Monday, December 17, 2012

GUN CONTROL HAS TO BE COMPREHENSIVE

OVERVIEW OF THE BLOG BELOW:

The reason guns are banned in schools, hospitals, banks etc is because of the fact that gun owners do not have the same training that cops go through and I am sure the NRA will welcome gun owners being trained to the level that cops are trained so gun owners are free to have guns everywhere including schools, hospitals, banks etc.

Terrorism in America is very rare, compared to the average of over 1.1 million violent crime incidents reported in America every year  which includes over 14,000 homicides ( mostly by the use of guns which account for 10,000 to 11,000 homicides ) and countless people being maimed, disfigured, paralyzed, deformed and blinded for life.


Google the following word : " Startempathy " or click on the following link:

https://startempathy.org/


 which is a site that promotes empathy education in our schools (especially for children from broken  or abusive homes ) in order to 

raise a generation of empathetic citizens so that

we can dramatically reduce the average of over 1.1 million violent crime incidents reported in America every year while

board certified mental health professionals conduct comprehensive mental health programs for all students (especially from abusive or broken homes ) following the guidelines of the DSM-5 certified by the APA ( American Psychiatric Association ), so that

troubled kids can get the same psychiatric help that rich kids get so that our kids get the mental help they need to prevent them from becoming dangerous individuals who endanger the lives of your loved ones if not treated early.

All 7 steps in the post below is geared towards getting rid of gun free zones and allow law abiding citizens to carry guns anywhere.

It's almost impossible to be ready for a "surprise" or ambush attack, as fully trained, fully alert and fully armed men surrounding President Reagan and his assistant Mr Brady ( who got paralyzed ) and tens of thousands of fully trained, fully alert and fully armed US soldiers in Vietnam found out. 

In order to dramatically reduce ambush situations, read the entire post below.

We know that the military effectively controls machine guns from getting into the hands of criminals so that your loved ones are not the victims of a machine gun ambush attack, so 

the following steps will effectively and dramatically bring down gun homicides from the 10,000-11,000 per year range (read the end of the post on why homicides from all methods, example from knife attacks will also go down dramatically )

All 7 steps below (to dramatically reduce surprise and ambush attacks ) can be financed by taking away a small portion of the hundreds of billions of annual corporate welfare dollars which is now going to the warfare complex:

(1) All school counselors and psychologists have to be board certified mental health professionals who are able to update a national database to prevent dangerous, troubled or unstable individuals from getting a gun before they are can be thoroughly evaluated and


 once the troubled individual is 18 years old, he could be subjected to a sting operation ( example: a FBI undercover operative giving him a fake bomb to see whether he would use it )


(2) To prevent guns from being stolen or kids getting guns, the government gives every gun owner a gun in a rechargeable electronic lock biometric gun case in a free gun exchange program for each gun the gunowner has.


The advantage of the government buying guns in biometric cases in bulk is not only the huge discounts the government can get in buying in bulk but also

the government can assure the quality of the heavily discounted guns resulting in

guns not misfiring or 

dangerously backfiring or 

malfunctioning in anyway due to the manufacturing standards set as a result of government research on the gun and the biometric case.

Remember, if you trust the electronics on planes since you do not hesitate to fly, 

you should trust the electronics of the rechargeable locking mechanism to open the case within a second of your finger being applied.

Any case that does not open within a second should be returned to the gun shop for a free exchange.



(3) To prevent guns from being stolen or kids getting guns, guns that are not in their biometric electronic lock gun cases have to be holstered at all times on the gun owner's body



(4) Since the Supreme Court does not object to the Supreme Court building being a gun free zone,

the only way the government will get rid of all gun free zones is if the government is satisfied as to the level of training of gun owners before being given a license to carry guns in gun free zones like the Supreme Court building and so

in order to get a biometric gun license, gun owners should receive free government funded NRA gun maintenance and gun firing training for the following reasons :

(a) Because it costs over $2 billion a year in hospital charges to treat victims of firearms-related injuries and also because

(b) the government has certain standards that must be met before allowing the gun owner or police to be armed in gun free zones like the Supreme Court building and

(c) If the US is ever invaded, would the government prefer a well trained citizenry or an untrained citizenry to defend the nation and

(d) Its more dangerous to have an untrained 80 year old lady with a gun than a well trained 80 year old lady with a gun.



(5) In order to prevent a black market in guns, legal gun owners can only transfer their guns to biometric licensed individuals who can carry guns in gun free zones like the Supreme Court building.


(6) Government conducts covert "black market" buy back programs to buy back all guns from the black market while arresting the dangerous individuals who sell the illegal guns


(7) Government conducts overt "black market" buy back programs from non-dangerous individuals who want to sell back illegal guns. Under the overt buy back program, no individuals are arrested



The above steps will effectively and dramatically bring down gun homicides from the 10,000-11,000 per year range and 


more towards the zero to one gun homicide per year in Singapore.


The reason Singapore's homicide rate of 0.38 per 100,000 from all methods of homicide (example: knife attacks ) is over 13 times lower, compared to the US 5.0 per 100,000 is because

there is a difference between a knife attack and a gun attack and that is there is a better chance of surviving a knife attack since the attacker has to get close to the victim and there is a chance the victim can fight back and that is why

in Singapore, since its hard to get an illegal gun, knife attacks in Singapore are also rare since attackers prefer a certain distance from their victims and a knife does not allow that.



A very, very tiny minority  of the 10,000 -11,000 gun homicides per year are committed by those who are licensed and trained to carry a gun (example : police officers ) and that is why training and licensing is so very important to dramatically cut down on surprise attacks and  ambush situations in which the NRA's "good guy" almost always loses.


Throughout this blog ask yourself these two questions :

Are you ok with the military allowing anybody to get the military's machine guns ? 

if you are not ok with that,, what controls over the military's machine guns do you approve of ?



