Ante up anti gunners...what will you allow for normal gun owners, what do you want?

[2aguy]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Since online a gun and voting are both basic civil rights.....would you agree to a tax on voting and a test before you can vote?

Are you unaware of how the constitution and judicial review works?

I am well aware of both.......do you want a tax on voting and a test before you can vote......?

Look up the 14th Amendment and get back to us.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Show me some evidence that the average American gun owner uses their firearms to commit crimes.

Adam Lanza had no criminal record. Neither did the San Bernardino couple. Neither did the Orlando shooter.

You'll never stop all mass killings no matter what you do.
A large truck did a fine job not to long ago.
And the Orlando shooter was investigated by the feds for terrorist ties yet they did nothing. The San Bernardino couple were muslim terrorist and the wife was let into the country with no vetting.
How about we start complaining about our lax approach to the laws on the books?

Because running people over in a street is the same thing as ....running people over in a classroom? Come on, be honest about the issue AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT.

Trucks are designed to transport people and items. Guns are designed to kill. Get a grip.

So you're in favor of banning trucks on our public streets?

No. There is a societal purpose to having trucks on streets.

Just as there is a Constitutional reason to own firearms.

 

[2aguy]

I see, so a bunch of law-abiding folks registered their cars and had them seized?

You're getting hilariously stomped in this thread. At every turn.

Not by you.

You seem to be a straight man in a comedy duo.

you MIGHT want to reread the post I responded to

I'm trying to find a parallel analogy to your absurd situation where law-abiding gun owners have their guns seized.

I can't find one. Because it doesn't exist.

It's happened in many countries around the world.

As a consequence of registration in the absence of any stated law requiring confiscation?

In modern times, in a first-world country?

Please cite.

Australia

Britain.

Germany in the 1920s was a first world country...that is when they registered their guns...citing every single argument you guys are making here.....

10 years later...the socialists used those lists to take guns away from their political opposition and Jews...how did that turn out?

 

[Al Azar]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Our gun culture isn't a problem...we have 357,000,000 guns in private hands.......and in 2015 we had 586 accidental gun deaths.

We had 8,124 gun murders. Out of 357,000,000 privately held guns........do you realize how small a number that is in a country with 320,000,000 people? And 90% of those doing the shooting cannot legally buy, own or carry the guns....

Normal gun owners are not the problem....

Think about that.

Americans use guns 1,500,000 times a year to stop violent criminal attack and to save lives...many times stopping mass shooters...........

The actual problem that we have is inner city criminals who have been raised for generations by single teenage mothers...creating young males with impulse control problems.......that is the problem....not gun owners or American gun culture.

Normal gun owners are not the problem and are unaffected by background checks and registration.

I've already pointed out the silliness of that argument

On the contrary, you've ignored it.

 

[2aguy]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Since online a gun and voting are both basic civil rights.....would you agree to a tax on voting and a test before you can vote?

So if background checks and registration were free, you'd have no objection to them?

Voting is mentioned in our constitution six times. Arms are mentioned but once. Yet we must prove that we are eligible to vote. Why the discrepancy?

I am fine with background checks at gun stores......they should be free however.....background checks for private sales are another issue...they require gun registration .......and gun registration is always used to ban and confiscate guns...they did that in Germany, Britain and Australia........so gun registration..which does not even apply to actual criminals is a non starter....

What exactly do you think gun registration achieves anyway......mass shooters would register their guns, happily....since they plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance....and criminals don't have to register their illegal guns...

So what do they do?

Again, any one of these steps alone is inadequate. Did you miss the third step, severe penalties for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer?

Why.......say I am a law abiding citizen with no criminal record...why should I get penalized for owning a gun?

I am more than happy to lock up anyone using a gun in a crime....30 years.....

I am more than happy to lock up felons caught in mere possession of a gun...30 years....

But a law abiding person, with no criminal record, who is not using a gun to commit a crime...why do you want to punish them ?

 

[2aguy]

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

Show me some evidence that the average American gun owner uses their firearms to commit crimes.

Adam Lanza had no criminal record. Neither did the San Bernardino couple. Neither did the Orlando shooter.

You'll never stop all mass killings no matter what you do.
A large truck did a fine job not to long ago.
And the Orlando shooter was investigated by the feds for terrorist ties yet they did nothing. The San Bernardino couple were muslim terrorist and the wife was let into the country with no vetting.
How about we start complaining about our lax approach to the laws on the books?

