i have a Massachusetts LTC-A and a C&R......both state and federal governments already know i am a gun owner.
also, this isnt 1950s Soviet Russia, i highly doubt the government is going to send unmarked vans to your house and haul you off to the Gulag.
Gun laws do not deter criminals from using guns. They are willing to commit armed robbery and/or murder, so tacking on a gun charge is like a parking ticket. If by some miracle you were able to remove so-called "assault weapons" from criminals, they would still have access to normal guns (which, contrary to what the media would suggest, are still just as deadly) or other weapons (kitchen knives, gasoline, home-made explosives, etc).
What gun control DOES do is limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. It detracts from the Second Amendment, potentially creates situations where we cannot use a firearm in self defense, and does nothing to prevent the use of guns in crime.
Instead of taking the easy route and applying the bandaid to the papercut that is guns, why not look at the prevailing issues in society instead: our revolving door prison system, poor mental health care, and a need for better social programs for at-risk youth.
I am a gun owner, and I am all about preventing as much violence as possible. Attacking the millions of law-abiding gun owners is not the way to do it. Tackling the problems that plague society is.
I implore the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court to come together, push aside the red herring that is the tool, and look at the core issue. If we preserve the Bill of Rights, and stop fighting each other to instead work together across party lines and tackle the real problem, I'm sure we can come up with some great ideas to reduce violent crime in our society, all without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens.
Two more bits I would like to add:
1) Gun control hurts small-business accessory manufacturers. This hurts our economy.
2) The gun industry is the ONLY industry where you are treated as guilty-until-proven-innocent. That flies in the face of our justice system.
I am a concealed weapons permit holder in California and I strongly oppose any further 2nd Amendment restrictions. I would agree to be restricted by the same measures you would restrict our military and law enforcement, as we hope to protect ourselves from the same evils that they do. Previous gun legislation has done very little to prevent crime, and has greatly increased criminal boldness when the populace is left unarmed. There is no possible way to provide enough police protection to ensure safety, so the best we can do is to provide as many good guys as possible with the ability to prevent and supress violent crime themselves.
If they wanted the opinion of us, what would be the point? What do WE want? I want MY voice to heard. I want them to know that an AWB isn't a solution. I want them to hear that message.You really think the Obama crowd at the White House wants feedback from PRO-SECOND AMENDMENT citizens.
Very well stated. By the way:My response to the WH.gov
As an elected school board official and parent and grandparent, I urge you to look at the mental health and school safety issues and realize that the GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM.
Blaming guns is lazy leadership and nothing more than crisis exploitation to further an agenda that will do nothing to reduce violence.
Remember last Friday, 320,000,000 responsible gun owners didn't shoot anybody.
Done.You guys may also want to provide links to your information or your studies to back up your claims. It helps the argument when you have something to back your claims up.
Banning certain firearms and accessories based on their looks, action or size is counter-productive. Both in practicality and politically. Instead, you should work towards protecting the areas where you now forbid people to defend themselves and children. One of the teachers in Newtown reportedly spoke with the killer. In that time, she might have been able to stop him, had she not been forbidden to have the means with which to do so.