Most gun owners ( including police) lose their lives in  ambush situations, so the solution  to dramatically cut down on ambush situations is given in this blog.

Why does Singapore not have a black market in illegal guns ? which  results in zero to one gun homicide per year in Singapore compared to the 10,000 -11,000 gun homicides per year in the US. 

This blog will answer the above question.



Even though having a gun is not a guarantee of safety, the question is,  

would you rather have an untrained 80 year old lady (with a gun) looking after your kids or a well trained 80 year old lady (with a gun) looking after your kids ?


According to the Virginia Declaration of Rights of June 12, 1776, a "well-regulated militia was to be trained to arms".

and if all gun owners are "trained to arms" by the government, would it be easier for the government to get rid of gun free zones ?

In other words,  the 2nd amendment's " RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE " seems to  have been interpreted by US courts as the right of the "well trained people" ( the police) to bear arms in gun free zones.



Why does the government only allow police to carry guns in gun free zones?

could it be because the government sees the police as the people of the 2nd amendment and thus allowed to carry guns in gun free zones.

If the people can convince the government that the government should train all gunowners to the level of the police,


is it more likely that the government will get rid of gun free zones  if all gun owners are as well trained and well regulated as part of the 2nd amendment's well regulated militia (as the police are well trained, according to the government) ?


Singapore has a well regulated citizen militia and

 Singapore has the financial resources to make sure that legal gun owners do not create a black market in guns.


Remember, its more dangerous to have an untrained 80 year old lady with a gun than a well trained 80 year old lady.



People say that the reason Singapore has zero to one gun homicide is because Singapore has only five million people. So can anybody point to any area in the US where there are five million people and zero to one gun homicide a year.


Why does Singapore have zero to one gun homicide per year compared to the best crime free area in America which sees numerous gun deaths per year ?

The reason Singapore has zero to one gun homicide per year is because guns is always the choice of most criminals and if access to illegal guns is very difficult, as machine guns and other illegal guns are in Singapore , criminals will think twice about committing a crime since most criminals want a comfortable distance from their victim. 

The reason we have "gun free" zones is because US courts understand what the founding fathers meant by a " well regulated militia" which had to be well trained and without that training, the "people of the 2nd amendment" cannot be armed in  "gun free" zones, unless they are part of that well regulated militia, which in today's terms refers to anybody who is well trained in the use of firearms ( example: the police ).

We do know that the NRA does not want gun owners to have gun training or psychological screenings in order to get a gun but at the same time

 the NRA is not petitioning the government to stop the gun training and psychological screenings of police officers because 

the NRA knows that gun training and psychological screenings is crucial for responsible gun ownership in the police force.




We also know that the death penalty is not a deterrent since the US has twelve thousand gun homicides per year even though there are more people per million on death row in the US (11 per million ) compared to Singapore ( 6 per million ).

For those who are thinking that Singapore executes people quickly, Singapore had zero executions in 2012 and 2013 and two executions in 2014.

Unlike the US, Singapore does not have "gun free" zones and yet Singapore has zero to one gun homicide per year.


 Singapore makes sure that those who get guns are responsible gun owners and do not transfer those guns to criminals and  that is why Singapore has practically no gun homicides.


People say that the death penalty is not a deterrent in the US because

death is not imminent as murderers have to wait for 20 years (confined for 23 hours per day in a cell ) before being executed but 

we know that war has imminent death as a penalty and yet people still join the military, 

so we know by just by watching hundreds of thousands join the military, that the penalty of imminent death is not a deterrent. 


Just as criminals do not think of the death penalty when committing the homicide but rather the upside that they think  will be obtained in killing somebody,

 nobody joins the military in order to die but in order to win, so the death penalty is not a deterrent.


Both a soldier and a homicidal criminal have one thing in common: 

they both are thinking of winning and not thinking of imminent death or the death penalty at the time the trigger is being pulled, in other words, 

death is not a deterrent and in the case of the homicidal criminal, the death penalty is not a deterrent at the time the trigger is being pulled.



We know that countries that prevent criminals from getting guns are the countries that have very low homicide rates from both gun and non-gun weapons (example: the US has 17 times the murder rate of Singapore per 100,000 from gun and non-gun homicides )

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/162/rate_of_homicide_any_method/194





Right now, the only armed people in "gun free zones" are the criminals and police.

 You are never going to convince the government to get rid of " gun free zones" unless

 you can convince the government that you are well qualified to carry a gun in "gun free zones".


Within the police force, the government already decides who gets the guns and

 that is why we see the police committing a very tiny percentage of the yearly average of over 10,000 - 11,000 gun homicides which shows psychological screenings do work.

 The reason Singapore has zero to one gun homicide per year is because

 Singapore makes sure gun owners are mentally stable and
competent and that gun owners are liable if they transfer their guns to criminals.





 In order to approximate Singapore's yearly average of zero to one gun homicide, its important for

 the US government to create a citizen militia by paying for all the training that should be required of gun owners, so that

 the government can get rid of "gun free zones".

 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO PREVENT CRIMINAL ACCESS TO GUNS, RESULTING IN
 THE GOVERNMENT GETTING RID OF GUN FREE ZONES,

Read the rest of the blog:

The reason Singapore's homicide rate of 0.38 per 100,000 from all methods of homicide (example: knife attacks ) is over 13 times lower, compared to the US 5.0 per 100,000 is because

there is a difference between a knife attack and a gun attack and that is there is a better chance of surviving a knife attack since the attacker has to get close to the victim and there is a chance the victim can fight back and that is why

in Singapore, since its hard to get an illegal gun, knife attacks in Singapore are also rare since attackers prefer a certain distance from their victims and a knife does not allow that.



If your loved ones were maimed, blinded or paralyzed for life due to  gun violence, you would consider gun control that enables Singaporeans to live in peace with their zero to one gun homicide per year on average.


The technology recommended in the blog below can fail but that also goes for guns that jam or backfire etc, so just because a technology can fail does not mean we should not keep improving it.

