Gun control ideas

[GBRedneck]

Heaven forbid that all options should be on the table for a civilized discussion.

Like what? Taking away rights without due process? That's a terrible precedent. Do you support racial profiling too?

What I mean is that there should be room for negotiation. People like you take the words of a politician you don't like and instantly spout out how awful they are and the country will be without ever considering that there are workable solutions from even the far left or far right of ideas.

There must be a balance between acceptable risk, personal freedom, and public safety. And based off the statements above, there are people that want to deny that there is any connection between those things.

"People like me"

Oh... ok.

I already said I'm not opposed to making changes. That doesn't mean I can't say that using the "no fly list" is asinine.

This is what I find to be the problem. You have zero problem telling everyone how you don't like something but you don't say how you would fix the issue. Unless you think we don't have a violence problem.

Violent crime rates have been dropping like a rock for the past 30-40 years. 50% lower since the '80s. And they're still dropping.

What's the problem? Not enough people understand statistics and probabilities?

 

[Saunders]

Heaven forbid that all options should be on the table for a civilized discussion.

Like what? Taking away rights without due process? That's a terrible precedent. Do you support racial profiling too?

What I mean is that there should be room for negotiation. People like you take the words of a politician you don't like and instantly spout out how awful they are and the country will be without ever considering that there are workable solutions from even the far left or far right of ideas.

There must be a balance between acceptable risk, personal freedom, and public safety. And based off the statements above, there are people that want to deny that there is any connection between those things.

"People like me"

Oh... ok.

I already said I'm not opposed to making changes. That doesn't mean I can't say that using the "no fly list" is asinine.

This is what I find to be the problem. You have zero problem telling everyone how you don't like something but you don't say how you would fix the issue. Unless you think we don't have a violence problem.

I've said it on this very board at least half a dozen times. Fix the for profit prisons, and scrap the current drug war. Instant massive drop in crime. This is more important than any single gun law.

Next, if we're going to mandatory background checks, then we do it this way. A mandatory background check becomes a national license. You lose the license if you commit any number of crimes. A basic proficiency test (plus written exam) like I had to do for my CCW. If you want to go concealed, then offer more free training. In turn, the license is national, so no more having 50 sets of rules. If you can conceal carry in Minnesota, or Florida, you can in California or New York too. This means that cali and NYC can't blame other states for their crime (and corruption) problems. Also, eliminate the silencer ban. It's stupid.

 

[Saunders]

What makes you think any of those are straw purchases?

No idea. As you suggest, many of them may not be!

This is to challenge, by volume, the writing off of most shootings as coming from straw purchases.

Maybe the vast majority of those are illegal weapons, maybe not. Either way, the outcomes are troubling -- and that's a problem borne by all of us.

I still don't know where you're going with this. Did someone suggest that most shootings come from straw purchases? That seems highly unlikely.

It's my fault. I misremembered the statistic. It's "the vast majority of illegal guns were acquired via straw purchase."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

 

[BigRedBuster]

another thing people don't understand is that talk of banning guns actually has the opposite affect.

I know people who have purchased more guns because they believe the government is going to ban them.

No, these people aren't the ones committing violent crimes.

This is one reason why I believe the gun manufacturers have fostered the thought that the government is going to ban guns.

It's similar to how some people claim trumps ban on Muslims plays right into the hands of Isis.

 

[Saunders]

I started a new thread on the no fly list, and I'll move the relevant posts there. If you want to see why using it as a gun control measure, read the lengthy article I posted to see just how screwed up it is.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/77929-the-problems-with-the-so-called-no-fly-list/

 

[Saunders]

New Executive Orders by the President on Gun control items. Whatever. This question regarding the ATF's post on it is priceless...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

 

[Hooked on Huskers]

1. Repeal 1788 2nd Amendment. Already repealed 1st Amendment.

2. Confiscate all guns door-to-door search including BB guns. Cops too. If you violate the confiscate law, then 5 years jail sentence with no parole.

3. Hunter freaks ..... restrict only bow and arrows weapons.

 

[Decked]

1. Repeal 1788 2nd Amendment. Already repealed 1st Amendment.

2. Confiscate all guns door-to-door search including BB guns. Cops too. If you violate the confiscate law, then 5 years jail sentence with no parole.

3. Hunter freaks ..... restrict only bow and arrows weapons.

Sounds like a great way to get cops killed

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

1. Repeal 1788 2nd Amendment. Already repealed 1st Amendment.

2. Confiscate all guns door-to-door search including BB guns. Cops too. If you violate the confiscate law, then 5 years jail sentence with no parole.

3. Hunter freaks ..... restrict only bow and arrows weapons.

Cause you'll be able to confiscate all the bad guys guns right?! But thank you for supporting the government coming into our homes and telling us what we can and can't have.

 

[onlyHskrfaninIL]

1. Repeal 1788 2nd Amendment. Already repealed 1st Amendment.

2. Confiscate all guns door-to-door search including BB guns. Cops too. If you violate the confiscate law, then 5 years jail sentence with no parole.

3. Hunter freaks ..... restrict only bow and arrows weapons.

Sounds like a great way to get cops killed

And some federal agents.
But you cant just take peoples private property. Youd have a major uprising. Id let them buy back my 22 and stash the rest at the office. This idea is assinine and that is being kind.

 

[Landlord]

It doesn't say how you should do it, but it clearly says your right to do it shall not be infringed. So if they ban the sale of firearms, you think that would be constitutional? I'm guessing you didn't read the link I provided.