Because running people over in a street is the same thing as ....running people over in a classroom? Come on, be honest about the issue AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT.

Trucks are designed to transport people and items. Guns are designed to kill. Get a grip.

No...guns are designed to keep the owner alive.....and in most self defense situations they never have to be fired .......you are wrong.

 

[2aguy]

Registration leads to confiscation.

Really? Where are all those cars and trucks confiscated over the past 100 years we've been registering those?

Police impound lots

I see, so a bunch of law-abiding folks registered their cars and had them seized?

You're getting hilariously stomped in this thread. At every turn.

Not by you.

You seem to be a straight man in a comedy duo.

you MIGHT want to reread the post I responded to

I'm trying to find a parallel analogy to your absurd situation where law-abiding gun owners have their guns seized.

I can't find one. Because it doesn't exist.

Britain and Australia, Germany in the 1930s.......

 

[Auld Phart]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Our gun culture isn't a problem...we have 357,000,000 guns in private hands.......and in 2015 we had 586 accidental gun deaths.

We had 8,124 gun murders. Out of 357,000,000 privately held guns........do you realize how small a number that is in a country with 320,000,000 people? And 90% of those doing the shooting cannot legally buy, own or carry the guns....

Normal gun owners are not the problem....

Think about that.

Americans use guns 1,500,000 times a year to stop violent criminal attack and to save lives...many times stopping mass shooters...........

The actual problem that we have is inner city criminals who have been raised for generations by single teenage mothers...creating young males with impulse control problems.......that is the problem....not gun owners or American gun culture.

Normal gun owners are not the problem and are unaffected by background checks and registration.

I've already pointed out the silliness of that argument

On the contrary, you've ignored it.

I suggest you take another look at post #56

 

[Al Azar]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Since online a gun and voting are both basic civil rights.....would you agree to a tax on voting and a test before you can vote?

So if background checks and registration were free, you'd have no objection to them?

Voting is mentioned in our constitution six times. Arms are mentioned but once. Yet we must prove that we are eligible to vote. Why the discrepancy?

I am fine with background checks at gun stores......they should be free however.....background checks for private sales are another issue...they require gun registration .......and gun registration is always used to ban and confiscate guns...they did that in Germany, Britain and Australia........so gun registration..which does not even apply to actual criminals is a non starter....

What exactly do you think gun registration achieves anyway......mass shooters would register their guns, happily....since they plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance....and criminals don't have to register their illegal guns...

So what do they do?

Again, any one of these steps alone is inadequate. Did you miss the third step, severe penalties for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer?

Why.......say I am a law abiding citizen with no criminal record...why should I get penalized for owning a gun?

I am more than happy to lock up anyone using a gun in a crime....30 years.....

I am more than happy to lock up felons caught in mere possession of a gun...30 years....

But a law abiding person, with no criminal record, who is not using a gun to commit a crime...why do you want to punish them ?

Who brought up penalizing law-abiding citizens?

 

[2aguy]

How about we jail those actually committing crimes with firearms for around 25 years if used in a robbery, fifty years if you discharge the weapon during said robbery and get your affairs in order if you kill someone in a robbery?
That way we actually punish the ones committing the crimes and not the law abiding.

Certainly nothing wrong with that approach. But we're not doing that either.

We're not doing anything to address this problem because of the influence of those who won't abide any new efforts to control the acquisition and use of firearms.

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

Show me some evidence that the average American gun owner uses their firearms to commit crimes.

Adam Lanza had no criminal record. Neither did the San Bernardino couple. Neither did the Orlando shooter.

90% of gun murderers have long histories of crime and violence......

357,000,000 guns in private hands...how many mass public shootings last year....4......

 

[2aguy]

They block efforts that would affect law abiding citizens as well as criminals.

Find me a link that shows them approving of straw purchases, felons or criminals owning firearms, back street sales, etc

They oppose background checks for ALL gun purchases. Most NRA members support it. If that's not proof to you, what is?

So do I.

I plan on giving my granddaughter, (19 ), a handgun in a week or so, with her fathers permission.

Under the ridiculous rule you want, I'd have to wait til she turns 21, so she can pass a background check

I have a number of other firearms I plan on giving to family members, or selling to friends at the gun range.

again, though I have known these people for years, your ridiculous rule would require to go to a local dealer, and pay to have a background check done.

