum has been a great place to share and learn over the years. So I'm asking serious question. How do we address these mass incidents without giving up all our freedoms? I don't want to allow the anti's to own this issue, and I think we as gun owners need to be vocal in an answer.

    The answer has absolutely nothing to do with firearms, regardless of type, because firearms aren't the problem. We have a societal problem with unstable people loose among innocent society, because it is no longer socially acceptable to institutionalize people who show signs of acting out exactly as we see these mass shooters act. We have a societal problem with an endemic, fundamental loss of respect for the basic value and sanctity of human life. We have a societal problem of erosion of respect for and decency toward our fellow human beings, exacerbated by loss of personal interaction, in large part driven by social media and other internet outlets that have replaced real-life interaction. I could go on.

    Those are issues that I can't solve alone. Those are issues over which I have next to no influence to solve in general. All I can do is to solve them for me and my family, encourage others to do the same, and pray for the Second Coming to take place soon, because I don't believe that we as a society will ever solve these problems - much less as we continue to turn our backs on God.
     

    4651feeder

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Oct 21, 2016
    1,186
    63
    East of NWI
    The answer never has been rooted in strengthening firearm regulation thru additional "Supposed" common sense gun laws, the problem is proponents of that concept have been allowed to make it the mainstream suggested solution; while other avenues of reducing violence in our Country have taken a back seat to it.

    In spite of million of "nefarious looking" firearm never becoming a tool to crime, a portion of our populace has subscribed to the concept these "weapons of war' must never be allowed into the hand of someone intend upon what was witnessed this weekend. Regardless of their desire to regulate private firearm ownership to extinction; evil acts will still exist and means will be found to carry those acts out.

    I'd like to say greater emphasis by government should be placed on Mental Health treatment, yet at the same time fear politics will play no less a roll than everything else they touch and become halfazzed at best.
     

    VUPDblue

    Silencers Have NEVER Been Illegal !
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   1
    Mar 20, 2008
    12,885
    83
    Franklin Township
    It is interesting to me that the uneducated out there will be vehemently against a certain type of firearm based only on its looks. It may look evil, to them, so therefore it HAS to go.

    However....

    These same folks are also vehemently against investigating PEOPLE based on looks alone because that’s not fair. Me stopping some sketchy looking dude who, through my training and experience, appears to be up to no good is a no-go.
     

    DCR

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 6, 2009
    691
    63
    I read a letter to the editor of the WSJ a few years back right after one of these incidents. I believe the writer was a psychiatrist. In one sentence I believe he put his finger on it. To paraphrase -- We are not being taught to self-soothe.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    93   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,170
    113
    Btown Rural
    Just heard this on the news. I don't know this gent, but he's catching hell on twitter for his tweet...


    [FONT=&amp]
    [/FONT]
    [FONT=&amp]


    Neil deGrasse Tyson

    @neiltyson

    [/FONT]In the past 48hrs, the USA horrifically lost 34 people to mass shootings. On average, across any 48hrs, we also lose…

    500 to Medical errors

    300 to the Flu

    250 to Suicide

    200 to Car Accidents

    40 to Homicide via Handgun

    Often our emotions respond more to spectacle than to data.


    [FONT=&amp]
    [/FONT]
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    He's actually caught some hell here on INGO in the past, too.

    At this point, I think he's just happy when people spell his peculiarly long name correctly.
     

    Usmccookie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 28, 2017
    5,838
    113
    nwi
    Look at other countries around the globe and you will see that the rifle is the weapon that keeps people free from .gov oppression. It's not handguns nor shotguns.

    A .gov that can become tyrannical should NEVER be allowed to remove arms that prevent a free people from fighting back that same tyranny. That's the true meaning of the 2A. Not the sporting clays, not the hunting.

    Governments have a long and unwavering history of killing people that can't fight back.

    If a mall or large crowded event doesn't want armed people in attendance then it needs to provide ARMED active security & be responsible civilly for any injuries to legal law abiding citizenry. Let people defend themselves or you better make damn sure nothing happens on your watch.

    I'm 100% for getting rid of any barriers to CCW (or open carry) at any facility that accepts any form of public $.