Well first of all, nobody is going to ban the sale of firearms. That just....won't happen. But to say that restricting the sale is somehow infringing the right to keep arms is a crazy contortionist twist of semantics.

"By definition, if you put limits on how they may obtain them, you are infringing on the right."



By this wacko definition, then that right is already infringed upon. The cost of a gun is a limit - if you don't have the money, you can't buy the gun. The location of a gun store is also a limit. Someone in a wheelchair with no transportation is apparently having their 2nd amendment right violated because they can't physically travel to the store to make the purchase.

Gun control is nothing but a scam to take guns away. Has ANY law ever stopped a criminal? How about the war on drugs, how has that gone? How about drunk driving laws?

Per the bold, um, yes, and also, more importantly, it has stopped people from becoming criminals. Hilarious that you bring up drunk driving laws, because stricter laws and penalties have lowered drunk driving rates by 2/3 since the 70's.

Laws can't legislate morality, of course. Laws can't stop bad things from happening. But laws can, and do, curb or discourage a lot of people from a lot of things. The goal is to make progress.

Guns are a tool, so think of an analogy with another tool. Say I want to build a bookshelf and I need a hammer. Maybe I have a hammer sitting right next to me, and there's nothing stopping me! But maybe the hammer is somewhere in a toolbox out in the garage. I can still go get it, but it requires a bit more work, and there's a slightly higher chance that I'll just decide to forget it. Maybe still, the hammer costs $10 at Home Depot a few miles away. I can still go get the hammer, but the odds of me losing my motivation to finish this bookshelf just went up because it's more work for me to acquire the tool.

Stricter, nationwide gun control laws have the same effect, ESPECIALLY for gun suicides. Over 20,000 people a year kill themselves with firearms. Let's say a 16 year old kid wants to kill himself. You make it 10% more difficult for him to be able to obtain a gun, that's 10% more chance that one of those small, subtle curbs is what it takes for him to decide his life is worth something. Curb is an interesting and fitting word too - street curbs are small and seemingly insignificant, but save how many lives yearly without us even realizing or acknowledging it?

I just really don't understand why there is no other issue in this country that has as big of a public safety concern as this one that we aren't at least able to take some basic steps towards putting together a good plan of action to do something.

 

[Danny Bateman]

1. Repeal 1788 2nd Amendment. Already repealed 1st Amendment.

2. Confiscate all guns door-to-door search including BB guns. Cops too. If you violate the confiscate law, then 5 years jail sentence with no parole.

3. Hunter freaks ..... restrict only bow and arrows weapons.

Sounds like a great way to get cops killed

And some federal agents. But you cant just take peoples private property. Youd have a major uprising. Id let them buy back my 22 and stash the rest at the office. This idea is assinine and that is being kind.

Guys, I don't think HoH was serious. This post seriously has to be tongue in cheek. If not, he's a total whack-job

It is seriously starting to piss me off that the GOP finds it so convenient lately to nuthug the NRA and suggest that the President is out to get your guns.

Nowhere in anything he's said or done does he even hint at trying to TAKE BACK any guns. He's gone so far as to say he wouldn't do so, citing the 2nd amendment. The man flatout does not want to violate the sanctity of that amendment, and if you believe otherwise, you're simply terrified of a non-existent boogeyman.

Interestingly though, Australia implemented a gun buyback program on semi-auto and pump weapons in 1997, and since then, overall homicide rates, gun homicide rates, and armed robbery rates have declined. Removing assault type weapons does seem to lead to a decrease in firearm-related crime. Just FYI.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

What he is trying to do is make sure as many people as possible go through the channel that they're supposed to go through before they acquire their gun. The channel designed to sniff out red flags that perhaps there's a legitimate reason you shouldn't have a firearm in the first place. If there's nothing wrong, you pass the test quickly, get your gun, and get to exercise your right.

What pisses me off the most is that the GOP and gun lobby at large seem more concerned with lobbing these fiction bombs that somehow this executive actions sets in motion this chain of events that culminates in absurdly difficult gov't confiscation of guns, rather than CARING about the LIVES they could potentially save. If this executive action prevents one person from acquiring a gun through nefarious check-less means and using it to perpetrate some type of violent crime, mass slaying, or blowing their own head off, isn't the whole damn thing worth it?

It's common sense. We're dealing with human lives.

 

[Saunders]

If this executive action prevents one person from acquiring a gun through nefarious check-less means and using it to perpetrate some type of violent crime, mass slaying, or blowing their own head off, isn't the whole damn thing worth it?

It's common sense. We're dealing with human lives.

Do you feel the same way about prohibition?

 

[Saunders]

"By definition, if you put limits on how they may obtain them, you are infringing on the right."


By this wacko definition, then that right is already infringed upon. The cost of a gun is a limit - if you don't have the money, you can't buy the gun. The location of a gun store is also a limit. Someone in a wheelchair with no transportation is apparently having their 2nd amendment right violated because they can't physically travel to the store to make the purchase.

No, not really. You're not even comparing apples and oranges here, it's apples and bricks. It's completely different that the government putting it's own set of rules on what you can/can't do. It's the same thing as voter ID laws.

 

[Saunders]

FTR, I don't really have a problem with what was "proposed" other than the ATF's new rulings muddying the waters. Hillary Creating "laws" and not telling people what those actually are other than "we'll tell you when you've done something wrong" is dangerous.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/01/05/new-atf-guidance-on-gun-sales-is-legally-meaningless-or-else-it-would-be-unlawful/