Reasonable gun control:Your views?

M

marlboroman84

New member
I'm posting this thread in response to some backlash I received on a thread about someone posting their gun views on an entertainment industry forum. What are your views on gun control? I'd say everyone here agrees with the right to carry, the right to own guns,the right to self-defense, and the right to purchase without alot of hassle. That said what are some good things about gun control in the general sense? What do you like or dislike? Here are a few of the topics that came to my mind.

Waiting periods, Background checks, Where you can carry, and Registering firearms.

Waiting periods: Personally I think a 1 day waiting period wouldn't kill anyone. My point in another thread was simply a few people buy a gun when angry and use it in the wrong manner and yes I know the argument "you can kill a person with anything" , but if just one person was saved because of a 1 day waiting period I think it'd be worth it. It's also gonna take alot of convincing to tell me a 1 day waiting period is just so horrible you can't live with it. I also think if you layaway a gun the waiting period should be void.

Background checks: I think it's fine to ensure you aren't a criminal,they should be confidential, and they should be free since they are mandatory.

Where you can carry: Personally if you're legal to carry I think you should be able to carry whereever. Sadly it's the idiots that take the gun to a bar, get trashed, and start "showing" it to people that causes the common sense CCL holder problems.

Registering Firearms: I don't believe it should be mandatory if you want to fine,but otherwise none of their business.

I understand it may be taboo for anyone "pro-gun" to say some of these things, but I think some common sense mixed in is good because it says we want to keep guns in good peoples hands, but out of those that would use them illegally. Perhaps if all firearms owners were better advocates of common sense, the smarter antis might understand us better. it's not a perfect world, but we can at least say we do our part to make our cause the "truer blue" let's say. As Capt Charlie's signature says What kind of ambassador are you?
 
To me 'reasonable' gun control means that any free citizen can have any weapon the military can have, under the same restrictions as the military. This is the wording of the second amendment.

For example, if you have the resources to buy an ICBM, you can do that. However, you can't keep it parked on a trailer outside your garage.

Waiting periods, and limitations on where you may carry, the whole idea of licensing people to carry concealed, and certainly firearms registration are unconstitutional and should be done away with. I am cool with the idea of optional registration though. As far as background checks go, I'm in favor of them, but only as a means to check for outstanding warrants and the like. If someone is a free US citizen, there is no constitutional or moral basis to selectively strip rights. You either have them all, or none of them.

I am also fully aware that my position is rather unpopular. I don't expect more than a small minority to agree with me.


I have been assured that my flame suit is fully up-to-date. :)
 
Reasonable Gun Control

Reasonable Gun Control will only occur following the repeal of the US Gun Control
Acts of 1968, and 1934 and anything in between and following 1968.
 
Waiting periods: Personally I think a 1 day waiting period wouldn't kill anyone. My point in another thread was simply a few people buy a gun when angry and use it in the wrong manner and yes I know the argument "you can kill a person with anything" , but if just one person was saved because of a 1 day waiting period I think it'd be worth it. It's also gonna take alot of convincing to tell me a 1 day waiting period is just so horrible you can't live with it. I also think if you layaway a gun the waiting period should be void.
Click to expand...

That notion has been proven to be false. The overwhelming majority of gun buyers are repeat buyers, meaning they already own one to start with. All a waiting period says to me is: Hey, you're not responsible enough to have one of these just yet. I don't need the government telling me when I can exercise a right. Other than that I agree with the rest of your post.

I do however like the idea of people showing proof of being able to handle a weapon if they intend to carry it concealed. Sounds hypocritical I know but it a shall issue state it doesn't prohibit just qualify.
 
i personally believe that it should be no harder to buy a weapon, any weapon, than it is to vote. you should be able to walk into any gun store, show your voter registration card and walk out with a handgun, concealed at that.

the requirements to be able to vote are 1) US citizenship, 2) over the age of 18, 3)never have been convicted of a felony. (this can be petitioned to have the right to vote resored in most places)

for some reason the same things that are considered "minor inconviences" when buying a gun would have people up in arms if applied to voting.

waiting periods for voting??? the aclu starts threatening lawsuits if people have to wait more than 5 min. in line to vote.

background checks??? i can't even fathom the (explitive) storm that would occur.

hell, i haven't even been asked for ID when i've voted, ever!

in closing, VOTE HAWKEN50 FOR PRESIDENT!!!
 