Several contributors to this  unedited community blog have the same password, so please forgive us if some material is repeated.

THE FOLLOWING IS BEING UPDATED ON A REGULAR BASIS,

SO CHECK BACK FOR THE LATEST UPDATES, THANKS :


PLEASE ALSO READ THE SECOND HALF OF THIS BLOG FOR

COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTIONS  TO

 PREVENTING YOUR FRIENDS

OR LOVED ONES BEING VICTIMS OF

 ARMED AND SUDDEN HOME INVASIONS

OR GUN VIOLENCE

by  a mentally unstable person or neighbor who threatens to shoot your children  when you are not around to protect them.

The following is for NRA members to read, followed by solutions to the gun violence problem for the general public to read:

 Right now in America, the only people armed in gun free zones are the criminals and police. Is that what you want ?

Why are "the people of the 2nd amendment" not allowed to be armed in the Supreme Court building ?

 The reason our government has gun free zones and requires police to be well trained and pass psychological exams is because

 the government interprets the word "people" in the second amendment differently from how the NRA interprets the word "people".

 The government seems to emphasize the "well regulated militia" part of the second amendment as being the "people", in other words,

 you are never going to convince the government to get rid of gun free zones unless you can convince the government that "the people" are part of the "police" or the "well regulated militia".

 You will find that the Supreme Court Justices who uphold the 2nd amendment are very comfortable with having armed police protecting the Supreme Court building instead of " regular people" protecting the Supreme Court building because


 the Supreme Court, along with the US government thinks of the police as the "well regulated militia" of the 2nd amendment instead of thinking of regular people as the "police" or "the well regulated militia" of the 2nd amendment and


 that is why "the people" are not allowed to be armed in the Supreme Court building.

 In Singapore, a person is allowed to carry a gun anywhere he wishes resulting in Singapore having


 zero to one gun homicide per year.


 The reason Singapore does not have gun free zones is because


 Singapore has enough resources to make sure those who have guns are part of a militia that is well regulated ( as our founding fathers envisioned ) and


 one way to know whether a citizen is part of a well regulated militia is to make sure that citizen militia members go through the same gun training and psychological exams the police go through unless


 the American public can convince the government that police are just as likely as criminals to commit violent crimes and so


psychological exams are useless and if that is the case,

 the American public has to convince the government that the police' share of the yearly average of 10,000 -11,000 gun homicides in this country are in proportion to the general public's proportional share


 (example; If there are 100 citizens and 10 commit gun homicides and if there are 10 cops, the public has to convince the government that least one cop is committing a gun homicide, the same proportion as the general public ).


 There is a much greater chance of you being the victim of


 domestic terrorism,


 violent crime,


 murder,


 serial killings,


 spree killings,


 mass killings,


 gang violence,


 gang invasions of  your home involving torture,


 car collisions due to drunk drivers,


 home invasions,


 and rape from psychologically unstable civilians than


 the chances of you being a victim of police criminality and

 the reason is due to police recruits being subject to psychological exams to prevent criminals from joining the police.


A few incidents of police brutality pales in comparison to the average of 10,000 gun homicides per year done by unstable people.

 IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE ABOVE,


THEN YOU NEED TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT TO GET RID OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING SO THAT
ANYBODY CAN JOIN THE POLICE.




YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF,


 WHY DO YOU OBEY THE POLICE ALL THE TIME ?

Its because the police have earned a level of respect that makes you obey them all the time and


 the reason you obey the police is  because


you have confidence that the government has done the required psychological screening of  police recruits instead of letting anybody join the police.

 The government will never get rid of gun free zones unless the NRA can compromise and make sure all gun owners are part of the well regulated militia ( example: the police ) and


 all gun applicants pass gun training and psychological exams, as the police are required to do, so that


 we can drastically reduce the number of gun homicides as close to the Singapore average of zero to one gun homicide per year .

 As for gun applicants who fail psychological tests, the best way to keep guns away from criminals is to


 invest heavily in finger print technology where only the legal gun owner is able to open the gun case which has an electronic lock and


 the other way to keep guns away from criminals is to make sure legal gun owners are liable for gun transfers to those who do not have a gun license.




PLEASE  READ THE SECOND HALF OF THE BLOG FOR FURTHER SOLUTIONS TO GUN VIOLENCE.




We could have prevented the Boston Marathon Bombings on 4/15/13 if

 the government had followed the recommendations in the solutions section of this blog 

because it is so important to annually  evaluate the mental health of children .

The Tsarnaev brothers who were involved in the Boston Marathon bombing were children at one time in the US, attending US schools

 and if they were mentally evaluated on an annual basis, the Boston Marathon bombings could have been prevented.

But sadly, since the US government spends up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year on the warfare complex, corporations and institutions :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_breakdown_for_2012

there are insufficient funds to

annually evaluate the mental health of children so

 they do not grow up to be mass killers ( example : Adam Lanza )

or home-grown terrorists ( example : Timothy McVeigh, Tsarnaev brothers ).




The story below reminds us of how well guarded President Reagan was,

surrounded by well trained,

well armed

and fully alert men, basically 24 hours a day

and yet one lone gunman shot President Reagan

and the story below is similar to that where

a well armed DA was fully alert and yet was shot to death :

Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland took no chances after one of his assistant prosecutors was gunned down two months ago.

McLelland said he carried a gun everywhere he went and was extra careful when answering the door at his home.

