Gun Control

[Saunders]

The gun issue has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Every other First World nation has reasonable curbs on gun ownership. That's all America wants. This isn't some government takeover, and that hysteria clouds the question.

Knapp, how do you define "reasonable curbs"?

I want them too, but I don't know that they are ultimately workable in this country.

Start with:

1. National license (ala drivers license) so it's the same everywher, and is mandatory.

2. Expand NICS system.

3. Increase availability of training, safety classes.

4. Increase wait times for first time buyers.

5. Cut the drug war.

6. Address socioeconomic issues, specifically in the inner cities.

 

[Redux]

If you decrease legal availability of getting a gun or put in a million checks to keep people from getting guns that shouldn't have them, it will only drive the availability of getting guns on the secondary/black market. Which is worse? Guns are like drugs. If you want to use, you find a way to get what you need.

Flooding the nation with guns & bullets like we've been doing is significantly worse than a nation with fewer guns. The fewer guns in the system, the harder it is for criminals to get them. This is simple, basic logic.

My point is that I don't believe there will be fewer guns. The loss of being able to get a gun legally will be made up through illegal ways. Also, more illegally bought guns gives money to really "great and nice" people. I would bet it would lead to things being even worse.

This has not proved true in any other first-world nation. It is an unfounded fear and not a valid excuse to not move forward on this problem.

Again, you are comparing America to very different cultures.

 

[cm husker]

If you decrease legal availability of getting a gun or put in a million checks to keep people from getting guns that shouldn't have them, it will only drive the availability of getting guns on the secondary/black market. Which is worse? Guns are like drugs. If you want to use, you find a way to get what you need.

Flooding the nation with guns & bullets like we've been doing is significantly worse than a nation with fewer guns. The fewer guns in the system, the harder it is for criminals to get them. This is simple, basic logic.

My point is that I don't believe there will be fewer guns. The loss of being able to get a gun legally will be made up through illegal ways. Also, more illegally bought guns gives money to really "great and nice" people. I would bet it would lead to things being even worse.

I sort of agree with this, but if we kill the drug war, which we absolutely should, the demand for illegal guns will plummet (as will everyday homicides).

I don't know that a black market is viable/sustainable for the guy who wants to carry out a mass shooting or even just murder his wife. There's just not enough demand to make people take the risks associated with selling to that smaller market.

 

[Saunders]

Also, if you used the argument that the government shouldn't regulate illegal drugs just because people will find them through other means, you'd be laughed at.

Even if that's true, it serve as a good reason for the government to just sit on its hands and do nothing.

By who? Isn't that the very argument for decriminalization.

 

[Redux]

If we made drugs legal for people 25yrs or older, drug related crime and prison overpopulation would disappear.

I have no information to support that claim, but it's a nice thought.

 

[Danny Bateman]

The blanket protection they get from lawsuits is garbage. It disgusts me that the Sandy Hook victims still haven't been able to receive a cent in compensation from them.

Because it opens up pandoras box. Should people be able to sue Budweiser or GM when someone is killed via a DUI or negligent driving?

On a beer bottle, they have to put a warning right there on the bottle to use their product responsibly. Do you get such a warning with or on your firearm? I ask as someone who has never purchased one. If you do, I assume it's on a waiver you sign before purchase.

But again, a hearken back to my earlier point. Intoxicants are designed to recreationally alter their moods. Cars are designed to transport people. Guns are designed specifically to injure and kill.

Anybody can use a product for something counter to its intended use. I just think we perhaps should consider holding the deadliest product to a different standard.

 

[cm husker]

The gun issue has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Every other First World nation has reasonable curbs on gun ownership. That's all America wants. This isn't some government takeover, and that hysteria clouds the question.

Knapp, how do you define "reasonable curbs"?
I want them too, but I don't know that they are ultimately workable in this country.

Start with:
1. National license (ala drivers license) so it's the same everywher, and is mandatory.

2. Expand NICS system.

3. Increase availability of training, safety classes.

4. Increase wait times for first time buyers.

5. Cut the drug war.

6. Address socioeconomic issues, specifically in the inner cities.

Those all sound reasonable, especially the tangential ideas like 5 and 6.

My only concern with the first 4 is that if you have a legal market and you make it more expensive or difficult on first time buyers, you'll definitely create a system where existing owners sell illegally (i.e., a black market). This would be similar to what we seeing in the cigarette industry right now between VA and NY.

I wonder what % of guns involved in illegal shootings were purchased legally by the shooter.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Also, if you used the argument that the government shouldn't regulate illegal drugs just because people will find them through other means, you'd be laughed at.

Even if that's true, it serve as a good reason for the government to just sit on its hands and do nothing.

By who? Isn't that the very argument for decriminalization.

There's reasonable evidence that suggests decriminalizing marijuana would be a good thing, and I'm very much on board.

I'm not for the government suddenly decriminalizing heroin or opioids.

 

[TAKODA]

First of all, I would like to send prayers to all those affected by the senseless and horrendous massacre in Orlando, Fla. This hardly seams the appropriate time but since it was brought up by President Obama in his address to the Nation yesterday (Gun control) and it sparked this thread, I will add my tidbit and move on.