What about the victim in need of effective self-defense today?
Click to expand...

Before I continue I do wanna clarify I am not an advocate for waiting periods I'm just saying a 24 hour waiting period wouldn't bother me. That being said, if you are in desperate need of a handgun in under 24 hours you are either A.Intending on using that handgun for a felonius purpose or B. In immediate fear of your life. Now as far as being in immediate fear of your life it would seem to me that they type of situation you know you are going to need a gun in the next few hours seems like some sort of mob hit scenario. As many people on here that say "Even though I carry if I can avoid using it and go to the police, I will" then it seems rational if you need a gun to defend yourself in the next 24 hours then you need either protective custody or go stay with a relative or friend somewhere safe. I'm not sure I would want someone who is scared out of their mind running in and buying a gun anyway. If the person has no firearms experience they are more likely to kill someone else or injure themselves than kill their attacker. Everyone should have the right to self defense, but carrying a handgun is a huge liability and carries a great responsibility with it. It seems like everyone is very opposed to waiting periods, but other than the normal "big brother telling me what to do" or "i bought it I should be able to take it home" arguments nothing is very subsistent on what is so bad about a 1 day waiting period. Now remember I'm pro-gun and am only trying to discuss a point from what most pro-gun people would call "the opposite side of the fence", but if you were trying to explain to an anti-gun person why you think waiting periods are so wrong the arguments need more substance. I'm sure my opinion isn't popular, but I've always been a go against the flow kinda guy. I never fully accept either sides view if I don't fully agree with it. I won't be a sheeple.
 
Read the 2nd Amendment using the view of the founding fathers and the sentiment at the time our country was founded. The ability to own arms (not just firearms but "arms" in general) is the birthright of every American. As a right, citizens need no permission from the government to exercise the right "to keep and bear arms". In my view, this means purchasing a firearm ought to be no more difficult than walking into Sears and buying a Skil saw.

There are some limitations that can be placed on the exercise of one's rights. The freedom of speech does not include the right to incite a riot, slander or defame, nor shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. In other words, limits against irresponsible exercise of a right can be constitutional. Few would argue against laws limiting or prohibiting discharging a firearm in their city without exigent circumstances or at a firing range.

Who can buy a firearm?
Any legal citizen of the country who can legally vote is a good measure, but that leaves our kids out in the cold. Given that an 18 year old can be drafted into the military, I'd go along with allowing long guns to be purchased by youngsters and deferring their purchase of a handgun until they are 18 years old. People adjudicated as mentally incompetent cannot sign legally binding contracts or do many other things and I would include owning firearms as this requires mental focus to follow safety rules and judge safety issues. Renouncing your citizenship is a disqualifier as is a dishonorable military discharge, as well as conviction of certain henious felonies (treason, sedition, murder, rape, pedophilia, etc.) [dons flame resistant clothing] Felons (except for those previously mentioned) who complete a seven year period without a conviction for anything above an infraction should be able to own long guns. If they stay out of trouble for that long they've made an effort at staying legal.

What kinds of "arms"?
Essentially following the idea of the militia, if the arms in question can be borne and operated by an adult male in good fitness it flies. This eliminates certain items such as crew-servered weaponry like tanks, warplanes, artillery, ICBM's and N.B.C. weapons. You want an M203 grenade launcher? No problem, but keep in mind restrictions on explosive munitions like grenades, mortar rounds, etc. are legal (and likely to be very expensive).

Other "arms" include short barreled shotguns, body armor, helmets, bayonets, combat knives, crossbows, swords, sabers, night-vision, IR/FLIR, etc.

