Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No “blood” is “on the hands” of anyone but the person who commits unlawful violence.

Further, I’m sure you have no intention of banning handguns from police or military. What about security personnel? What about business owners subject to robbery and assault? What about people facing threats to their lives? What about professionals at high risk of assault because they, for example, have access to narcotics? What about elderly, weak or small statured people, especially women? What about judges? Political office holders?

Magical solutions sound great until one examines the fact that firearms have specific utility for plenty of decent people.

And from a practical standpoint the more “illegal” guns are the more incentive there is for illicit manufacture, smuggling, theft from government stockpiles and so forth. Criminals import actual tons of unlawful drugs every year. Do you really believe anti-firearm legislation will stop them? Felons are already prohibited from possessing firearms. It is already unlawful to carry a firearm without a license. Armed robbery, assault and murder are already unlawful.

The “magic magnet” doesn’t exist and wouldn’t work if it did. Focus on the criminals, not inanimate objects.

Blood is on the hands of every single person who fought to make it easier for criminals to get guns, starting with the NRA and gun lobby. We need, at a minimum, complete accountability and traceability of all guns. Maybe that should start with mandatory registration and documentation for every gun transfer and periodic verification that the guns are still in their owners possession. Also, there should be limits on how many guns people can buy, to reduce the pipeline feeding criminals. You DO NOT need to buy 20 glocks a year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I alone in wanting?
1) tough sentences for violent crimes - including automatic 10yr add-on for any crime where a gun was used.
2) social safety net so kids aren't hungry, homeless or hopeless (ie: educational and employment opportunity)
3) serious plan to massively reduce personal gun ownership for all but licensed and psychologically evaluated professionals with a demonstrated need. Ban on all new personal gun sales and a massive gun violence victims tax (10,000%?) on non-LEO/Military ammunition sales together with a gun buy-back program with target of >100k guns a day. National registry/license and insurance requirement for those who continue to own, plus references from 6 non-relative neighbors who agree to take criminal responsibility for your actions. 2A can itself be amended given modern reality. With political will could dramatically bend the curve on gun violence over next 5-10 years - it's personal and public responsibility that could pass on a more mature and safer country for the next generation. ...

No. These are all possible but we'll need better leaders going into politics.

All we need are political figures willing to impose strict laws, and see that they’re enforced. Pick a date in the future, 2,3 years, whatever. After “X” date, you cannot own or possess a gun. Period. No exceptions. If you do, you go to prison for 20 years. No parole, no pleading down for reduced sentence, no time off for good behavior. Twenty. Years. No. Exceptions.

We build enough prisons to house these criminals, and we keep them there. I keep reading “90 million people own guns”… Ok, let’s assume that there will be a 10% rate of noncompliance. So we build prison space for 9 million people. The construction process alone would be a major infrastructure stimulus in itself, putting thousands of people back to work to build prisons.

After the “x” date passes, the govt can offer large rewards for turning in people who are still working in possession of guns. If people could get $5,000-$10,000 for turning in a loathsome neighbor or family member who had guns hidden, they’d do it in a heartbeat. And big tech can use their algorithms to scour the internet looking for likely gun possession based on posts or searches.

This problem CAN be stamped out within five years. All it takes are leaders willing to step up to the plate and commit to it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I alone in wanting?
1) tough sentences for violent crimes - including automatic 10yr add-on for any crime where a gun was used.
2) social safety net so kids aren't hungry, homeless or hopeless (ie: educational and employment opportunity)
3) serious plan to massively reduce personal gun ownership for all but licensed and psychologically evaluated professionals with a demonstrated need. Ban on all new personal gun sales and a massive gun violence victims tax (10,000%?) on non-LEO/Military ammunition sales together with a gun buy-back program with target of >100k guns a day. National registry/license and insurance requirement for those who continue to own, plus references from 6 non-relative neighbors who agree to take criminal responsibility for your actions. 2A can itself be amended given modern reality. With political will could dramatically bend the curve on gun violence over next 5-10 years - it's personal and public responsibility that could pass on a more mature and safer country for the next generation. ...

No. These are all possible but we'll need better leaders going into politics.

All we need are political figures willing to impose strict laws, and see that they’re enforced. Pick a date in the future, 2,3 years, whatever. After “X” date, you cannot own or possess a gun. Period. No exceptions. If you do, you go to prison for 20 years. No parole, no pleading down for reduced sentence, no time off for good behavior. Twenty. Years. No. Exceptions.

We build enough prisons to house these criminals, and we keep them there. I keep reading “90 million people own guns”… Ok, let’s assume that there will be a 10% rate of noncompliance. So we build prison space for 9 million people. The construction process alone would be a major infrastructure stimulus in itself, putting thousands of people back to work to build prisons.

After the “x” date passes, the govt can offer large rewards for turning in people who are still working in possession of guns. If people could get $5,000-$10,000 for turning in a loathsome neighbor or family member who had guns hidden, they’d do it in a heartbeat. And big tech can use their algorithms to scour the internet looking for likely gun possession based on posts or searches.

This problem CAN be stamped out within five years. All it takes are leaders willing to step up to the plate and commit to it.

Anonymous wrote:gun control has to be done on a federal basis. It is useless on the state level---particularly in DC, where guns just flood in from Virginia. Throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s, DC had some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and it had no effect on gang violence/underclass culture of shootouts.

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that yes, hunger is an issue. The stats the Capital Area Food Bank quote are:

1 out of 10 residents of the metropolitan Washington region is food insecure.
Nearly ⅓ of them are children.