As a law abiding citizen/gun owner, I am all for further/deeper scrutiny prior to obtaining a permit allowing the purchase of any gun, however, don't tell me what I can or cannot buy, how many or what kind of guns I can own!

I have paid my dues to this Country and will continue to defend it, if and when it becomes necessary.

Like previously stated by Saunders, the assault weapons that are mentioned are no different than a hunting rifle these days (not full auto weapons)!

Do they hold more ammunition than a .375, .45/70, 270, 336, .30-30, .308, 30/06, .40, .45, 44mag or 9mm, yes!

Are they more lethal than any of the others I mentioned, no!

So the question may be asked, why would anyone want such a gun?

The answer is, because it's available, and if someone is cleared (I would agree to deeper scrutiny) to own any firearm, leave them the F alone!

Again, as a legal gun owner, I have zero problem increasing background checks to insure those who are looking to acquire them, fit the bill.

*Edit, (if there is any mental health issues, group affiliation or any other provable concerns), then they do not pass the background check, period!

 

[Landlord]

 

[Saunders]

The blanket protection they get from lawsuits is garbage. It disgusts me that the Sandy Hook victims still haven't been able to receive a cent in compensation from them.

Because it opens up pandoras box. Should people be able to sue Budweiser or GM when someone is killed via a DUI or negligent driving?

On a beer bottle, they have to put a warning right there on the bottle to use their product responsibly. Do you get such a warning with or on your firearm? I ask as someone who has never purchased one. If you do, I assume it's on a waiver you sign before purchase.

But again, a hearken back to my earlier point. Intoxicants are designed to recreationally alter their moods. Cars are designed to transport people. Guns are designed specifically to injure and kill.

Anybody can use a product for something counter to its intended use. I just think we perhaps should consider holding the deadliest product to a different standard.

1. Yes. All over the owners manual.

2. Alcohol is a poison. But when used responsibly, we as humans enjoy it.

Punishing manufacturers for people doing illegal things with a product is a horrible precedent.

 

[Saunders]

The gun issue has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Every other First World nation has reasonable curbs on gun ownership. That's all America wants. This isn't some government takeover, and that hysteria clouds the question.

Knapp, how do you define "reasonable curbs"?
I want them too, but I don't know that they are ultimately workable in this country.

Start with:
1. National license (ala drivers license) so it's the same everywher, and is mandatory.

2. Expand NICS system.

3. Increase availability of training, safety classes.

4. Increase wait times for first time buyers.

5. Cut the drug war.

6. Address socioeconomic issues, specifically in the inner cities.

Those all sound reasonable, especially the tangential ideas like 5 and 6.

My only concern with the first 4 is that if you have a legal market and you make it more expensive or difficult on first time buyers, you'll definitely create a system where existing owners sell illegally (i.e., a black market). This would be similar to what we seeing in the cigarette industry right now between VA and NY.

I wonder what % of guns involved in illegal shootings were purchased legally by the shooter.

Unfortunately, that's going to happen whether you just restrict them, or ban them outright.

 

[cm husker]

The gun issue has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Every other First World nation has reasonable curbs on gun ownership. That's all America wants. This isn't some government takeover, and that hysteria clouds the question.

Knapp, how do you define "reasonable curbs"?
I want them too, but I don't know that they are ultimately workable in this country.

Start with:
1. National license (ala drivers license) so it's the same everywher, and is mandatory.

2. Expand NICS system.

3. Increase availability of training, safety classes.

4. Increase wait times for first time buyers.

5. Cut the drug war.

6. Address socioeconomic issues, specifically in the inner cities.

Those all sound reasonable, especially the tangential ideas like 5 and 6.
My only concern with the first 4 is that if you have a legal market and you make it more expensive or difficult on first time buyers, you'll definitely create a system where existing owners sell illegally (i.e., a black market). This would be similar to what we seeing in the cigarette industry right now between VA and NY.

I wonder what % of guns involved in illegal shootings were purchased legally by the shooter.

Unfortunately, that's going to happen whether you just restrict them, or ban them outright.

True. That's why I'm all over the place on whether we should ban them or make no changes. My sense is that more changes, short of an all out ban,would have little effect and would create a more vibrant black market than an outright ban would allow.

It's a a tough nut, no doubt.

 

[Scratchtown]

But "leftists" aren't the only ones who want gun control. Moderates, who make up the majority of the American voting bloc, do too.

Moderates exhibit left leaning agenda. Which Gun Control is.

It's why they are moderate. They lean left and right.

 

[Redux]

Let me put this into perspective:

I purchased my first hand gun a year ago. I bought it for protection against break ins and in the event of mass hysteria (regardless of how slim a chance either events occur) and because I wanted one to go out and shoot with (target practice).

It took me probably a year and a half to finally go about getting one. All it included was going to the sheriffs department and paying $10 for a purchase permit, a few days later I had it and went and bought a gun and took it homr that day.

We could very easily make aquiring a purchase permit much more difficult. There have to be steps we can take that don't go to the extreme of making firearms illegal to own or purchase. I'm open to hearing them, but 9/10 people just suggest they be made illegal.