lets go run in traffic on the freeway
it will b fun ...

your odds of living are better ..

I am amazed at the stupid shit..

That is quintessential America.

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

up to a hundred, (I DON"T know the exact number but it is high) rounds in one minute.

No one can tell me one good reason to have a weapon that can "gun down" a mass of people at one time.

WW2 generation and gun guy also dropped out of NRA about the same time as you. He was into restoring and collecting old rifles. he had me shoot his mauser at age 5. no hand guns and no hunting. he liked guns for the precision and physics. he was fearsome about gun safety and he trained me sternly to never point the gun at anybody and always point the gun down.

guns never appealed to me but i inherited some of his mechanical ability. i think he was a b-17 crew chief but stayed in the states during ww2. he spent his career as a plant manager all over the midwest and was in mfg mgmt at republic aviation on long island 1959 to 1957, which may have been the longest employment of his career. he was a high functioning alcoholic which made me shy, fe,arful, insecure and un-trusting. I did overcome all that stuff mostly by going away to college 3 years late with the help of a lifelong friend. i miss both parents and it wasn't all bad. humor was big with my parents and i appreciate that gift.

our national fetish with the mis-use of the 2nd amendment is simply perverse and reinforces the generalization that Americans tend to be stupid, cruel, fearful, poorly educated and superstitious with the wide consumption of mis/dis info and preposterous conspiracy theories. voters groomed by republicans, in other words.

-90% jimmy

Only because the 1% could get richer from it and therefor support its passage into law. If Sandyhook didn't get gun control passed, nothing will.

laws and regulations make for civilized society, don't they?

Gun possession should be at least as hard as women exercising their reproductive rights!

I believe if you looked up the gun laws here, all of those items are required. I believe they do home inspections to make sure the guns and ammo are stored properly. Open carry is not allowed. Police training is at least 2 years of training and law school. The gun violence here seems to be suicides.

They were not holding the gun. Someone help please.
If anything, the owner of the gun should be held accountable.

facilitation, not murder.

If this was a group of 12-13 year olds playing the game, it's ridiculous and cruel to charge children for this death. But if the victim was playing this game with older teens, say 15-16 year olds, then it makes more sense.

and wouldn't be at all surprised if this isn't a case of 'overcharging' (fairly commonplace) on the part of authorities - 1) to make a public statement, and 2) in search of an eventual easy 'plea agreement' (which is also SOP)

(we don't know what the details of the situation and 'game' are here either. perhaps there was an element of coercion or bullying? but, in this age range - inclined to think just mind numbingly stupid.)

In a pretend game of Russian roulette.

The example I usually use is Kelly Gissendaner. She wanted her husband whacked, but didn't want to do it herself. She convinced Gregory Owen to kill him. She was proven to have orchestrated the murder, was charged with "malice murder," convicted, sentenced to death, and executed.

So...in this case the 12-year-old's companions talked him into playing Russian roulette. Murder is the appropriate charge.

It looks like Section 1(b) could apply. Perhaps the part about death occurring as a result of child abuse, also.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ms/title-97-crimes/ms-code-sect-97-3-19.html

someone's parents stored their gun in the toy chest.