If There Were No Antis What Gun Laws Would You Have?

Status
Not open for further replies.

shotgunjoel

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
1,577
Location
illinois
Here's a question that's probably been asked before but if everyone in the whole world was pro gun and no one wanted to take away your gun rights what kind of gun laws would you think would be appropriate? Like I'm thinking laws that really would protect people, not feel good or restrictive laws. I think that having a basic proficiency test to carry concealed would make a lot of sense and would actually save innocent lives from someone carrying that doesn't know the difference between a Smith and a Glock. Yeah yeah I know, it's your right to carry and there probably shouldn't be a test or even ccw permits at all, we could just carry. Maybe we shouldn't have permits in our pie in the sky world with no antis, so what I'm saying is what would you do?
 
my pre purchase form would be "do you intend to commit a crime with this firearm?"
No- ok, sale approved
Yes- no sale.

aside form that i wouldnt make laws to restrict objects, as they lack mens rea and are incapable of actus reus. id make murder, and robbery illegal... oh wait they are now. wouldnt of known. you woulda thought the guns were the problem
 
I would make it a misdemeanor to advertise a PSL as a Dragunov or a CETME as an HK91, and a felony to charge more than $1000 for any stock AR or AK!
 
A crime against a person is natural law, so whether you shoot them, or what with, isn't really an issue. Same goes for hitting a bystander. You're responsible for what/who you hit.
Personal responsibility. When you try to legislate it, you're really just giving a crutch to those who won't take it for themselves.

No "gun" laws, just Golden Rule stuff.
 
My idea of sensible gun control:

1. No sales of long arms to those under 18.

2. No sales of handguns to or possession by those under 21.

3. No sales to or possession by aliens illegally in the United States.

4. No sales to those prohibited by court order (subject to strict 2nd Amendment scrutiny) from possessing a firearm.

5. No sales to those adjudicated mentally incompetent, unless and until adjudicated mentally competent.

6. No sales to those renouncing their citizenship, unless and until citizenship restored.

7. No sales of full auto weapons without the purchaser paying a substantial bond and completing either an authorized extensive training course or military qualification.

8. No export of firearms without federal export license.

9. No import of firearms without federal import license.

10. No manufacture of firearms other than for personal use without federal manufacturing license.

11. No sale of firearms not meeting reasonable safety standards, said standards based solely on safe operation of firearm as designed, and NOT to include safety devices, locks, or specific features or designs.

12. Destructive devices subject to system similar to current system.

13. Firearms on airplanes must be checked and secured in baggage, inaccessible to passengers.

14. No sales to or possession by members of an organization dedicated to violence against the American people or their lawful representatives or agents.

15. No sales to or possession by agents of foreign governments, INCLUDING diplomatic personnel, except as provided by international agreement or military protocol.

16. No possession of, IN A PUBLIC PLACE, by persons otherwise prohibited from firearm possession of realistic non-guns. Realistic non-gun is defined as a non-gun likely to be mistaken for a genuine firearm by a non-expert. A rebuttable presumption that a firearm is NOT realistic is created by the addition of a conspicuous orange colored muzzle cap.
 
No gun laws at all is wishful thinking. There is no such thing in this nation as a right with no restrictions of any kind.

The truth is, I don't have a problem with many of the existing gun laws other than they are to be the basis for more gun laws. I don't want felons carrying guns. I don't mind if full-auto weapons are more difficult and expensive to own than other guns. (Although current prices are insane.) I don't mind destructive devices being regulated. (Although I don't regard SPAS 12s and Streetsweepers as destructive devices.

As a matter of supporting gun rights and foiling antis, I would rather tear them all away and start at zero. I would mostly like to see states be able to make their own laws again.
 
Simple. Any adult can own a gun unless prohibited from ownership for reason of violent crime or proven mental defect.
 
4. No sales to those prohibited by court order (subject to strict 2nd Amendment scrutiny) from possessing a firearm.

This could potentially include anyone. I believe such a prohibition should be reserved for persons convicted of a violent, or potentially violent felony: murder, attempted murder, assault, home invasion, burglery, etc (with or without a deadly weapon).



A rebuttable presumption that a firearm is NOT realistic is created by the addition of a conspicuous orange colored muzzle cap.

I'll rebutt that presumption. A conspicuous orange colored muzzle cap does not necessarily insure a firearm is inoperable. It could be a deliberate ruse.
 
Duke of Doubt, why 21 to buy handgun but 18 to buy rifle? You are an adult at age 18 and should be accorded all of the legal rights of an adult. (For the record I think that should also apply to alcohol.)

If you are old enough to serve in the military you are old enough to purchase a handgun.
 
What a laundry list Duke.Vermont,Alaska, and many,many other states do not agree and they are getting along just fine.

Respectfully, the reason Alaska and Vermont's gun laws work is that these are ALREADY their law - because they are federal laws they operate within. As a former Vermont resident, I can not stress enough that the smooth functioning of their absence of state laws relies upon a specific framework of common sense the minimal federal guidelines largely provide.
 
14. No sales to or possession by members of an organization dedicated to violence against the American people or their lawful representatives or agents.

Interesting, had this law been in effect in 1775 it would have disarmed both The Sons Of Liberty and the Minutemen.

Things that make you go hmmmm?
 
What I was trying to say is what laws would you have if you didn't need to worry about the whole slippery slope issue. Hey Duke, on number 14 have you ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?
 
No gun laws at all is wishful thinking. There is no such thing in this nation as a right with no restrictions of any kind.

Actually, I think that's more "privileges" than "rights"...


Me, I'd have no laws. Committing a crime is committing a crime, whether you do it with a glock or a rock. Punish for the crime committed, not for criminal "potential".
 
Not specifically a gun law, but it does apply:

If you take Conscientious Objector status to avoid military service entirely (does not pertain to those who still serve in a non-combat role), you forfeit your civil rights for life and are barred from public office.

Why? A penalty needs to exist for those who take this status to avoid it being abused. Those who will not protect this nation deserve no say in how it is run.
 
1. It shall be illegal for persons convicted of a felony to own or use a firearm.

2. It shall be illegal for persons certified to be mentally incompetent to own or use a firearm.

3. State and local authorities shall not have the authority of restricting firearms or associated products in any way.
 
How many times do you need to read and hear it to understand it:

"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."

Which part isn't clear?
 
I deliberately left felons off my list of prohibited persons. I have become convinced that it serves no useful purpose to prohibit them from legal purchase.

A rehabilitated felon is no more dangerous than anyone else.

An unrehabilitated felon will steal a gun rather than buy it anyway; that's half the fun for him. I once knew a guy who insisted on stealing his steaks from the market. He could have afforded them. But stealing them added to his dining experience. I refused to eat any. So one day without my knowledge he dropped some off at a mutual friend's place for grilling and came around only after I had come over and eaten my fill. He was grinning and laughing as if it was the funniest joke in the world. He kept telling me to "eliminate the evidence." That's about the maturity level of most garden variety robbers.

Besides, so much stuff out there is a felony these days that shouldn't be. Insider trading. Tax evasion. Habitual offender driving after revocation. Kiting a modest (by most standards) check. Technical gun crimes. Possession of certain prescription medications other than by the original prescribee (well, that one is debatable).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top