"I'm ahead of everybody else because, basically, I'm a soldier," the 23-year Army veteran said in an interview less than two weeks ago:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/30/mike-mclelland-found-dead_n_2986663.html?utm_hp_ref=crime




No wonder Singapore, which has  zero gun homicides, rather prevent criminals from getting guns then encouraging everybody to be armed

because when everybody is armed, the gunmen will just sneak up on their victims as seen in the case of President Reagan and the DA mentioned above

or when everybody is armed, killers (especially mass killers) will start wearing body armor as seen in recent years:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/human_nature/2012/08/criminals_in_body_armor_how_many_felons_wear_bulletproof_vests_.html


Also, when everybody is armed, there will be a feeling a paranoia because

 people will be expecting some kind of shoot out any minute,

so is it better to be like Singapore where people are not paranoid because people are not armed or

 would it be better to see everybody armed not knowing who is mentally unstable and armed within the crowd of armed people

because in a crowd of armed people,

a mentally unstable gunmen would still be able to shoot a lot of people before being shot himself,

 contributing to a very awful gory scene.


Even the Supreme Court believes in gun control when they only allow law enforcement to have guns in the Supreme Court building and nobody else.

Do you think the rich and powerful ( example : Supreme Court Justices ) want to be surrounded by well trained, mentally stable gun owners ( police) rather than

 anyone with a gun and hence the prohibition of guns in every building in the US where the rich and powerful might be present ?

 and because the "citizen militia" in this country whose training standards and mental state is unknown, numerous federal buildings including the Supreme Court do not allow individuals with firearms to enter the building.

 The Supreme Court has clearly made a distinction between law enforcement and the rest of us by prohibiting us from carrying firearms into government buildings and the only logical reason for that is the so-called citizen militia do not have any training standards or mental health standards in order to carry firearms


 and if we had the same standards as law enforcement then I am pretty sure the Supreme Court will allow everybody to carry firearms into federal buildings including the Supreme Court building.



The reason mass killings happen in war zones where everybody is armed is because

 when everybody is armed, there is a tendency to sneak up on victims who are fully armed

and that is how over 50,000 of our fully armed and alert soldiers died in Vietnam since

 the enemy sneaked up and ambushed them on a regular basis.


The reason there are all kinds of weapons in war zones,

other than guns is because

 when everybody has guns,

 there is a tendency to go up the scale to

the next level of heavy weapon in order to tilt the balance of power to the side that has the heavier weapon.

So that is what will happen in a country where everybody is armed;

there will be a tendency for criminals to get heavier weapons or change their tactics in committing their crime.



The NRA implies that everybody should be armed and then we will not have the kind of gun violence we have right now.

Singapore has a different approach:

 they rather prevent criminals from getting guns than trying to arm everybody.


People imply that if there are no guns within a zone, there will be mass casualties.


So if people are fully armed and fully alert in a zone,  they should not come to harm, right ?


So how does one explain a war zone in which

everybody is armed

and yet we find  fatal gun shot wounds on tens of thousands of our well armed and fully alert soldiers during the  Vietnam  War ?





For all the talk about Singapore being a police state

 ( even though the NRA and the Israeli government would prefer police everywhere, especially schools)

 here is  a citation where a tourist did not see a single cop all week in Singapore :

http://breakawaybackpacker.com/2012/12/observations-of-singapore-is-it-a-utopia-or-police-state/


There are advantages and disadvantages in living in any country and Singapore is no different but

 at the same time, rich people (example: Facebook co-founder) prefer living in Singapore since

 its a safe country to live in and tax laws are favorable.



Also, if you ask the victims of gun violence in this country,

 which country they would have preferred to live in before the tragedy that happened to them , what would they say?

Would they have preferred  a country with zero gun homicides like Singapore where criminals are caned or

 a country with gun violence zones like the US

 where

 they have to spend the rest of their lives

 maimed,

disfigured,

paralyzed,

 blinded or

deformed due to

the gun violence that happened to them  ?



 Singapore is not perfect but

would victims of gun violence in this country approve of the laws in Singapore if

 it meant they would have been spared a life of being

disfigured,

maimed,

blinded,

deformed or

paralyzed and spoon-fed for life ?


We are  sure victims of gun violence will say they rather live in a country where the gun homicide rate is zero


so they do not have to live a life in deformity, disfigurement, paralysis or blindness.


Even when you consider all methods of killing,

 a country with a zero gun homicide rate like Singapore will still fare much better because

we have removed one method of killing through comprehensive gun control laws.


People in gun violence zones in America would rather live in peaceful Singapore but

 do not have the money to move there.






In the solutions section of this blog,

most firearms are not banned, unless

 they look like machine guns which is the weapon of choice among mass killers.

Do you think a mass killer would use a gun colored pink ?

We need to make sure guns look as "feminine" as possible.


We  are pretty sure victims of gun violence  would say they rather live in a country with the laws Singapore has

than live in a country which has 

 lax gun control laws

or a country not putting enough resources

and law enforcement personnel  to

enforce every gun control law.



A gun is a product that needs to be used properly,

for its intended purpose

 and in order to ensure that  the person having the gun,  uses it for its intended purpose,

that person has to be well trained and educated in the judicious and proper use of the gun including

 having a stable mental state of mind when using the gun as a member of

a well regulated militia as envisioned by our founding fathers.






The NRA wants everybody to be armed

and we agree with the NRA

if all who are armed receive the same scrutiny

and gun training that policemen receive

just as the second amendment envisioned a well regulated militia

meaning a well trained and well regulated armed person.


Even when a person is well trained there is always a danger of

the innocent being killed as seen in

 the following case where a policeman shot an innocent girl who was held hostage :

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/18/andrea-rebello-hofstra-dead_n_3297994.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D315359



So one can imagine what might happen when a person is not trained at all in gun safety and training.


When a person is not trained in the judicious use of a gun,

 that person is apt to fire off multiple rounds in panic

and thus endangering the lives of the innocent including

endangering the lives of little kids in the home.


In order to co-opt the NRA, so that they would favor gun control laws,

the government should give the NRA the entire business of training people who want to be gun owners, so that

 the lucrative business of training people to become gun owners will give the NRA the incentive to support gun control laws ( recommendations listed in the second half of this blog ).



One of the prime objectives of the NRA is to arm the good guy in order to stop the bad guy.


