Give their thoughts and prayers to another school shooting and some feel there is a serious mental health situation happening...however in the last congress when mental health access and support at schools was voted for by the dems 205 gop house members voted no
The Mighty GOP
- Thread starter NYShoreGuy
- Start date
Instead of resorting to your partisan cheap shots, how about taking a moment to acknowledge the incredible bravery of the Nashville police department.
Over 300 children shot in Chicago last year…didn’t see your misplaced outrage there.
Correct police take an oath to protect and serve with no guarantee they get to walk back through their front door when the shift ends. It is heroic and brave. I applaud the lead team that penetrated the school and took out the murdering shooter
How I feel about guns...in usa too many high potency weapons with exaggerated ammunition gets into the hands of wrong people whether criminal element or mental health crisis element.
I am all for handgun and rifle/shotgun use with lawfully obtained licensing and weapon purchasing.
Scotland had a school shooting 26 years ago that government stepped up.
Usa decided it was ok for students to die as long as special interests and nra are taken care of after sandy hook
I am all for handgun and rifle/shotgun use with lawfully obtained licensing and weapon purchasing.
Scotland had a school shooting 26 years ago that government stepped up.
Usa decided it was ok for students to die as long as special interests and nra are taken care of after sandy hook
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022
By the looks of the actual data, the vast majority of mass shootings seem like they are drive by shootings, drug or gang related .
USA also ok with brown and black people killing each other. Let’s start by getting guns out of the hands of criminals. When cartels and gangs have illegal guns and more fire power….start there. Add red flag laws to prevent mentally ill from owning a gun. Get guns away from criminals and crazies and homicides strong precipitously.
Didn't the mighty Dems have all three branches in 2020?
By the looks of the actual data, the vast majority of mass shootings seem like they are drive by shootings, drug or gang related .
USA also ok with brown and black people killing each other. Let’s start by getting guns out of the hands of criminals. When cartels and gangs have illegal guns and more fire power….start there. Add red flag laws to prevent mentally ill from owning a gun. Get guns away from criminals and crazies and homicides strong precipitously.
Didn't the mighty Dems have all three branches in 2020?
Last edited:
Welcome to America. That's the way it's worked on both sides of the aisle for decades. You can pick special interest groups over the people in any topic. Michelle Obama went away from her nutrition plan and changed to let’s move because of special interest groups in the food industry. In essence when it was time to speak up about nutrition and obesity, she was shut up by the food industry and pivoted to exercise. Pharmaceutical companies are raking in money left and right because of their lobbying. Take this pill, try this pill is all we ever do instead of addressing lifestyle habits. Unions keeping children out of school longer than they needed to while some teachers were teaching from vacation resorts. You think keeping kids away from their friends in school was good for mental health? Oil lobbyist control a ton of decisions made in Washington. The list goes on and on and on. Guess what the mighty D's and the mighty R's are on the side of the money more than the people.
Nashville school shooting could have been avoided, Parkland dad says: 'Parents need to wake up'
Andrew Pollack, whose daughter was killed in the 2018 Parkland school shooting, outlined a school safety plan in light of the mass shooting at a private Christian school in Tennessee.
You sure can find a lot of tweets on when the Republicans are at fault. And make no mistake they are. But you clearly can't find anything when the Democrats are at fault and you surely don't seem to have any thoughts of your own on the areas where Democrats have failed for decades.Nashville school shooting could have been avoided, Parkland dad says: 'Parents need to wake up'
Andrew Pollack, whose daughter was killed in the 2018 Parkland school shooting, outlined a school safety plan in light of the mass shooting at a private Christian school in Tennessee.www.foxnews.com
So you're saying that a trans person was mentally ill? Your side doesn't allow that.
We have had this same discussion over the summer about guns and assault weapons. With my suggestions of laws, you will dramatically reduce gun crimes. Ban assault weapons and establishment of national database of all firearms.
Unless you get weapons out of the hands of criminals, you will never get a ban on their sale or agreement of a national database (which I think does make sense). Non-starter. What we need is a comprehensive plan and not a silly monologue of "ban assault weapons".
National Database doesn't make sense? So if a gun is used in the commission of a crime, you can track it to the last registered owner. Criminal penalties attach to anyone who does not notify the database of the sale of a weapon. Banning Assault weapons had a marked decrease in mass shootings during the ban in the 1990's. It is not a silly monologue. The resistance makes no sense how we can save lives, solve crimes with guns all without violating the Second Amendment. You get firearms out of criminals hands by doing this. Using a gun in the commission of a crime would provide great leads to the shooter.
I didn't say a national database doesn't make sense, but if you really want to pass meaningful legislation to reduce homicides, you are not going to get the support you need without everything else. You get weapons out of criminals hands by arresting them and putting them in jail. Without meaningful legislation and enforcement of crime, nothing will happen.