So, I am INDEED against it

I plan to help my son buy a car. Under these ridiculous DMV rules, I have to wait until he's licensed, get the car registered, make sure it's insured, etc.

ABSURD! I should be able to give him whatever i want, RIGHT NOW!! WAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!

Go ahead, give it to him.

You don't need a license, insurance, or registration to drive it on your own property.

and driving, last time I looked at the Constitution, driving is not a right

Maybe it should be. Almost everyone in the country needs to drive in order to make a living. Almost no one in the country needs a privately-owned gun to make a living.

Until they are attacked by criminals.....1,500,000 times a year Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack and to save lives...many times stopping mass shootings......

if it saves one life...right?

 

[2aguy]

Since online a gun and voting are both basic civil rights.....would you agree to a tax on voting and a test before you can vote?

So if background checks and registration were free, you'd have no objection to them?

Voting is mentioned in our constitution six times. Arms are mentioned but once. Yet we must prove that we are eligible to vote. Why the discrepancy?

I am fine with background checks at gun stores......they should be free however.....background checks for private sales are another issue...they require gun registration .......and gun registration is always used to ban and confiscate guns...they did that in Germany, Britain and Australia........so gun registration..which does not even apply to actual criminals is a non starter....

What exactly do you think gun registration achieves anyway......mass shooters would register their guns, happily....since they plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance....and criminals don't have to register their illegal guns...

So what do they do?

Again, any one of these steps alone is inadequate. Did you miss the third step, severe penalties for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer?

Why.......say I am a law abiding citizen with no criminal record...why should I get penalized for owning a gun?

I am more than happy to lock up anyone using a gun in a crime....30 years.....

I am more than happy to lock up felons caught in mere possession of a gun...30 years....

But a law abiding person, with no criminal record, who is not using a gun to commit a crime...why do you want to punish them ?

Who brought up penalizing law-abiding citizens?

If I have a gun that is not registered...having broken no law and committed no crime.......you want me punished. For something that is a Right under our Bill of Rights.....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

1) Background check for every acquisition.

2) Registration of every firearm.

3) Serious penalty for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer.

Basically, regulate every firearm as we already regulate machine guns. We have millions of those in private hands and none of them are used irresponsibly.

I am curious.......I support current background checks because they make people like you happy....but.....how does any of it stop crime or mass shootings?

Haynes v. UNited States ruled that criminals do not have to register illegal guns.....

So only normal people will have to register their guns...people who are not using guns for any crime....

And if a law abiding citizen..who has committed no other crime...or any crime with a gun...you want to punish them over a clerical error...that's what you want?

Any one of these steps is inadequate. All three get the job done.

Again, reference the effectiveness of our existing machine gun laws.

People dont own machine guns because of the cost.

 

[2aguy]

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

I really dont care about suicide.
If someone wants to kill themselves there are plenty of tall buildings to jump off of or garages to park in with the engine running.

That's like saying "I really don't care about cancer."

Suicide is the end result of depression, which is a disease. Guns make suicide much, much easier, and much, much more tempting.

Thats the dumbest analogy I've ever heard.
People generally want to be cured of cancer...unless of course they're suicidal.
Can you explain how Japans suicide rate is way higher than that of the US yet they have very strict gun laws?

And people generally don't want ot die from cancer, and don't have a choice.

Similarly, people with severe depression may not have a choice about wanting to die. Talk to a mental health professional, you act like I'm making this up.

True, Japan would have WAY more people dying of gunshot wounds if they had more guns. As it stands, they instead have more people surviving suicide attempts and getting help.

You say that's a bad thing? Weird, I think human suffering is not great. Agree to disagree I guess.

wrong......the suicide rate of Japan, South Korea, and China...countries that only allow criminals and cops to have guns are higher than our suicide rate......also France and many countries in gun controlled Europe.......

 

[2aguy]

Except that only criminals would be armed to the teeth. What kind of fantasy world do you live in where criminals obey laws? See, that's the fundamental flaw in your thinking. Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. No gun law ever has, nor ever will, stop a criminal from committing a crime. If a criminal wants my wallet, on the other hand, he will have to kill me to get it. See the difference? You want to prosecute him for taking my wallet, I want to stop him from taking it.

Criminals don't obey laws? You think that life in prison for illegal possession of a machine gun isn't effective? How many crimes are being committed by criminals wielding machine guns do we suffer every day?

