A "pragmatic" approach to gun violence?

ScienceChic wrote: Anyone's self-proclaimed "gun expert" status isn't the issue here, as we're all allowed to discuss a topic regardless of first-hand experience or proving ourselves, or proving the credentials of someone else whose article we share (otherwise all you anti-vaxxers would be up s*** creek without a paddle still relying on Jenny McCarthy. LOL). The topic is a pragmatic approach to gun violence.

ZHawke wrote: Sharing three links in one post here. The first is to an essay written by Jim Wright. Retired Navy vet, gun owner, gun instructor. Mr. Wright has written extensively about the issue of gun violence in his "Bang, Bang, Crazy" series. This essay is a continuation of that series:

www.stonekettle.com/2015/06/bang-bang-sanity.html

When I read his essay, it prompted me to do a little research on organizations, most of which are pro-gun advocates, who also promote gun safety rules. A simple Google search of "Gun safety rules" yielded over 26 million results:

www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-ins...8#q=gun+safety+rules

The first page of this search has links to multiple more famous organizations like the NRA, the NSSF, and others. All of them tout a list of gun safety rules everyone who chooses to own or handle guns should follow. One even went so far as to label theirs the "10 Commandments of Firearm Safety" ( www.remington.com/10commandments ).

My question, and the basis for this OP, is along the lines of whether Mr. Wright might be onto something in his essay. After all, most, if not all, pro-gun advocacy organizations promote gun safety. Why not codify those rules of gun safety into law as Mr. Wright suggests with differing penalties and consequences for different violations of said laws?

A pragmatic approach that doesn't infringe on anyone's right to "keep and bear arms", but also recognizes that with that right also comes responsibilities?

As an aside, Mr. Wright also addresses the issue of laws and what they can and cannot do - something I've tried to explain in threads past, but he does it so much better than I ever could.

Only one person has expressed being a "gun expert" and it was Jim Wright. Then one poster expressed the following, "a simple Google search...", yet when I did just that, everything I post comes into question. Hypocrite much?
When the Left (yeah, there it is again) acknowledges that "gun owners" have families and loved ones that they care about too, and honestly seek answers to the violence in this nation, then and only then can any solution be reached.
Regarding safe gun handling, storage and responsible shooting, yes they are "all" already addressed by the laws and gun rights organizations.

This is Jim Wright:
1. He stands to gain financially if his proposal of making gun safety is made into federal law.
2. He makes an unconnected leap from speaking about gun violence to gun safety. This is so disconnected that only a liberal could make this leap!!!!
3. He immediately calls his opposition names (nuts and disaffected and the simple-minded haters).
4. He inaccurately defines the use of "laws". Says laws don't "prevent". (Then, what are seatbelt laws supposed to do? Laws concerning vehicle emissions? There are a whole host of laws that prevent.) He is wrong. Sure, there are "shall not" laws, but there are also "shall" laws.
5. He suggests that we prosecute the mass murderers for: carrying a loaded gun; pointing a gun at something that he does not intend to shoot; putting his finger on the trigger. This is laughable.

His whole article is tortured thinking. 'nuff said!

HEARTLESS wrote: I too was willing to let your ignorant post go, but you won't let it die.
Using whatever search engine you choose, search "Jim Wright gun expert." Note that the only references are his own words from his blog, so no one else considers him a gun expert.
Example: I'm Batman, no wait I'm Superman. There it is in print, so it must be true.
Next search "Jim Wright gunsmith" and note the only references are his blog again. An actual gunsmith is a highly trained individual that was either educated at The Colorado School of Trades or similar, or trained under the oversight of a known gunsmith that would be a member of the guild or such.
So now we have two areas with no results that should be easily proven.
The primary two references for "Jim Wright gun anything" are the Daily KOS and Forward Progressives, both far Left leaning publications, so it is also political which you said it isn't.
Now if you want to present Jim Wright as the "DOD double super secret squirrel, go for it. But since I knew people that did weapons testing for the DOD, I'm not putting much on that either.
Now a final opportunity for you ZHawke, time to either put up, or shut up. I will provide proof of far more than what I posted here for my qualifications in public, but you need to not post for a year when I prove these things, or I will do the same if I can't. DEAL?

I won't let it die? Really?

I'm not asking you to "prove" anything, HEARTLESS, not because you do or do not have them, but, rather, because they aren't relevant to this discussion. Your single minded focus on anyone's qualifications isn't what the thread is about. Go ahead, though, and post your qualifications if it makes you feel better. And, take up that very same issue with Mr. Wright while you're at it. See what he has to say.

HEARTLESS wrote: Only one person has expressed being a "gun expert" and it was Jim Wright. Then one poster expressed the following, "a simple Google search...", yet when I did just that, everything I post comes into question. Hypocrite much?
When the Left (yeah, there it is again) acknowledges that "gun owners" have families and loved ones that they care about too, and honestly seek answers to the violence in this nation, then and only then can any solution be reached.
Regarding safe gun handling, storage and responsible shooting, yes they are "all" already addressed by the laws and gun rights organizations.

If you were to look back at exactly what I referenced when I indicated a "simple Google search", you'd see that it had nothing whatsoever to do with trying to prove anyone's qualifications as a gun safety expert. The reason everything you post comes into question is because virtually everything you post is off topic from the original post. Your posts focus on the supposed qualifications of Mr. Wright and yourself, not on the organizations who talk gun safety. That's what I was trying to point out when I provided the link that I did.

An editorial from a newspaper in South Carolina on the issue of a three day waiting period to complete a background check:

Let FBI finish checks before gun purchases

Makes sense to me.