I really don't know what you are saying about this. In NJ we have pretty tough laws with guns. Possession of a handgun is a second degree. If all is perfect with the defendant and having no priors, the best he can do on a plea offer is that he has to spend minimum 1 year in prison. He goes to trial, its 3 years in jail. No parole. Any crime committed with a gun is 5-10 years and you have to spend 85% of that time in jail without parole. Robbery with a gun is 10-20 years in jail with 85% of that time in jail without parole. These are tough laws.
Despite these tough laws, guns flood into this state from the South. Most illegal guns in NJ were purchased in the south and transported here. Second, if you actually had a database, you would have great evidence against a defendant on a crime.
We were talking about comprehensive federal laws not just New Jersey. And I said, I supported a database. What part of that don’t you get?
How does a database capture an illegal gun if that gun is never registered?
Guns are to be registered from when it is manufactured to each owner. The chain will never be broken. Gun owners have a period of time to register their weapons say 2 years. Anyone caught with an unregistered handgun faces mandatory jail time.
Is this 100% foolproof? No. But will it dramatically reduce and make it easier to solve gun crimes? Absolutely. Have you heard of any other better ideas that will actually do something?
Guns don’t come into this country illegally? Are stolen guns typically registered by the criminal that stole them? Once again I’m for registration of guns but that’s not going to happen unless we punish criminals.
The opposite of what Alvin Bragg is doing!
1-Red flag laws - Nashville shooter should never be able to purchase a gun
2-Mandatory material minimum jail time for using a gun in the commission of a crime. No pleas.
3-Anyone with a criminal record caught with a gun…mandatory jail sentence
4-Anyone under the treatment of a physician for mental illness or taking a prescription to treat cannot own a weapon
5-If you have knowledge of a person with a criminal record or mental illness having a gun and don’t report it - can be held accountable.
6-Increased mandatory sentences for gun violence where a child is a victim.
Much of this needs to be done on the federal level or else you will continue to have violence and cities like New York and Chicago without any change. Once again, most gun owners support, registering and background checks, but will only support those changes if laws and enforcement of criminals is addressed as well.
First stolen firearms happen. But not as much as you think. https://www.statista.com/statistics/457713/number-of-stolen-or-lost-firearms-in-the-us/
Second, Many of your suggestions are laws in NJ, except for #5 and #6. Really no need for it because there are huge sentences. Red flag laws help a bit but not much. Family member or friends must speak out or know. Most of the time, this does not happen. There are mandatory Minimums which I have stated above. The No plea idea cannot work. The legal system would collapse. However, the mandatory minimum is 1 year in jail in a plea.
#4 is interesting and unworkable. So, if you have ADHD, can you own a gun? What mental illness triggers this? If you have a mental illness but want a gun, does this not result in people not seeking help in their illness? Due to HIPPA how do you even find out that they are under psychiatric care?
So most of this exists. It doesn't work. We need to do more. And none of this help solve the crimes of a perpetrator of gun violence.
If they are libel for withholding information they will.
There are mandatory Minimums which I have stated above. The No plea idea cannot work. The legal system would collapse.
So add more resources.
However, the mandatory minimum is 1 year in jail in a plea.
I’ll leave the classification of which mental illness needs to be flagged to health care professionals. You want a registry for guns but not mental illness? We have EHR’s…that information largely exists.
So how do you materially reduce the 500 gun homicides each year In Philadelphia? Predominantly hand guns.
#4, in the insurance industry, you sign a release and you are underwritten. Medical information is out there, it’s just restricted. No reason a mental health check couldn’t be done when registering to purchase a gun.
Interesting that u said insurance. In NJ, after July 2023, in order to get a permit to carry, you must have insurance for liability. However, no insurance company has yet set that up.
I think that’s a good idea to have this while even getting a permit to carry but that is an arrow in the quiver in prevention.
If you want to get illegal guns off the streets you have to let cops do their jobs. Every year the search and seizure laws get tougher and tougher.
In the early 1990's the NJ State Police used to average over 10,000 gun seizures a year. Then they were accused of being a racist organization and way to many restrictions were placed upon them. Since then the average has gone down to around 3,000.
In the early 1990's the NJ State Police used to average over 10,000 gun seizures a year. Then they were accused of being a racist organization and way to many restrictions were placed upon them. Since then the average has gone down to around 3,000.
Exactly, which is why I asked cern the question of what he would do to stop the 500 gun homicides each year in Philadelphia and about the same in NYC. Still waiting for that one.
In the early 1990's crime was WAY higher than what it is today. Couldn't it just be that they were confiscating way more back then because there was just a lot more crime back then?
But there are a lot more guns out there today and judging by the criminals and victims of crimes in these cities, it's a major opportunity to increase efforts.