If arming is the only criteria,  why do the good men in the  police and military have to

 go through psychological evaluations

 and gun training

before being issued a gun ?

 Could it be because one cannot just protect themselves or the public with just a gun but

also need the required gun training and psychological evaluations ?

http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r40_501.pdf

http://www.policepsych.com/screening.php





People will say that there is nothing special about guns and a killer will use any method to kill and not just by guns, in other words,

people say its not guns that kill people but people who kill people.


The above statement would be true if the number of killings by all methods per 100,000 are the same in every high income country because

 the premise is

since people kill people, then

 the number of killings must be the same per 100,000 if all methods of killings are incorporated into the statistics and not just from guns;


 but if you look at a high income, densely populated country like Singapore with strict gun control laws plus the resources to make sure those laws are strictly followed,

  Singapore's killings by all methods is 10 times less than compared to the US :

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/162/rate_of_homicide_any_method/194


which shows that, even though people kill people,  the preferred choice of killing is by using a gun

and when guns are strictly controlled, it does lead to much less killing overall

even when considering all methods of killing including the use of guns.




Compared to densely populated Singapore that has zero gun homicides in certain years,


 Michael Nutter, President of the US Conference of Mayors had this to say :

Every year in America more than 100,000 people are shot and
37537 of them die
including 11583 who are murdered

Every year 18000 children and teenagers are shot
2829 of them die including 1888 who are murdered

Every day in America 282 people are shot and 86 of them die including 32 who are murdered

Every day 50 children and teens are shot and 8 of them die including 5 who are murdered (end of quote ):

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/ViolencePre

Many of the people who do not die from gunshots are

either paralyzed and spoon-fed for life and/or 

deformed,

 maimed,

disfigured

and/or blinded for life.




There is a simple logic regarding gun control.

Less availability of guns equals

less opportunity to use guns.

Similarly, less availability of grenades or rocket propelled grenades equals

less opportunities to use grenades or rocket propelled grenades.

Singapore understands this logic

and that is why Singapore restricts the availability of guns as seen in

the comparative high price of AK-47s in Singapore ( on the black market )

making it unaffordable to most criminals

compared to the price of AK-47s on the black market in other countries

with strict gun control laws

but who lack adequate funding to strictly enforce the gun control laws

which has the effect of making it a lot cheaper to

get AK-47s on the black market in strict gun control countries.

And because Singapore not only has strict gun control laws
but

has the adequate funding to make sure those laws are strictly enforced,

Singapore in certain years has zero homicides even though

non-homogeneous Singapore has millions of people

and in other years, Singapore has about 180 times less gun homicides compared to the US.



http://www.gunpolicy.org/


Even if you consider killings by all methods, the US is 10 times worse than

non-homogeneous Singapore if

you consider killings by all methods, even though

Singapore is a densely populated urban country with millions of people :




http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/162/rate_of_homicide_any_method/194


Not because Singapore is a less violent society but

because the government of Singapore is able to

strictly enforce gun control laws

and has the resources to control the legal and illegal access to guns,

so that is why

Singapore is 10 times better than the US when

considering killings by all methods since

the strict enforcement of gun control laws results in

skewing the results in favor of Singapore when

considering killings by all methods.

In gun incidents , cross fire alone kills many more people than a knife attack.



Singapore in 2000 had 1 gun homicide (0.02/100K)

US had in 1999 8,259 gun homicides (2.97/100K)

Singapore in 2003 had 0 gun homicides (0.00/100K)

US had in 2003 had 9,659 gun homicides (3.3/100K)

Singapore in 2004 had 0 gun homicides(0.00/100K)

US in 2004 had 9,385 gun homicides(3.2/100K)

Singapore in 2005 had 0 gun homicides (0.00/100K)

US in 2005 had 10,158 gun homicides (3.43/100K)

Singapore in 2006 had 1 gun homicide (0.02/100K)

US in 2006 had 10,225 gun homicides(3.42/100K)

http://www.gunpolicy.org



If the US government can adopt the strict gun control laws of Singapore

and adequately fund the enforcement of those laws,

we should be able to dramatically bring down the gun homicide rates in the US.

 

Even if all citizens have guns,

gun crimes will not be reduced since

criminals will find a way to commit their violence by

using body armor,

using machine guns

and ambushing their victims without prior warning

Also, since the government does not regulate the safety and reliability of guns or cartridges,

 its possible for cartridges to malfunction that can cause serious injury or death (example: case head separation, failure to discharge, delayed discharge, incomplete discharge )

 and guns can also have mechanical malfunction that cause serious injury or death ( example : failure to feed, firing mechanism malfunction, unintended discharge, failure to eject cartridge) :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_malfunction


and also it is possible for guns to be used against the legal owner by the perpetrator.


 

So the better solution is

preventing criminals from obtaining guns



and that includes preventing guns from getting into the hands of those who are violent towards their families.

People say that criminals will get guns anyway even with strict gun control.

Does that mean we give criminals legal guns because they are going to get the guns anyway ?

or do we put every obstacle in front of criminals in order to

prevent them from getting guns,

as the ATF does in preventing people from getting bombs or grenades or machine guns



You cannot walk into a store and buy a machine gun or  bombs even though some people might mistakenly think that criminals are going to get machine guns or bombs anyway.

So similarly, just as not everybody can buy a machine gun or  bomb, not everybody should be allowed to go into a gun store

and buy regular guns unless that person passes certain tests and procedures ( listed below )



If everybody is armed, not only will

more people die from cross-fire,

the gunmen will start wearing body armor

and use tactics to avoid being shot as seen in

the case of the shooting of one of our Presidents.


Police have been known to be so  scared out of their wits that

they let out a barrage of bullets 

(example: a barrage of bullets were directed towards the 19 year old Boston Marathon bomber in 2013 )


Another reason why all gun owners need to be trained in using a gun judiciously

because if cops can panic due to a 19 year old kid,

 can you imagine an untrained gunowner shooting up the neighborhood in panic

and putting neighbors in danger of stray bullets ?