    This^^^ with a slight variation. If a place wont allow you to protect yourself, why are you there? Is it necessary to visit this place. And if so, is it worth the risk to carry, regardless of the consequences?
    For my, I tend to be unarmed, a lot! I work in ch***go. I feel like a naked, insecure piece of meet in the city. When I am home. I am reminded of the security I have in being free enough to own and carry what I want. No one else should be responsible for your safety. That's how the fight against an overreaching Gov started. Idk, i feel myself starting to rant and ramble...
     

    rob63

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    20   0   0
    May 9, 2013
    4,282
    77
    This is an interesting article from the LA Times, of all places. Yes, it has some gun-control proposals in it and I'm not saying I agree with those, but at least it shares information about the perpetrators and what motivates them.

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/sto...6mRUvY1JDre44blev48F7moA19UTkoC8mhxHdOBojbFfc

    Here are the main data points from their study:

    First, the vast majority of mass shooters in our study experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.

    Second, practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. They often had become angry and despondent because of a specific grievance. For workplace shooters, a change in job status was frequently the trigger. For shooters in other contexts, relationship rejection or loss often played a role. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

    Third, most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives. People in crisis have always existed. But in the age of 24-hour rolling news and social media, there are scripts to follow that promise notoriety in death. Societal fear and fascination with mass shootings partly drives the motivation to commit them. Hence, as we have seen in the last week, mass shootings tend to come in clusters. They are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and model their acts after previous shootings. Many are radicalized online in their search for validation from others that their will to murder is justified.


    Fourth, the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans. Once someone decides life is no longer worth living and that murdering others would be a proper revenge, only means and opportunity stand in the way of another mass shooting. Is an appropriate shooting site accessible? Can the would-be shooter obtain firearms? In 80% of school shootings, perpetrators got their weapons from family members, according to our data. Workplace shooters tended to use handguns they legally owned. Other public shooters were more likely to acquire them illegally.
     
    Last edited:

    fullmetaljesus

    Probably smoking a cigar.
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    5,849
    149
    Indy
    The first step is to recognize that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever unique about violence perpetrated with guns, much less, violence perpetrated with some arbitrary subset of guns.



    Right. You are describing the difference between the estimated 100 million, law-abiding gun owners, and deranged, evil, madmen (and other violent criminals). Given that homicides are committed by the latter, and not by the former, why would it ever be reasonable even to suggest that the former have somehow contributed to the latter, or that putting more restrictions on the former would somehow affect the latter?



    Did you ask your 19 y/o if he is also in favor of no blunt instruments, given that they are used in more homicides each year than rifles of all types (including but not limited to scary black rifles)?

    Did you ask your son, if he is so worried about homicides committed using scary black rifles, why he doesn't express far greater concern for homicides committed using handguns, given that they are used to commit more homicide by an order of magnitude?



    The answer has absolutely nothing to do with firearms, regardless of type, because firearms aren't the problem. We have a societal problem with unstable people loose among innocent society, because it is no longer socially acceptable to institutionalize people who show signs of acting out exactly as we see these mass shooters act. We have a societal problem with an endemic, fundamental loss of respect for the basic value and sanctity of human life. We have a societal problem of erosion of respect for and decency toward our fellow human beings, exacerbated by loss of personal interaction, in large part driven by social media and other internet outlets that have replaced real-life interaction. I could go on.

    Those are issues that I can't solve alone. Those are issues over which I have next to no influence to solve in general. All I can do is to solve them for me and my family, encourage others to do the same, and pray for the Second Coming to take place soon, because I don't believe that we as a society will ever solve these problems - much less as we continue to turn our backs on God.

    I'm with you 99%, the 1% difference isn't worth discussing.

    I'd also like to share this. I feel it's important and often over looked.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LGHtc_D328
     

    Thor

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jan 18, 2014
    10,704
    113
    Could be anywhere
    A lot of long posts on here...I say just go back to the 2nd A intent, self defense is a human right. If anything become like Switzerland, require all adults to learn to shoot and show up for training once a year. Turning the whole country into a government mandated psycho free fire zone will only make things worse.

    If weakness was an adequate defense police would be carrying .22 cal single shot pistols to dispatch the odd rabid dog.

    The 4th of July is celebrated with fireworks to rekindle the memories of civilians with military grade weapons fighting for their freedoms against a repressive government. Go back to the 2A and get rid of restrictive gun laws that keep law abiding citizens from mounting a proper defense.
     