When and where you can bear arms
It should be easier for us to come to agreement on places where one should not bear arms -- courthouses, polling places during elections, in bars and probably a few other places. This might require a new ordinance - CUI - Carrying under the influence, too. It would certainly require some adjustments by our legal system too. Some miscreant shooting an unarmed or non-threating person becomes fair game. There would certainly need to be a change in liability laws too -- limited liability during self-defense and prohibitions against assailants making claims for injuries sustained during a crime.

Registration
If we were to assume that Congress would actually provide some support for "the militia" (hey, quit laughing) then registration could actually be of benefit. But this registration does not need to be invasive or even too very detailed. In a realisitic sense, knowing how many firearms of a given cartridge are in a region should be sufficient to allocate ammo provisions or other equipment. But this could only work if the states would promote organization and training of their militafolk to aid in times of crisis or disaster.

Registration, as we know it today, should be voluntary and maybe incentives provided by insurance companies to reduce premiums. This data should be treated as any other "personally identifiable" information like credit card numbers, SSNs, bank accounts, etc - encrypted on computers and limited access with accountability (logging who accessed what information).

That's my $0.02...uh... $0.25 worth. :D
 
if you are in desperate need of a handgun in under 24 hours you are either A.Intending on using that handgun for a felonius purpose...
Click to expand...

even if a criminal was aquiring a handgun legally (which studies have shown they don't) it's probably a little more than naive to think they are too stupid to plan thier crimes around a waiting period.

gunshop clerk- "sorry sir, you'll have to come back tommrow to pick up this gun you just bought"
criminal- "aww crap. if i have to wait untill tommrow to rob that bank, i might just as well get a job and become a productive member of society."

it's a meaningless requirement that does nothing to prevent crime, and even if it is only a minor inconvience, a minor inconvience here...a minor inconvience there, it adds up to a major inconvience and more real quick for someone who's just trying to obey the law.
 
While a 24 hour waiting period may not bother you, consider what the Supreme court has said about rights in general;

A right delayed is a right denied.

A right may not be taxed nor any fee imposed to exercise the right.

That being said, if you are in desperate need of a handgun in under 24 hours you are either A.Intending on using that handgun for a felonius purpose or B. In immediate fear of your life. Now as far as being in immediate fear of your life it would seem to me that they type of situation you know you are going to need a gun in the next few hours seems like some sort of mob hit scenario.
Click to expand...

See: Rodney King Riots, Los Angeles, April 1992

The rioting was not limited only to the South Central area of L.A. as most folks think. There were outbreaks of violence in several areas of the city, but the riots in South Central received most of the attention.

As an amusing side note, many L.A. residents expressed surprise and outrage when they found out that California had a 15 day waiting period to buy a handgun.
 
Well, I understand the reasoning behind the waiting period. About preventing spur of the moment murders. But not everyone has to wait to buy a gun. I am American, born to American parents. I just happened to be born in Saudi Arabia. I also served four years in the Navy. Now I don't know if either of these facts influences my background check in anyway, but when I buy a gun, I don't have to wait any longer than the five minutes it takes for the clerk to call whoever it is that he calls for the ok to complete the transaction. So my point is, not everyone has to wait, but everyone CAN get mad. People who don't have to wait to buy a weapon, then for some reason get in a situation that they feel the need to murder someone, yet don't have a gun on hand. Can just buy one like they normally do, thereby nullifying the whole waiting period.

I do think background checks are a good idea. Provided the way the check is performed is changed if it hasn't already. The way I understand it, the background check simply sees if there are any outstanding warrants associated with the submited social security number. Not whether or not the person is actually a convicted felon or even a real living person for that matter. If this is no longer the case then no problem.

Limiting were someone can carry makes no real sense to me at all. A gun owner can just as easily defend someone elses life in a bank or a federal building, as they can on the street.

Registering handguns is a very bad idea. It's the first step towards the end.:cool:
 
Background checks are reasonable, although I'd like an "already approved" ID card or something. As mentioned, most of us already own guns, so what's one more?

Waiting periods--why? see above--maybe for your first gun, but after that, what's the point?

Registration--never--Just more government meddling in personal business--see above AGAIN--If I'm a legal firearms owner, why do they need to know everything I own?