According to Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut who  cited a Rand Corporation Study; well trained policemen shoot their targets less than two times out of 10 times in an exchange of gunfire.

Watch at the 19:30 timeline :

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Gette




 

Here is an example of not hitting the target but hitting bystanders, committed by well trained policemen:

The tragic shooting incident in midtown Manhattan in which a recently unemployed Jeffrey Johnson, 58, walked up to his former boss and shot him three times point blank before "calmly" walking away,

but the police ended up shooting 9 other people, luckily none fatally, before Johnson was taken down by the NYPD:


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/was-nypd-responsible-10-11-people-shot-yesterday





If everybody had guns, more people will die from cross fire.

The better alternative is to prevent unstable people from getting guns.




President Reagan was shot even though he was surrounded by


well armed,

well trained

and fully alert men,

so the solution is not arming everybody but

to put as many obstacles in front of the criminal from getting to guns, the weapon of choice of mass murderers.


Even a Navy SEAL is not safe at a gun range and was a victim of a gun homicide:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/03/eddie-routh-chris-kyle-murder-navy-seal_n_2611117.html


An easy way to show whether gun ownership is better than preventing criminals from getting guns is for the government to

research the proportion of gun homicides of legal gun owners and compare that number with the proportion of gun homicides among non-criminal and non-gun owners

and if the research indicates that homicides of gun owners do not differ much from non-criminal, non-gun owners, than having a gun is not an advantage.



As for countries that have strict gun control but have high gun homicide rates, its because in those countries, they do not have the resources as Singapore does in order to strictly enforce gun control laws.

Singapore has zero gun homicides in certain years even though Singapore society is not homogeneous and has millions of people

and on the average for every person killed by guns in Singapore, 180 people in the US are killed by guns ( per one hundred thousand )

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/162/rate_of_gun_homicide/194,110

Even when you consider homicides by all methods, including guns,

for every one homicide victim in Singapore, there are

about 10 homicide victims in the US ( per one hundred thousand )

 

showing that Singapore still fares much better than the US since

Singapore’s gun control is so strict, the “all methods” results is skewed in

favor of Singapore compared to the US “all methods” homicide rate :




http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/162/rate_of_homicide_any_method/194

 

More people die from gun homicides in the US during one year compared to US soldiers who died in the Vietnam war ( most years ).

The 2007 weekly gun homicide death toll (242 dead ) in the US far exceeded the

weekly death toll (223 dead ) of US soldiers during the Vietnam war in 1969.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States#Violent_crime_related_to_guns


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties#By_Year


For licensing and certification purposes of legal gun owners , all tests and procedures listed below ( including in-house psychiatrists, shooting ranges etc ) can be done in one building run by the ATF

( ATF buildings can be stand-alone or local police stations can be extended to accommodate the ATF depending on the availability of space )

For the convenience of all legal gun applicants, the ATF should have at least one huge building facility in each town and cities would have more ATF facilities. 


 

In order to approximate Singapore's record of zero gun homicides in certain years, the US government needs to do the following :


(1) According to the  Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care

Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense:

http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abstract/1998/08000/Injuries_and_Deaths_Due_to_Firearms_in_the_Home.10.aspx1998

81% of homicide deaths of 10-19 year olds are carried out with a firearm :

http://www.cpyv.org/programs/what-is-speak-up-2/media-and-spokespeople/statistics/


 Deaths from using guns for all reasons including suicide, accidents and murder  approximates 30,000 deaths a year and approximately 75,000 nonfatal injuries are seen in hospital emergency departments:

http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/aboutus/wintemute.html



COMPROMISE SOLUTION :

To prevent uncertified family members and friends from accessing legal guns (both hunting rifles and handguns ) , all new guns sold should be in a solid steel case where

the legal gun owner will have immediate access using his finger prints on the case which unlocks the case immediately.

The case fits like a very tight glove since the interior of the case will be molded out  according to the shape of the gun

and the electronic case lock which will be on both sides of the trigger mechanism should be powered by an AC outlet plus a back up rechargeable battery inside the case.


The rechargeable battery should last for months without any AC supply to recharge it.


Anyone trying to open the case using a cutting torch would destroy the trigger mechanism since the solid steel lock is on both sides of the trigger mechanism.

All legal owners who do not store their guns in their cases and if those guns are used in a crime, those owners will be held liable for the crime.

Hunters have to also store their guns in the battery operated  biometric case as soon as the hunt is over.

All hand guns will only  be sold with holsters.

All hand guns not in their battery operated biometric cases have to be holstered ( attached to the legal owner's body ) at all times.


(2) All gun manufacturers should be mandated to manufacture guns with their biometric solid steel cases and any gun manufacturers who do not comply and their guns are used in a crime, the manufacturers would be held liable for the crime

(3) Since killers usually practice shooting in order to kill more efficiently, all shooting ranges can only be accessed with the biometric gun license given to every legal owner of guns where swiping the card on a card reader will unlock the entrance door.

All shooting ranges will have police or ATF officers to make sure the biometric gun license is being used by those accessing the facility.

Shooting outside of designated shooting ranges would be strictly prohibited and the public would be encouraged to report to police if they hear shooting practices in their neighborhood.

Police will investigate every case of shooting outside of designated gun ranges and the shooter, if found to be with a legal gun, will be warned initially but if he persists in shooting outside of a designated shooting range, he will face a heavy fine.

Forest and Park Rangers would be authorized to use their hand-held computers to scan the serial numbers on the guns of hunters to make sure the guns are registered digitally on the hunter's biometric gun license.


(4) In order to stop the burglary of gun shops and "straw purchases" guns should only be sold at ATF facilities that are open and protected 24 hours a day.

We do not know of any case where guns were stolen from a police station that is on guard 24/7.