    EvilElmo

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Feb 11, 2009
    1,235
    48
    Dearborn Co.
    Buckeye Firearms Association had what I thought was a good writeup today about how existing Ohio laws are actually better for dealing with this kind of situation than the various "red flag" proposals I've seen, and I'd bet it's better than what we have here in Indiana. From the relatively brief article it still strikes me as something that could be abused but at least there are some basic protections afforded to the accused and due process is respected.

    https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/current-law-better-any-red-flag-law-when-utilized-properly-0
     

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    101,989
    77
    Southside Indy
    Buckeye Firearms Association had what I thought was a good writeup today about how existing Ohio laws are actually better for dealing with this kind of situation than the various "red flag" proposals I've seen, and I'd bet it's better than what we have here in Indiana. From the relatively brief article it still strikes me as something that could be abused but at least there are some basic protections afforded to the accused and due process is respected.

    https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/current-law-better-any-red-flag-law-when-utilized-properly-0

    It does sound better than typical red flag law proposals, however I wonder about this:

    "Under ORC 2923.13, adjudication as a mentally ill person subject to court order disqualifies the person from firearms ownership and firearms can be confiscated. The person is also prohibited from further firearms purchases."

    Since the question is asked on the 4473 already (Have you been adjudicated as mentally ill?), what is to stop a person from simply checking the "No" box? The only way to enforce it would be to include that medical/psychiatric information in the NICS database. I'm thinking that might run afoul of HIPAA regulation, unless an exception is written into the current HIPAA law. IANAL though.
     

    Charles H

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 3, 2014
    10
    3
    Clark County
    Great thread! Very well said. I read this to my 28 year old son and my 29 year old who carries everyday. Hope they get out of it what I did as I agree with it wholeheartedly.
     

    EvilElmo

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Feb 11, 2009
    1,235
    48
    Dearborn Co.
    It does sound better than typical red flag law proposals, however I wonder about this:

    "Under ORC 2923.13, adjudication as a mentally ill person subject to court order disqualifies the person from firearms ownership and firearms can be confiscated. The person is also prohibited from further firearms purchases."

    Since the question is asked on the 4473 already (Have you been adjudicated as mentally ill?), what is to stop a person from simply checking the "No" box? The only way to enforce it would be to include that medical/psychiatric information in the NICS database. I'm thinking that might run afoul of HIPAA regulation, unless an exception is written into the current HIPAA law. IANAL though.

    I would hope that those adjudicated mentally ill would be added to the NICS list of prohibited persons or it isn't going to accomplish anything. Unfortunately there are numerous examples of gov not using the laws/tools that are already in place. Having said all that I have no idea is Ohio actually does it.
     

    Tanfodude

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 25, 2012
    3,886
    83
    4 Seasons
    This is an interesting article from the LA Times, of all places. Yes, it has some gun-control proposals in it and I'm not saying I agree with those, but at least it shares information about the perpetrators and what motivates them.

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/sto...6mRUvY1JDre44blev48F7moA19UTkoC8mhxHdOBojbFfc

    Here are the main data points from their study:

    First, the vast majority of mass shooters in our study experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.

    Second, practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. They often had become angry and despondent because of a specific grievance. For workplace shooters, a change in job status was frequently the trigger. For shooters in other contexts, relationship rejection or loss often played a role. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

    Third, most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives. People in crisis have always existed. But in the age of 24-hour rolling news and social media, there are scripts to follow that promise notoriety in death. Societal fear and fascination with mass shootings partly drives the motivation to commit them. Hence, as we have seen in the last week, mass shootings tend to come in clusters. They are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and model their acts after previous shootings. Many are radicalized online in their search for validation from others that their will to murder is justified.


    Fourth, the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans. Once someone decides life is no longer worth living and that murdering others would be a proper revenge, only means and opportunity stand in the way of another mass shooting. Is an appropriate shooting site accessible? Can the would-be shooter obtain firearms? In 80% of school shootings, perpetrators got their weapons from family members, according to our data. Workplace shooters tended to use handguns they legally owned. Other public shooters were more likely to acquire them illegally.

    That's actually a well written article, surprisingly it comes from CAtimes.
     
    Top Bottom