Americans For Responsible Solutions

[HunterDave]

To date, as far as I can tell, there have only been two sides in the gun issue in the US. The pro-gun side spearheaded by the NRA, and the anti-gun side spearheaded by Dianne Feinstein (et al). Both sides are equally extreme on opposite sides of the issue IMO. The NRA would like to see more guns in America while the Feinstein (et al) side would like to ban all guns if she could. There was no middle ground for the majority of Americans.

Today, Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly launched a new campaign called "Americans For Responsible Solutions'. From what I have read about this campaign, it takes a more moderate position when it comes to gun control in the US that more accurately reflects what the majority of US citizens want.

From the "Americans For Responsible Solutions" website:

"Americans for Responsible Solutions" will encourage elected officials to stand up for solutions to prevent gun violence and protect responsible gun ownership by communicating directly with the constituents that elect them."

According to recent polls, neither the anti-gun nor the pro-gun side accurately reflect what the majority of Americans want, and the "Americans For Responsible Solutions" does.

Do you think that this campaign will become popular with Americans?

[fordtruckin]

Do you think anyone's opinion in this thread will make a difference? NOPE

[HunterDave]

Do you think anyone's opinion in this thread will make a difference? NOPE

I'm 100% sure that people's opinions on here won't make any difference. :lol:

People do have their opinions though.....obviously you don't. :)

[Okotokian]

Do you think anyone's opinion in this thread will make a difference? NOPE

Hey, you chime in on a Canadian outdoors forum.... I'm just sayin... LOL

Besides, the OP didn't suggest our opinions would make a difference. Just wanted to know what they were. It would be easier however, if this new group actually had an opinion. The quote seemed about as vague as a politician could craft it.

[last minute]

[

[score]

Hey, you chime in on a Canadian outdoors forum.... I'm just sayin... LOL

Besides, the OP didn't suggest our opinions would make a difference. Just wanted to know what they were. It would be easier however, if this new group actually had an opinion. The quote seemed about as vague as a politician could craft it.

Very vague AND political, agreed. Some will be fooled. I suspect that fordtruckin has an opinion, but I don't think it would jive with this groups. :) Just sayin.

[fordtruckin]

Very vague AND political, agreed. Some will be fooled. I suspect that fordtruckin has an opinion, but I don't think it would jive with this groups. :) Just sayin.

It would Jive with some peoples...not all thats for sure!

[260 Rem]

Yes, I think the Gifford initiative will gain some traction with the potential to counterbalance the NRA as a lobby group. As you may recall, Giffords is the poiltican shot in head during an attemped assaination in which several others were killed and wounded, so she has some credibility and a lot of political conections. Her husband was an astronaut, so he too, is an influential public figure. Their timming is right in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings. The NRA position on armed guards in every school is a not gainning any traction, and in fact, the NRA itself is drawing a fair bit of ridicule in terms of their "head in the sand" recognition of the part that guns play in gun violence. Yes, there is panic here in the US among the gunnies who are buying up every gun that has a semi-auto action / high cap mags .....if they didn't believe things were about to change, they would not be in such a rush.

[HunterDave]

Hey, you chime in on a Canadian outdoors forum.... I'm just sayin... LOL

Besides, the OP didn't suggest our opinions would make a difference. Just wanted to know what they were. It would be easier however, if this new group actually had an opinion. The quote seemed about as vague as a politician could craft it.

I read several articles yesterday trying to find exactly what they are for and against and I agree that it is very difficult to nail down what it is. From what I've read they are for countering the NRA's political strangle hold on all things related to guns and for representing the rights of Americans through their input.

In a nutshell, I don't think that, other than neutralizing the NRA, they have an agenda other than to listen to what Americans want and push for any reforms that they ask for.

[MtnGiant]

I read several articles yesterday trying to find exactly what they are for and against and I agree that it is very difficult to nail down what it is. From what I've read they are for countering the NRA's political strangle hold on all things related to guns and for representing the rights of Americans through their input.