Not the case at all. As soon as the restrictions were placed on the NJ State Police and all police officers in NJ, the rate of guns being seized dropped dramatically. Again, the restrictions to search vehicles becomes stricter year after year giving more power to the criminals.
Funny thing is that the State Police were not accused of planting guns on criminals, only that they were stopping minorities at a higher rate. An independent study reveled that minorities were in fact committing motor vehicle offenses at a higher rate than non-minorities but that did not matter. As long as the court was able to show that minorities were stopped at a higher rate, the State Police had to be racist (even the minority Troopers).
I answered you. A national database that tracks every weapon from manufacturer to every subsequent owner of that weapon. Each gun will have ballistics run and kept in that database. This would be similar to CODIS and DNA. Thus, a gun is used in a crime and gun or bullet recovered, that can be run against the database to find the last registered owner of the weapon. This would be a great way to reduce gun crime and more importantly solve crimes with guns. What if the gun is not recovered or the bullet has been damaged so you cannot run ballistics. Yes, that can all happen. But so many other cases, you will find the perpetrator of the crime.
If you use a gun and are more likely to be found due to the tracking of ballistics, then the criminals would be less likely to use guns. If all guns are registered and tracked, then you take the guns away from criminals. Well, what if a straw person is used to purchase guns for criminals. Then that person will face a heavy criminal sentence. Something like 5 years mandatory in jail.
These are the ways to reduce gun violence without violating the Second Amendment. This along with every other measures would help. All it takes is political will. But there is none of that. As a matter of fact, there is a Federal law against keeping a database for guns? Why??? The NRA is completely against this.
I would be interested in someone from law enforcement to weigh in on how many of these guns used by criminals don't have their serial numbers filed down. How many of these guns were owned legally to begin with? Does a cartel embedded in a city purchase guns from a legal owner in another state? Once again, I am not against a database, but I'm not convinced based on your answer that it will reduce many if any of those 500 homicides.
A drug dealer is going to use a gun to protect himself and his business. He runs the risk of being killed...do you think he's less likely to be a drug dealer if a gun might be tracked?
The NRA represents a small percentage of gun owners and as I said earlier, most owners would support a database, but not before we address criminality.
You talk about the NJSP in the 1990's. I actually watched the trial of 5 NJSP officers who went on trial in New Brunswick. One of the attorneys I worked for at the time was defending one of the officers. I was shocked that 3 were not convicted. That was during a time when it was impossible to convict a cop. Even a guilty cop. But the NJSP was racial profiling people on the NJ Turnpike. T
As far as restriction go? What restrictions are you talking about? The 4th Amendment for automobile searches from the 1990's until the 2000's was essentially the same. You needed PC to search a car with certain exceptions, i.e plain view, search incident to arrest. Certain things changed a little like an officer needed to have articulable suspicion in order to ask the motorist to consent to a search. There was a time when Pena-Flores was law and Police need to get a search warrant to search a car but that got reversed. The latest clarification on the law was done a few weeks ago that in order to search a car, police need to get a search warrant unless the circumstances surrounding theca were unforeseeable and spontaneous. But these are clarifications of the law more than restrictions on police. The latest case I have more of a problem with than the prior clarifications.
However, if you are blaming these clarifications on 4th Amendment restricting police, it is kind of amazing that since the 1990's, violent crime was on the decline. https://www.macrotrends.net/states/new-jersey/crime-rate-statistics. https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/njcrimn.htm
Once a suspect was arrested an officer used to be able to take an inventory of the vehicle's contents to make sure nothing was stolen at the tow yard. That is no longer the case. An officer can search the actor and area within his/her reach as long as the actor is still within reach of the vehicle. Officers used to immediately bring the actor into the police car after searching the actor's person. They could then return to the actor's vehicle and search the area within for contraband. This was safe for the actor and officer. The officers had to adapt to this law and keep the actor at the rear of the vehicle to conduct the search without obtaining a warrant which could take hours. This put the officer and the suspect both at higher risk.
In the early 90's Troopers and then all officers had to document each and every traffic stop. Noting the race, nationality and sex of the driver. One of the worst labels an Officer/Trooper can get is racist. This forced Officers/Troopers to make sure they stopped a bunch of White people for every person of color to avoid being investigated. It also cut car stops by more than 50% in NJ. Perhaps that is part of the reduction of crime. Less car stops = less arrests.
You mentioned things that changed "a little" like needing reasonable articulable suspicion to get a consent search of a vehicle. That is a dramatic change and not "a little" change as you put it. Officer's experience leads them to know or have a 6th sense of when/who to ask for consent to search a vehicle. You may not always be able to articulate it but the gut feeling is just there. The driver can always say No to the consent which was explained to the driver. I'm not sure if it changed but an officer used to be able to order any driver out of the vehicle on a motor vehicle stop. When consent searches went out the window officers adapted to the law. They would then just order the driver out of the vehicle. Once the door was opened, the officer had a better chance of seeing something in plain view. On a busy highway, this puts the officer and suspect at risk.
