PowerG
Member
My view. If they can't be trusted with a firearm, they should not be walking the streets.
How free do you want to be poll
- Thread starter JVaughn
- Start date
- Status
PowerG
Member
I would think that if prison was a place that you REALLY didn't want to go, crime might be a little less commonplace. Nothing overtly cruel or anything, but growing your own food or other work required.
Guess I am a fool then. If someone is that dangerous and not to be trusted why are they not breaking rocks in North Dakota? If they are really that big of a danger to the rest of the population put them in an unpleasant place until they expire. Other wise do not try to limit my freedom under the pretense of protecting me from the bad people of the world. That is pretty much say "won't someone please think of the children". I can protect myself just fine thanks. I mean were I am leaglly allowed the right to life...
Last edited:
Ole Humpback
Member
Define assault weapon. If its a semi-auto replica of a military arm, its not an assault weapon. Also, define background check. I know a few convicted felons who were convicted (note that I said convicted not committed) of non-violent felonies for things such as money laundering, forgery, and other "paper crimes" that resulted in no damage to anyone but they are all Class C felonies. Sure, if someone commits a felony offense with a firearm, they loose their gun rights for life. But all felons loosing most all their rights regardless of crime committed is a bit like asking for blood.
Also, does this apply to things like suppressors, night vision, full auto arms, DD's, and other things that you need NFA/FEL registrations for? That whole ball of wax needs reform but I think that just passing a background check in order to buy a grenade launcher & rounds for it is a bit loose on control.
FWIW, I voted for limited control as that is about all the control I feel I can deal with. Also, I don't have a desire to own a FA or DD, but the fact that several of those laws interfere with things I may want to do in the future that involve semi auto arms or accessories to any kind of firearm.
The Sarge
Member
Shall not be infringed....I graduated Ms. Jennings 4th grade class. I got it. No Federal Government control whatsoever concerning firearms. You a bad guy and use a firearm in committing a crime we give you the night night needle. Dirt nap.
Law abiding citizens are covered under the Constitution.
Mental patients etc. cannot get drivers licenses in many cases and that is usually a State Law. Firearms should be covered under State laws. The Feds have no business in the firearms arena.
Law abiding citizens are covered under the Constitution.
Mental patients etc. cannot get drivers licenses in many cases and that is usually a State Law. Firearms should be covered under State laws. The Feds have no business in the firearms arena.
blarby
Member
False ! It wasn't a mistake, I saw no intent to erase it on the document in DC. They copied it a bunch of times too....same structure of words.
I believe they were actually pretty close to the mark with their intent.
The fact that they started with "no" law other than this, and went forward to where we are law-bound today is pretty decent.
Imagine if they had written regulation in there, where we'd be !
I voted #5. Even with the statement as written, encroachment has occurred irregardless.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
I would be interested to hear from the three people who voted for moderate control, as to what they mean and why.
^^
Indeed.
Indeed.
leadaddict
Member
Great poll. Interesting results. I voted #4. In the same way we need to deprives some people of liberty (think prison) there are some who we don't need to keep in prison, yet also (for a time at least) need to be restricted from having firearms. Hence background checks are needed.
To all the people who are saying gun control laws only affect people who actually follow the law and therefore are irrelevant really need to pull their heads out of their... if that is the case, then what is the point of having any laws, period?
I would vote for some middle ground between limited and moderate gun control. Background checks, illegal for felons to have firearms (but there is an appeals process) shall issue ccw, no registration, no AWB, no mag restrictions.
I would vote for some middle ground between limited and moderate gun control. Background checks, illegal for felons to have firearms (but there is an appeals process) shall issue ccw, no registration, no AWB, no mag restrictions.
mgmorden
Member
Because MOST laws punish people who have done bad things. They incarcerate such individuals for the safety of others.
IE, if you kill someone, then there is no further doubt as to your character. You have committed a heinous act and must be removed from society for the protection of others.
Same with theft. Same with rape. Same with assualt/battery. We're talking things that have a direct and measurable impact.
Now, consider "gun laws". They're not about punishing anything actually wrong. A gun sitting on a table or even in one's hands harms NOTHING. Its all about what they MIGHT do. The thing is, everything that one MIGHT do with the gun that is negative is ALREADY ILLEGAL.