In a nutshell, I don't think that, other than neutralizing the NRA, they have an agenda other than to listen to what Americans want and push for any reforms that they ask for.

This is a little vague for you Mr Dave.
But if I am to understand you correctly...You think that this is a case of what the citizens want? I agree to an extent since it's a public outcry for some kinda reform.
But they do have some Big guns on their side.
They have a US Colonel promoting the ban of assault type guns owned by citizens. I don't recall his name....but saw him interviewed late last night on the Anderson Cooper show.
Correct me if I misinterpreted you

[HunterDave]

This is a little vague for you Mr Dave.
But if I am to understand you correctly...You think that this is a case of what the citizens want? I agree to an extent since it's a public outcry for some kinda reform.
But they do have some Big guns on their side.
They have a US Colonel promoting the ban of assault type guns owned by citizens. I don't recall his name....but saw him interviewed late last night on the Anderson Cooper show.
Correct me if I misinterpreted you

It's vague because that's all that I know about it. I have no idea who is endorsing this movement and who isn't. I have a good idea of what the majority of Americans want based on the Reuters/IPSOS poll from Dec 27(?) but I haven't read anything about the movement using it as an agenda.

The movement claims that they want to represent what Americans want........I guess that if you figure out what they want it'll be a little less vague. I haven't googled it yet so there might be more news on the net. :)

[MtnGiant]

Ya I spose the details aren't well defined what is wanted.

But basically it's...
1- assault type weapon possession ban.
2- more public protection

With many undefined sub categories as #3.....ya I see your point is that they don't really have a point.

This is gonna drag on for a long long time as I see it

[billie]

Do you think that this campaign will become popular with Americans?

Spounds like a breath of fresh air. There must be somewhere between "ban all guns" and "nukes for everyone".

In all that I've read, there is scant offerings of answers. Almost everything is one way or the other, very little in the middle, and mostly emotional. I think this movement could gather a lot of steam, but they will have their work cut out for them. I believe the majority of Americans would be happy to concede a bit on both sides.

The one factor that seems to be overlooked is that not one answer could possibly have much of an impact, the situation is far too complex for many reasons. Little ideas with small impacts could add up to a reasonable improvement. Humans are a violent bunch and there are no ends to the tools to use (apparently hammers are good and assault rocks are hitting the buy&sell sections :).)

These are some ideas, not necessarily good ones, just some ideas, which might be better than the rhetoric that is predominant all over:
1) Automatic weapons have not been used in crimes since 1934. There may be some value is restricting some weapons, who has them, how they are stored and where they are used.
2) Guns in schools? May have some merit but it sounds so much like admitting defeat.
3) Secured schools. Strip searched, barbed wire, gun turrets and cross-fire coverage would likely work, but see item 2. Granted, buzzing in guests is a positive procedure in schools.
4) Practise with kids for emergency. We do fire drills, why not something else relative. Maybe a bucket of marbles for every kid to dump into the hallways. Practice by staff to use a fire hose to subdue danger. What other things could be done with the products at hand.
5) Where are the exit doors for classrooms? Why doesn't the design of schools change for emergency exit to outside rather than into the corridors (would be better for fire also). Besides, the corridor is now full of marbles:thinking-006:
6) Mental health changes (no end to the ideas here)
7) Many of these weapons are legal and the perpetrator has taken illegal posession of them. Hold the owners more responsible and let a jury of their peers decide their complicity. What was the consequences for the gun suppliers to Columbine?
8) Media. Where does the freedom of speech end when the consequences of glorifying the perpetrators foster increased danger to our society.
9) Bullying. Awareness is better now but the end results could use some work. I have seen many instances of adults encouraging bullying by their actions or lack thereof.
10) Medication. Definitely concern on this one. Where is the accountability for doctors.

What seems to be ignored in the "anyone without a criminal record" arguement, is that even if a known gang member had a trunk full of legal weapons, thay cannot be confiscated, even though it is likely they will be used for nefarious reasons.

Anyway, this is not intended as anything more than just rambling thoughts from a guy in the middle, who has read lots of "can't" or "won't" and not enough "maybe".