+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: General Social Media & Marketing Forums (/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: General Social Media questions (/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Gun debate following Sandy Hook Tragedy? (/thread-63870.html)
Gun debate following Sandy Hook Tragedy? - Jim S - 02-28-2013 01:42 AM
We all know that there will be a big push soon to create new legislation following this horrific event. We also all know that this issue is extremely complex and beliefs are held very close every ones heart on both side of this debate. I propose a line down the middle that will have interest in both sides that can be imposed quickly and have immediate yielding effects to crimes of this nature.
Its called the Sandy Hook Act
1) Every ones Interest - All mass murder incidents that fall under this act shall restrict social media reporting to only the facts surrounding the victims and legal efforts as it applies to immediate continued danger to the public. The perpetrator/s shall remain nameless and no reporting shall be focused on the life, background or family of said perpetrator/s. Person/s convicted under this act shall remain in the legal system with access to only legal representation, medical, psychological professionals, and immediate family members. There will be no media access, memoirs, or artifacts from the prisoner made known, or for sell. The perpetrator/s information shall be sealed for the sole use of law enforcement.
2) Conservative Interest - School educators and transportation operators for children shall be offered a full federal firearm training class and permitted to carry concealed fire arms for the entire duration of their supervised obligation for the children directly under their care. No restrictions shall apply to locations of this permit to include all classes, field trips, transportation, and after school care.
3) Liberal interest - A full certified back ground check should be obtained by a federally licensed establishment at the gun owner’s expense. This certification will expire at a reasonable time frame for renewal. The background should be similar, if not the same as federal high security clearance status. This certification will need to be presented before any purchase of a fire arm, to include gun shows and unlicensed dealers.
- The Virginian - 02-28-2013 01:45 AM
Arming civilians does little to stop mass shooters, and even cops can't stop every shooting. Columbine High School had an armed security officer on campus at the time of the 1999 shooting that killed 13 people. He even exchanged gunfire with one of the killers. Neither one of them was hit.
- I know you - 02-28-2013 01:51 AM
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/columbine.cd/Pages/DEPUTIES_TEXT.htm
- Chip - 02-28-2013 01:59 AM
trying to put specifics to a general event doesnt work, there are to many facts about this event in particular that the public doesnt know which makes your proposal incorrect,
- pretender59321 - 02-28-2013 02:02 AM
2) Places designated as a "Gun Free" zone by businesses or Governments shall provide at the designators expense a minimum 8 member swat team to protect those who have been made defenseless by the designator.
3) the expense of a back ground check is already included in the price of a gun. The back ground check should be nothing more than a criminal record check.
"The background should be similar, if not the same as federal high security clearance status." This means that anyone who has ever smoked marijuana is prohibited from purchasing a firearm."
Number 1) I am in total agreement on except that the perpetrator gives up his right to surrender with the first shot and police are required to end his life at the scene of the crime, saving the public the expense of appeals, trial etc.
- Miley 4 President - 02-28-2013 02:05 AM
1) sounds like an okay idea but a big 1st amendment violation.
2) who will pay for this when we have this fiscal cliff problem and a bad economy?
3) sounds similar to what you have to do to obtain a fully automatic machine gun (which is virtually impossible) and is almost the same as an all out ban.
But nonpartisan ideas and respecting both sides is a good start rather than people just yelling and being dramatic.
Why doesn't anyone seem to care about all the people who keep abducting, raping, and killing children. It's not just the cute photogenic kids you occasionally see on the news. It's A LOT of children and it is happening all the time. When the media turns something into a circus it doesn't mean it's more important than the ugly problems that people don't want to think about.
- chris a - 02-28-2013 02:08 AM
"The background should be similar, if not the same as federal high security clearance status."
Okay then, describe the investigation for a "federal high security clearance status" and how each element of investigation and adjudication applies to potential gun ownership, and how it ensures the government's interest in safety is attained with the minimum impact on the subject's rights.
- The Wolf - 02-28-2013 02:09 AM
Here is the answer to stopping shootings like the Sandy Hook shooting.