All other outlets for guns including online outlets would be financially compensated by the government and shut down.

(5) In order to limit the theft of guns and straw purchases,  legal gun owners should only be allowed to buy two guns for personal protection and two guns for hunting,


because too many guns lying around, tempts thieves to take those guns and use those guns against the owners of those guns.

When the law mandates biometric storage for guns (as stated in point 1 above) then gun owners can have as many guns as they want.


(6) Since mass killers prefer using guns that look like machine guns due to the psychological effect of feeling powerful,  all guns that look like machine guns should be banned.

Do you think a mass killer would use a gun that was colored pink ? so its important to make a gun look as "feminine" as possible.



(7) All guns will be limited to  firing 10 bullets ( firing one bullet per trigger pull ) before having to reload.

Instead of randomly shooting, a mass killer will have to carefully aim and shoot if he has only 10 bullets to fire before reloading, giving victims a chance to escape.


According to Police Chief  Jim Johnson ( http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/310644-1 )

the "Tucson Shooter" (  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting )

killed 9 nine-year-old girl, Christina-Taylor Green with the 13th bullet in his gun

and if the shooter had only a 10 bullet clip/magazine, Christina would be alive today

since the shooter was apprehended by bystanders when he was trying to reload another 33 round clip into his gun.


A well trained legal gun owner only needs 10 bullets before reloading because

there is no evidence a criminal or a number of criminals will attack anybody who is fully trained

and who uses 10 bullets prudently and carefully  before the well trained legal owner has to reload.

Why limit the number of bullets in a magazine/clip  before reloading ?


 because it only takes about a second to  either escape from a criminal or bring down a criminal who is nervously trying to reload before firing again.

As for the legal gun owner, if he is well trained, he only needs 10 bullets before reloading and reloading only takes a second if he is well trained to reload too.


(8) Gun collectors and those who want to transfer their heirloom guns can still have lots of guns but except for the above allowed guns,

the rest of the guns will have their barrels welded shut and those guns will cannot be used as weapons even if somebody tries to break the weld.

(9) Non-sale transfers within families can still happen via the ATF only with guns that are stored in their biometric electronic cases.

The guns are transferred to the ATF for safe custody while the family members that the guns are being transferred to complete and pass the training and certification requirements as outlined in  point (14) below



(10) Every gun has to be registered and its serial number would be digitally registered on the owner's biometric gun license so that any law enforcement officer using a software application on the officer's hand-held computer can easily check to see whether the gun belongs to the person having the gun in his possession.

(11) Tamper-proof serial numbers imbedded inside the gun on the trigger mechanism and also on the gun where it can be easily scanned by a hand-held computer to show law enforcement whether the gun is registered to the person who is in possession of the gun

(12) Generous gun buy back program in which all owners of illegal guns will not be prosecuted if they turn in their guns but will get cash for the value of the gun plus 20%.



All private sales of legal guns are banned except for guns that have their barrels welded shut as to render them useless as weapons but can used as collectibles/heirlooms

and all sales by licensed individuals have to be made to the government's  buy back program at a reasonable market value ( purchase price less depreciation )

The only guns bought back at the generous rate of 120% of market value will be illegal guns and owners of illegal guns will not be prosecuted as long as they turn in their guns  voluntarily to law enforcement .


(13) All gun shows will have only one buyer and that is the government and nobody else would be allowed into gun shows

and in turn the government will conduct its own gun show where

all "collectible" guns sold will have their barrels welded shut.




(14) All legal gun owners have to:

(a) turn in their non-secured guns and the government will give them a free new gun with the biometric electronic solid steel case as mentioned above.

All guns not turned in would be deemed illegal guns

and the owners subject to fines

and liability if those non-secured guns are stolen or taken and used in a crime

(b) get a certificate of competency in handling, maintaining, cleaning and firing a gun. The digital certificate would be registered on the person's biometric gun license.

If an applicant is unable to shoot a target at a reasonable distance, he has no business having a gun

(c) be certified mentally competent by a government paid board certified psychiatrist who specializes in psychopathic behaviors and abnormal psychology.

A lie detector test will be part of the psychiatric examination.



The digital certificate would be registered on the person's biometric gun license.


(d) be held liable if they transfer their guns into the black market or

to a uncertified person or

a crime is committed due to their guns being taken due to

not being secured in their biometric solid steel cases.




(e) pass a background check where the police (the only seller of legal guns)

are able to access a national database that can be updated by

school counselors,

police or

anybody in authority so that

any incident of violence will show up on the database .


(f) renew the biometric gun license every year after having

passed all the above criteria.


All necessary information will be digitally registered on the license and can be accessed by any law enforcement officer using a software application on his hand-held computer.

Legal owners of guns should report immediately, a lost or stolen biometric gun license so that the legal owner will not be held liable for crimes committed using a stolen or lost biometric gun license.

All stolen or lost biometric gun licenses will be cancelled so that they cannot be used to access shooting ranges or buying guns at ATF facilities


(g) All individuals who are not able to get certification can either appeal their case to a special tribunal of judges and psychiatrists or

apply again the following year


(h) All the above can be done conveniently in one building that houses the ATF, the psychiatrists, shooting range etc


 

(15) Instead of annually spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars on the warfare corporations and institutions:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_breakdown_for_2012


the US government needs to spend resources on the following:

 

(a)
have enough law enforcement personnel to make sure all gun control laws are enforced in this country as Singapore does since Singapore have adequate resources.

Some countries have strict gun control laws but

because they do not have enough personnel, they are not able to enforce the gun control laws as Singapore does.

(b) speed up the research on "smart" guns that can only be fired by the legal owner

and not accidentally by children or thieves or uncertified family members and friends.


(c) Accelerate research on
Brain scan technology or Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI ) to detect empathy so that we can have an added tool in the future to determine whether a person can be trusted with a gun.