CCW--should be legal everywhere, no restrictions, or special requirements--again if I'm responsible enough to own ANY gun, what difference does it make what or where I can carry it?
 
I believe that any gun control is an infringes on my right to "keep and bear arms" is illegal.

Just to remind you of what it says "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

"shall not be infringed." carries a lot of weight when I read it - and I firmly believe that our rights are being infringed today.
 
if just one person was saved because of a 1 day waiting period I think it'd be worth it
Click to expand...
"If just one person was saved because of" government control of calorie content in restaurant foods "I think it'd be worth it.":barf:

"If just one person was saved because of" outlawing motorcycles "I think it'd be worth it.":barf:

"If just one person was saved because of" prohibiting swimming pools "I think it'd be worth it.":barf:

In a country of 300 million people, the "if just one person was saved" argument means that anything and everything can be controlled by the government.
 
Reasonable gun control: Your views?
Click to expand...
There is nothing "reasonable" about the salesman's foot in your door...

There is an Arabic Parable about camels in the tent...
If you allow the camel to stick his nose into the tent...
soon you will have his head in the tent and then his neck and soon the whole camel!

ALL GUN CONTROL, in all of history, has proven to CONTROL only the people...
It has never controlled crime...
if just one person was saved
Click to expand...
At what point are people responsible for themselves...
Before Karl Marx they had always been responsible for themselves...

NEVER GIVE AN INCH.
 
The basic problem is with the term "reasonable". Maybe to you a one day waiting period is "reasonable"... to me, it isn't... to a Clinton or a Kennedy a wait of one month (or more) might be "reasonable".

The "One-gun-a-month" proposal gets a lot of play as "reasonable". If you are the type who is only interested in one gun that might be "reasonable". To someone who goes to a gunshow and sees three different firearms which he has been looking for for years, "One-gun" is not "reasonable".

How much ammo is "reasonable"? 50 rounds? 100 rounds? 1000 reounds? 10,000 rounds? To someone who doesn't shoot much or only hunts occationally one 20 round box is pleanty for the year. To a competative shooter 10,000 rounds per caliber might be a light year.

Once you begin with "reasonable" restrictions, those restrictions WILL be tightened by those who don't like guns. Just prior to Congress passing the Brady Act, Chucky Schummer, Sarah Brady, Diane Finstien and others where all over the media cliaming repeatedly that this was as far as they wanted to go. That they were not trying to take peoples' guns away, but that this was just "reasonable gun-control". The DAY after Brady passed, Chucky, Sarah, Diane, John Kerry and a few others were on the steps of the capitol building introducing "Brady 2". It had more "reasonable" gun-control proposals. Proposals such as, limiting the amount of ammo and reloading componants one could possess. How many firearms one could possess. Licensing of all handgun owners. Licensing fees of upto $600 per year for "collectors". Manditory waiting periods of longer and longer periods. And on... and on... and on!

"Reasonable gun-control"? Anyone convicted of a violent crime with a firearm gets 10 years automaticly added top their sentance. Any convicted felon aquiring/possessing a firearm gets an automatic 10 years...

Oh, wait... those laws have been on the books for yars! Too bad that the liberals and gun hates don't want them to be enforced.
 
Waiting periods, Background checks, Where you can carry, and Registering firearms.
Click to expand...
Waiting periods: Only effective for the first gun purchase. Doesn't matter if I have to wait a month to buy a handgun, I already have more than I can comfortably carry.

Background checks: Again, that only matters for the first gun purchase.

Where you can carry: unenforceable without metal detectors, thorough searches, and guards able and willing to back up the searches with force if necessary. Effective searches, even at government buildings, are incredibly rare.

Registering firearms: unenforceable. You don't know who has firearms unless they're already registered. Purchase-based registration can be denied -- "I lost it," or "I sold it." Other registration can be complied with, then denied, or it can be ignored as it has been in California (AWB registration), Canada, and everywhere else post-purchase registration has been tried.

Both waiting periods and background checks fail to acknowledge the existence of a black market.


Freedom from firearms regulation means a few more people might do bad things. If that's too tough for you, buy some property in the woods, and on your way there pick up a copy of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top