Or ever?

Save your bumper sticker responses.

How about we jail those actually committing crimes with firearms for around 25 years if used in a robbery, fifty years if you discharge the weapon during said robbery and get your affairs in order if you kill someone in a robbery?
That way we actually punish the ones committing the crimes and not the law abiding.

Certainly nothing wrong with that approach. But we're not doing that either.

We're not doing anything to address this problem because of the influence of those who won't abide any new efforts to control the acquisition and use of firearms.

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

wrong....accidental gun deaths in 2015...586...in a country with over 357,000,000 guns in private hands...

Car accidental deaths...33,000.....2 million non fatal injuries.....

 

[Al Azar]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Our gun culture isn't a problem...we have 357,000,000 guns in private hands.......and in 2015 we had 586 accidental gun deaths.

We had 8,124 gun murders. Out of 357,000,000 privately held guns........do you realize how small a number that is in a country with 320,000,000 people? And 90% of those doing the shooting cannot legally buy, own or carry the guns....

Normal gun owners are not the problem....

Think about that.

Americans use guns 1,500,000 times a year to stop violent criminal attack and to save lives...many times stopping mass shooters...........

The actual problem that we have is inner city criminals who have been raised for generations by single teenage mothers...creating young males with impulse control problems.......that is the problem....not gun owners or American gun culture.

Normal gun owners are not the problem and are unaffected by background checks and registration.

I've already pointed out the silliness of that argument

On the contrary, you've ignored it.

I suggest you take another look at post #56

Your example of how you would feel inconvenienced is not persuasive.

 

[2aguy]

Except that only criminals would be armed to the teeth. What kind of fantasy world do you live in where criminals obey laws? See, that's the fundamental flaw in your thinking. Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. No gun law ever has, nor ever will, stop a criminal from committing a crime. If a criminal wants my wallet, on the other hand, he will have to kill me to get it. See the difference? You want to prosecute him for taking my wallet, I want to stop him from taking it.

Criminals don't obey laws? You think that life in prison for illegal possession of a machine gun isn't effective? How many crimes are being committed by criminals wielding machine guns do we suffer every day?

Or ever?

Save your bumper sticker responses.

How about we jail those actually committing crimes with firearms for around 25 years if used in a robbery, fifty years if you discharge the weapon during said robbery and get your affairs in order if you kill someone in a robbery?
That way we actually punish the ones committing the crimes and not the law abiding.

Certainly nothing wrong with that approach. But we're not doing that either.

We're not doing anything to address this problem because of the influence of those who won't abide any new efforts to control the acquisition and use of firearms.

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

Here...non Asian suicide rates by country.......countries with extreme gun control laws v. the United States...

World suicide rates by country

World suicide rates by country

Per 100,000


Hungary ... 21.0
Belgium .... 18.4
Finland... 16.5
France... 14.6
Poland... 13.8
Austria... 13.8
Czech Republic... 12.7
New Zealand.... 11.9
Denmark... 11.3
Sweden..............11.1
Norway...............10.9
Iceland................10.4
Germany.............10.3
Canada...............10.2

United States.......10.1

 

[Al Azar]

So if background checks and registration were free, you'd have no objection to them?

Voting is mentioned in our constitution six times. Arms are mentioned but once. Yet we must prove that we are eligible to vote. Why the discrepancy?

I am fine with background checks at gun stores......they should be free however.....background checks for private sales are another issue...they require gun registration .......and gun registration is always used to ban and confiscate guns...they did that in Germany, Britain and Australia........so gun registration..which does not even apply to actual criminals is a non starter....

What exactly do you think gun registration achieves anyway......mass shooters would register their guns, happily....since they plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance....and criminals don't have to register their illegal guns...

So what do they do?

Again, any one of these steps alone is inadequate. Did you miss the third step, severe penalties for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer?

Why.......say I am a law abiding citizen with no criminal record...why should I get penalized for owning a gun?

I am more than happy to lock up anyone using a gun in a crime....30 years.....

I am more than happy to lock up felons caught in mere possession of a gun...30 years....

But a law abiding person, with no criminal record, who is not using a gun to commit a crime...why do you want to punish them ?

Who brought up penalizing law-abiding citizens?

If I have a gun that is not registered...having broken no law and committed no crime.......you want me punished. For something that is a Right under our Bill of Rights.....