There was an article in the Post talking about how students have suffered and food insecurity via losing access to meals was part of it. I'm not a policy expert by any means, but I do think that the benefits from UBI would extend into the community greatly. Just looking at this one issue, people could then spend money in their communities instead of relying on school meals or food banks. Maybe shoplifting would go down encouraging more grocery stores to open, providing stable jobs. There is something to be said for the dignity of choosing and paying for your own food.

As for the issue of involvement with the drug trade, which I assume is what's fueling these shootings, my hope would be that with better options people would choose something else. No one wants to be terrified for their life as they walk down the street, or see their friends and loved ones hurt or killed. People with better options exercise them. That's why there's a Ward 9.

Anonymous wrote:I think one solution that hasn't come up yet would be UBI. It gives families stability, maybe the chance to work one job and spend more time with their children. There would hopefully be fewer hungry kids, and less pressure to engage in crime like drug dealing which leads to violence. Everyone is discussing throwing more money at police, schools, the safety net, etc. UBI is at least a new option that empowers people to choose for themselves how they want to live without the overwhelming forces of poverty at play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I alone in wanting?
1) tough sentences for violent crimes - including automatic 10yr add-on for any crime where a gun was used.
2) social safety net so kids aren't hungry, homeless or hopeless (ie: educational and employment opportunity)
3) serious plan to massively reduce personal gun ownership for all but licensed and psychologically evaluated professionals with a demonstrated need. Ban on all new personal gun sales and a massive gun violence victims tax (10,000%?) on non-LEO/Military ammunition sales together with a gun buy-back program with target of >100k guns a day. National registry/license and insurance requirement for those who continue to own, plus references from 6 non-relative neighbors who agree to take criminal responsibility for your actions. 2A can itself be amended given modern reality. With political will could dramatically bend the curve on gun violence over next 5-10 years - it's personal and public responsibility that could pass on a more mature and safer country for the next generation. ...

No. These are all possible but we'll need better leaders going into politics.

Anonymous wrote:Am I alone in wanting?
1) tough sentences for violent crimes - including automatic 10yr add-on for any crime where a gun was used.
2) social safety net so kids aren't hungry, homeless or hopeless (ie: educational and employment opportunity)
3) serious plan to massively reduce personal gun ownership for all but licensed and psychologically evaluated professionals with a demonstrated need. Ban on all new personal gun sales and a massive gun violence victims tax (10,000%?) on non-LEO/Military ammunition sales together with a gun buy-back program with target of >100k guns a day. National registry/license and insurance requirement for those who continue to own, plus references from 6 non-relative neighbors who agree to take criminal responsibility for your actions. 2A can itself be amended given modern reality. With political will could dramatically bend the curve on gun violence over next 5-10 years - it's personal and public responsibility that could pass on a more mature and safer country for the next generation. ...

Anonymous wrote:No “blood” is “on the hands” of anyone but the person who commits unlawful violence.

Further, I’m sure you have no intention of banning handguns from police or military. What about security personnel? What about business owners subject to robbery and assault? What about people facing threats to their lives? What about professionals at high risk of assault because they, for example, have access to narcotics? What about elderly, weak or small statured people, especially women? What about judges? Political office holders?

Magical solutions sound great until one examines the fact that firearms have specific utility for plenty of decent people.

And from a practical standpoint the more “illegal” guns are the more incentive there is for illicit manufacture, smuggling, theft from government stockpiles and so forth. Criminals import actual tons of unlawful drugs every year. Do you really believe anti-firearm legislation will stop them? Felons are already prohibited from possessing firearms. It is already unlawful to carry a firearm without a license. Armed robbery, assault and murder are already unlawful.

The “magic magnet” doesn’t exist and wouldn’t work if it did. Focus on the criminals, not inanimate objects.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles Allen says he hasn't commented on any of this because his Twitter account got hacked, because that's the only way to communicate?

https://twitter.com/CMCharlesAllen/status/1419034932790321154?s=19

Going to guess his advisers are telling him that each time he opens his mouth about crime he loses voters.

So how to get him and his sympathizers off our city council?

Stop electing only liberal Democrats. There needs to be some checks and balances on the council to hold back this woke stampede to the bottom.

This.

Totally agree. I'm thinking of forming a political committee to start distributing some shirts & signs about Charles Allen supporting crime. Let me know if you're interested. I think step #1 is for us to show a viable challenger there is support for getting rid of Allen and others. If anyone else is interested I'll be starting a thread and group on this.

This is either sock puppetry or the Qnon bat-signal went out for trumptrolls to start disrupting this thread. I’ve reported all your posts.


There is one, and ONLY ONE, solution to this problem: getting rid of every single gun in this country. Period. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that stops this. There iso need to discuss any other factors but that. It’s the guns. Nothing else. Full stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles Allen says he hasn't commented on any of this because his Twitter account got hacked, because that's the only way to communicate?

https://twitter.com/CMCharlesAllen/status/1419034932790321154?s=19

Going to guess his advisers are telling him that each time he opens his mouth about crime he loses voters.

So how to get him and his sympathizers off our city council?

Stop electing only liberal Democrats. There needs to be some checks and balances on the council to hold back this woke stampede to the bottom.

This.

Totally agree. I'm thinking of forming a political committee to start distributing some shirts & signs about Charles Allen supporting crime. Let me know if you're interested. I think step #1 is for us to show a viable challenger there is support for getting rid of Allen and others. If anyone else is interested I'll be starting a thread and group on this.

This is either sock puppetry or the Qnon bat-signal went out for trumptrolls to start disrupting this thread. I’ve reported all your posts.


There is one, and ONLY ONE, solution to this problem: getting rid of every single gun in this country. Period. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that stops this. There iso need to discuss any other factors but that. It’s the guns. Nothing else. Full stop.