Its not that no laws have purposes - it's that they LAYERED laws have no purpose. If you want to prevent murder you make murder a crime and anyone who commits it gets charged with murder.
Last edited:
Yup. Murder is still murder. Does not matter if you use a gun or a knife or an ax or a sharp pointy stick. Punish someone for the actions they took, not the tool with which they did it.
Who is the victim if you break a gun law, now who is the victim if you break a law about murder. See the difference?
leadaddict
Member
I agree most laying is bad. Some 'layering' can be good though. We don't allow most people to have guns when they meet the president. Probably a good layer.
beatledog7
Member
It's a gun forum. Did you expect a lot of 1s, 2s, and 3s?
The Sarge
Member
Ugh...well....we are talking about law abiding citizens here and gun restrictions on those law abiding citizens who have committed no crime but see their Constitutional rights infringed. I have some Windex for that belly button windshield if needed.formula94 said:
Bobson
Member
Deleted.
Last edited:
leadaddict
Member
I think the difference is that our president is someone who lots of people already have the motivation to kill and I'm sure receives death threats on a regular basis. He is also a person we as a country have great motivation to not allow him to be killed. My point is that sometimes preventitive measures do make sense.
<this is in response to a post that is no longer there...>
<this is in response to a post that is no longer there...>
Last edited:
M91/30
Member
I voted for Limited gun control, even though criminals can get guns regardless, having a background check helps prevent them from buying from reputable dealers and misuseing the firearm to do harm which may reflect back to the honest shop owner. I also believe that there should be mandatory education to anyone who intends on owning a firearm. It doesn't have to be much. Kinda like a Hunters safety course, education on how to safely handle the gun, basic functions of the gun, maintaining, safe shooting area's(bullet ricochet etc) and safe storage of the gun. Also a short class range visit with a simple handling responsibility test where you actually handle guns and then shoot a couple rounds. As far as a license goes it would be exactly like my hunter ed card is. Simple on record proof that I have completed a short course on responsible ownership and use. If a person is being irresponsible and is reported by forsay a range officer or other safety personnel like game wardens etc you should have to retest on your own dime(a small fee of 25$ or similar) and if you are a repeat offender potential suspension of "license". Of course this is far from a finished system and needs things worked out like, "What happens if my license is suspended, where to my firearms go" "What if an angry range officer or similar wrongly accuses me of improper use?" and various other issues. But that is what i believe would make firearms a more accepted thing, as well as reducing gun related non criminal accidents and whatnot. Of course guns used in crime will likely stay the same but thats more of a law enforcement issue (more so law system issue) for not stopping the importation of illegal guns and stopping suspected offenders before its a problem, IE gangs. If you have any thoughts or comments for me I am interested.
JVaughn
Member
Good point. I say an ID check to verify age in the same vein as buying beer requires a show of ID is perfectly fine. I will even go so far as to say it has to be a government issued ID which (hopefully) verifies citizenship. I don't want the seller to make a copy or write down my numbers however.
Yes, we are serious. We want to be free, we know there are costs. Some people will get guns to use in the commission of crimes, others will get them to prevent the crime from happening to them or their families.
+1
+1 on this as well
JVaughn
Member
My understanding of the actual definition of assault weapon is selective fire, as in, it has a full auto option and in some cases a 3-rd option. I may be wrong in this definition.
Simply put - someone verifies my identification and compares it to some list somewhere to see if I am allowed to purchase.
Yes, I think so.
JVaughn
Member
I was hoping there wouldn't be many.
BobTheTomato
Member
Who determines what a mental illness is? Some people think that owning a gun means that you are mentally ill. The tea party and Ron Paul supporters have been called domestic terrorists. In the vast majority of history laws have been put into place to keep "undesirables" from defending themselves.
I choose LIBERTY. It means I am free to make my own decisions. Yes I understand that this means that there might be bad people out there who will use freedom to hurt others. In the end it is my life and I should be able to defend myself as I see necessary. All of the laws that have been put into place so far have not stopped mass shootings.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