Now with officers needing to get warrants to search cars even with something in plain view. Do you know how long it takes to get a search warrant? Usually about 6 hours.
The old way: Officer pulls over a car. Establishes probable cause, makes arrest, searches car incidental to arrest, brings suspect to police station, processes the prisoner, places the prisoner in holding cell, does paperwork. This usually took about 2 hours for a routine arrest and only required 2 officers.
New way: Officer pulls over a car. Establishes probable cause, makes arrest. Observes illegal item in plain view, calls for another officer to sit by suspect vehicle while the arresting officer brings suspect to police station, processes the prisoner, Lets the prisoner go free based on the bail reform laws, does paperwork, applies for a search warrant, has the search warrant approved, goes back to the scene, searches the vehicle, does more paperwork based on the search. This process takes approximately 6 hours utilizing at least 4 officers.
Case # 1 - Proper arrest, 2 officers utilized for about 2 hours, suspect still in jail where he can't commit any more crimes.
Case #2 - Proper arrest, minimum of 4 officers utilized for about 6 hours, suspect let go to commit more crimes.
Like I said you call it restrictions, it is clarification of what the 4th Amendment allows. Your first paragraph talks about inventory searches and searches incident to arrest. Inventory searches were just a ruse to search a car that was impounded. No department ever had policies on how to conduct an inventory search. No department routinely did inventory searches on every car. It was when they felt like it. Second a search incident to arrest was allowed only for officer's safety. The officer could search around the defendant in case to check to see if he had a weapon. Once the defendant is handcuffed and in the back of the patrol car, there is nothing inside the car that defendant could grab that would impact officer safety.
And while I understand an officer's feeling or hunch about something, that just doesn't justify searches without warrants under the 4th Amendment. For every hunch that turned up something, how many did not? Police officers did this to themselves. How many times have I seen a police report that officer smells that scent of marijuana in order to justify a search. Hell, one police officer did that when he stopped an assistant prosecutor. And consent searches were not really consent. It went more like cop says you can consent to let me search the car or we can sit here for a few hours while we impound your car and wait to get a search warrant. So what is your choice? That is not really a voluntary consent to search. Cops forced people for their consent.
Btw, an officer does not need a search warrant if he sees something in plain view in a car. That is still good and the officer can seize the contraband. Second, search warrants are done telephonically. I am not sure how easy it is across the State but in Union County there is always an AP and judges on call for this. Within an hour that search warrant is done.
Despite all those restrictions crime and violent crime went down all throughout the 90's and up and until 2020.
And while I don't agree with a lot with bail reform, That person isn't getting out that day, it is the next day. lol
Last edited:
This report has some of the data you're looking for.
2.5% of guns recovered that were used in a crime had their serial number obliterated.
I’m just skeptical that registering guns is going to have a material impact on felonies. Tracing guns used in a crime is going to be laborious, take time and additional resources. Then you have to follow chain of custody, etc. Criminals will find a way to get weapons illegally (smuggling over the border, theft, etc.) to protect their business or turf. Then you have to get through the justice system and prosecution of these cases.
As I said earlier most gun owners support a database but only if you address dealing with the criminal (enforcement and mandatory prison terms).
Your entire response is complete BS.
Paragraph one - Every Police Department that I have ever dealt with had a policy on Inventory Searches. It actually made me laugh when you said NO departments. At first I took that as you are exaggerating your point but then you continued multiple with the NO department.
Paragraph two - The hunches I referred to were about consent searches. You then wanted to insinuate that I was in favor of violating someone's constitutional rights over a hunch. Then typical woke BS as the cops are the bad guys and they did it to themselves. Then there is no way an AP can ever smell like marijuana. I guess no AP's smoke marijuana. Then consent does not mean consent. Even though the law states that a traffic stop can only lawfully last a reasonable amount of time to conduct the stop, you have officers holding people for people for as long as it takes to get a warrant even though probable cause has not been established.
Third paragraph - On paper an officer can get a telephonic search warrant. All Prosecutor's Offices are supposed to have someone on call for it. That works ok M-F, 9-5. Try getting an AP in the middle of the night, on a weekend.
Forth Paragraph - With Bail Reform most arrestees don't even get bail placed on them and are out before the paperwork is even complete by the officers. Those cases where bail is actually placed. They get out the next day.
The only part of your reply that was correct was in plain view. Yes they can retrieve those items and those items only. I should have been more clear. A warrant would be needed for the rest of the car.