Since the government spends up to 1.4 trillion dollars every year on the warfare complex, corporations and institutions

the government does not have the resources to have a comprehensive study on how to drastically reduce violent crime.

A comprehensive study could involve scanning the brains ( using fMRI) of every violent criminal in the US and looking for commonalities:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130328125319.htm

and using those findings in developing comprehensive laws that mandate all citizens to undergo free annual brain scans

before renewing drivers license or car tags etc.

Those citizens who have commonalities with criminals will be subject to further free psychological testing and free psychiatric services to see whether further action is needed

to help those who have criminal tendencies.

The goal is to help and not to punish anybody who shares commonalities with criminals because

a person can only be punished when a crime is committed, not before

(example: woman who shot both her young children dead and critically wounded her husband could have received free psychiatric services,


if a mandatory annual brain scan showed commonalities with violent criminals,

and thus prevented the crime :http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/suzanna-simpson-shoots-family_n_3275773.html?1368572230&icid=maing-grid7%7Caim%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D313136 )





(d) Spend the resources to study/research the Singapore model in which

there are zero gun homicides in certain years even though

non-homogeneous Singapore is a densely populated country with

millions of people living in urban areas.

 

(e) Keep improving the EGS280 Biometric fingerprint gun mechanical commercial safe box case technology


(f) Spending enough resources to make sure that all school children are evaluated by

an in-house, government-paid board certified psychiatrist/psychologists at least once a year in order to

not only update a national database of troubled children ( only accessible by law enforcement, certified social workers and psychiatrists/psychologists ) but also to

initiate a customized preventive care program so that

those troubled children do not grow up to be killers or criminals involved in home invasions etc.

All troubled children will be enrolled in long term therapy either with government-paid social workers or


 government-paid board certified psychiatrists/psychologists depending on


 the level of psychological trauma suffered by the child.

(g) Spending the resources to study/analyze the results obtained from gun ownership and non-gun ownership:

An easy way to show whether gun ownership is better than preventing criminals from getting guns is for the government to

research the proportion of gun homicides of legal gun owners

and compare that number with the proportion of gun homicides among non-criminal/non-gun owners

and if the research indicates that homicides of gun owners do not differ much from non-criminal/non-gun owners, than having a gun is not an advantage.

According to  Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut, a gun in a home is 22 times likely to be used in a suicide or murder then for self-defense

Watch at the 19:30 timeline :

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Gette

(h) Government needs to spend enough resources to regulate the gun industry in order to make sure guns meet certain safety and quality control standards  in design, materials, and performance

so that guns do not malfunction and cause injury or death to the owner :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_malfunction#Ramifications



IN CLOSING :



Federal law imposes no design safety standards on domestically produced firearms. 

As a result, many firearms are manufactured and sold in the U.S. without undergoing appropriate safety testing and without including basic safety features. 

Poorly constructed firearms play a significant role in unintentional shootings and are disproportionately associated with criminal misuse, especially by juveniles and young adults.

Between 2005 and 2010, almost 3,800 people were killed and over 95,000 people were injured in unintentional shootings in the U.S.

Over 42,000 victims of unintentional shootings during this period were under 25 years of age, and more than 1,300 of these children and young adults died.

As stated in an October 2012 study from the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research.

“Although unintentional or accidental shootings account for a small share of firearm related mortality and morbidity, these deaths and injuries are highly preventable through proper design of firearms.”

We are not calling for the banning of guns but remember what gun ownership means:


Having a really good reliable gun is pretty expensive, also

gun manufacturers are not held to a high standard of quality or safety due to the lobbying efforts of the NRA,

 having a gun can mean regularly making sure it does not misfire,

 making sure its maintained properly, 

making sure it does not get stolen, 

making sure kids do not get to it.


 Its hard for people to empathize with strangers who are victims of gun violence but

if somebody in your family is a victim


and you had to lay them in a closed coffin due to the decapitating horrors of a shooting

( some of the children from the Sandy Hook Elementary school had be layed in closed coffins )

you would be calling for the very gun control that Singapore so effectively administers.

 


Even though a lot of people who visit Singapore say its like Disneyland, no government is perfect.

What our government needs to do is study Singapore to see

what can work here regarding gun control.


Gun control laws if strictly enforced due to adequate funding of law enforcement can work to dramatically reduce gun crimes to zero as seen in Singapore in certain years  :



http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-gunownership.htm

 

 

2 comments:

  1. Right-give the government total control over who an own a firearm-and you have a recipe for those who are armed taking over the government-
    Biometric gun cases and trigger locks? You watched far too much Star Trek-technology like that fails at the worst possible moment.
    You want biometric locks and gun cases/safes-they already exist,and those who choose to use them do so-which is their right-just as it is MY right to choose not to use them.
    The number of legal gun owners who commit gun crimes is around 1-2%-the same as it is for police,so all your pysch testing,and other restrictions on MY rights are in no way justified.
    You can not legislate morality,you can not legislate behavior-murder is already a crime.
    There is zero justification for ANY more "gun control" laws-in fact the second amendment mentions nothing about any prequisites to exercising the right to keep and bear arms,or to exercise any other enumerated right.
    There is absolutely no need for any more "gun control" laws,none.
    Punish those who do commit gun rimes with years in prison,rather than dropping charges in plea bargains,allowing gang-bangers to have multiple weapons under disability charges-yet they are still on the streets committing yet more gun crimes.
    All the cries to ban "assault weapons" when the fact is more people are killed with blunt objects-hammers and baseball bats-(FBI UCR expanded homicide tables)-than are killed by ALL rifles COMBINED-there is NO justification for banning the misnamed and focused on by the anti-gun lobby-Josh Sugarman to be exact- "assault rifles".


    you people are freakin clueless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The reason guns are banned in hospitals banks etc is because of the fact that gun owners do not have the same training that cops go through and I am sure the NRA will welcome gun owners being trained to the level that cops are trained so gun owners are free to have guns everywhere including hospitals, banks etc

      Delete