You broke the law by not registering it. It's no different than breaking the law by driving without a license.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The problem with guns here, is the culture behind it. I was listening to an interview with a Norwegian on their gun culture.

Like Americans, many Norwegians own guns. But according to Seierstad, the culture of gun ownership is very different in the two countries. In Norway, for example, it's uncommon to see guns outside organized settings like gun clubs or during hunting season.


“Yes, there’s a high percentage of gun ownership in Norway," she says, "but those guns are used mainly one week in the year during the hunting of elk season ... the rest of the year it’s locked down and stored.”


Even US and Norwegian law enforcement have different approaches to firearms.


“The police has not been armed in Norway,” Seierstad says. “People in the US could say, ‘Well, isn’t that scary?’ Well when the police is not armed, the drug dealer is not armed, the criminals are not armed, because no one is armed.”

After Orlando, Americans and US lawmakers are arguing over whether to strengthen (or even weaken) gun regulations. But after the attacks in Oslo and Utoya, Norwegian law didn't change.


The Norwegian government did set up a committee that proposed tighter gun laws — including mandatory medical background checks, regular checks on weapon owners and better lists accounting for guns with lead ammunition — but none of these proposals went into effect.


Why? The reason was pretty simple.

“We had quite restrictive laws,” Seierstad explains. "We have very very few gun accidents and gun murders.”​

You don't see testosterone impaired idiots walking around like this:

In my mind common sense gun control would look at changing the culture as much as changing any laws. I'd have no problem with some sort of education course in safe use, legal issues etc before you can purchase gun. I'd also have no problem with having certain types of weapons banned, and the purchase of large amounts of weapons and ammunition causing a red flag to be raised. Universal background checks.

Since online a gun and voting are both basic civil rights.....would you agree to a tax on voting and a test before you can vote?

So if background checks and registration were free, you'd have no objection to them?

Voting is mentioned in our constitution six times. Arms are mentioned but once. Yet we must prove that we are eligible to vote. Why the discrepancy?

I am fine with background checks at gun stores......they should be free however.....background checks for private sales are another issue...they require gun registration .......and gun registration is always used to ban and confiscate guns...they did that in Germany, Britain and Australia........so gun registration..which does not even apply to actual criminals is a non starter....

What exactly do you think gun registration achieves anyway......mass shooters would register their guns, happily....since they plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance....and criminals don't have to register their illegal guns...

So what do they do?

Again, any one of these steps alone is inadequate. Did you miss the third step, severe penalties for possession of a firearm not registered to the bearer?

So you borrow a buddies gun to go to the range because you're thinking about buying one and you go to jail.

Nah..i dont think so.

 

[2aguy]

Except that only criminals would be armed to the teeth. What kind of fantasy world do you live in where criminals obey laws? See, that's the fundamental flaw in your thinking. Criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. No gun law ever has, nor ever will, stop a criminal from committing a crime. If a criminal wants my wallet, on the other hand, he will have to kill me to get it. See the difference? You want to prosecute him for taking my wallet, I want to stop him from taking it.

Criminals don't obey laws? You think that life in prison for illegal possession of a machine gun isn't effective? How many crimes are being committed by criminals wielding machine guns do we suffer every day?

Or ever?

Save your bumper sticker responses.

How about we jail those actually committing crimes with firearms for around 25 years if used in a robbery, fifty years if you discharge the weapon during said robbery and get your affairs in order if you kill someone in a robbery?
That way we actually punish the ones committing the crimes and not the law abiding.

Certainly nothing wrong with that approach. But we're not doing that either.

We're not doing anything to address this problem because of the influence of those who won't abide any new efforts to control the acquisition and use of firearms.

Nothing else would be needed if we locked up criminals who use firearms for long sentences.
The statistics show it's a small percentage of the population that commit crimes over and over again.
Stop letting em out of prison and we'd see a dramatic drop in firearm related crime.

That only leaves about 18,000 suicides, 1,000 accidental gun deaths, etc. Still more than all of Europe combined. (You know, since we're back to "black lives don't matter" or "only thugs kill with guns").

But sure, it's just the bad guys. You gotta be delusional. We're a gun-crazy country that the rest of the world shakes its head at.

Here.......gun suicide v. non gun suicide in the U.S.......

Gun suicide in 2014..... 21,334 (WISQARS Leading Causes of Death Reports)

non gun suicide in 2014...21,359 (WISQARS Leading Causes of Death Reports)

-----------