Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[RDD_1210]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

How about we try the right gun laws. You know, the ones that work in every other industrialized nation.

 

[2aguy]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

How about we try the right gun laws. You know, the ones that work in every other industrialized nation.

Sorry…..it isn't the gun laws that are preventing gun murder and crime in those countries….it is the culture of the criminal in those countries….

I have posted stories about the Yakuza in Japan…when they want to have a gang war…like the one that started in 2006 and ended 7 years later…they get guns and grenades and kill each other. Europe…the preferred weapon is the fully auto military rifle……you don't hear about it because our press doesn't cover gun crime in Europe…..

Our criminals simply murder more often than the criminals in Europe do…..but that too is changing …..Britain is arming more police, gun crime in Australia is going up, and the confiscation in Britain didn't change the gun crime rate……….it stayed the same….

So it isn't gun control laws that keep their gun crime rates low…as we saw in the Charlie Hebdo attack and the attack in Paris and the shootings in Marseilles….criminals and terrorists in FRance get guns easily when they want them….that is what the police over there say….not me…….I have posted the links to the European papers that discuss the problem…….

The criminal culture over there keeps their gun crimes low…or did anyway…they have now imported more violent criminals to do the gun crime Europeans don't want to do….

 

[2aguy]

Rustic... would you please stop littering the forum with your quote photos? The grown ups are trying to talk... Use your words

Rustic…those photos are great….he doesn't like them because they hit the nail on the head…..

 

[westwall]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

How about we try the right gun laws. You know, the ones that work in every other industrialized nation.

Show me a country where there is no gun crime.

 

[2aguy]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

We live in modern progressive times

And the Germans in theWeimar Republic believed the same thing…they had modern universities, the rule of law, democracy……..and a civil society….do you think they knew that 20 years later they would be sending German citizens into gas chambers…….?

 

[2aguy]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

No…we don't object to everything proposed……we oppose licensing gun owners, registering guns and universal background checks.

We support prison sentences for criminals who use guns to commit crimes…long ones. And for most felons, they should not be able to own guns..and if they are caught with a gun they should be sent immediately to jail….

Those two points cover just about everything you need to keep gun crime down….we just aren't doing either one...

 

[RDD_1210]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

How about we try the right gun laws. You know, the ones that work in every other industrialized nation.

Show me a country where there is no gun crime.

Ooooh, I get it now. So if it's not completed eliminated, it's not effective. Is that the route we're going?

So I guess modern medicine isn't any good since we still have disease.

 

[Slade3200]

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

You don't see any effort to actually reduce crime?? Then you aren't looking because, there are constant initiatives, funding, programs, and support given to law enforcement, and to mental health programs... I hope it continues because it has a huge effect on our safety.

As for where do the anti-gun people compromise... Well if they want to live in a gun free society then I guess laws allowing gun sales is their compromise.

Why does this discussion always move to having guns/rights and not having... It's so exaggerated... Whats the problem with making a dangerous thing safer??

 

[westwall]

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

You don't see any effort to actually reduce crime?? Then you are looking because, there are constant initiatives, funding, programs, and support given to law enforcement, and to mental health programs... I hope it continues because it has a huge effect on our safety.

As for where do the anti-gun people compromise... Well if they want to live in a gun free society then I guess laws allowing gun sales is their compromise.

Why does this discussion always move to having guns/rights and not having... It's so exaggerated... Whats the problem with making a dangerous thing safer??

No. There is none. 20,000 gun laws on the books and the only thing that has been PROVEN to reduce crime is to incarcerate the bad guys. That works. Everything else doesn't. The discussion is not exaggerated. We have over 1500 years of history that shows weapons being registered, then confiscated, then the country turning totalitarian and mass murder ensues. It is a pattern that THINKING people recognize. First is tribal, then autocracy, then Republic, then some form of socialism, which then devolves to totalitarianism which after a period of time leads to another revolution and then a Republic again if you're lucky.

Here's the deal. There are lots of other governmental systems out there. How about you move to the one you like and leave this one alone. We have ONE true Constitutional Republic on this planet. It has progressed further, faster, than any country before it. How about you leave this country alone and go live in the other countries you think are better.

 

[westwall]

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.
You?

Again you fight the invisible ghost... How about you argue against confiscation once it is proposed, which it isn't. We live in modern progressive times and so much weight of your arguments stem from either an era of revolution when the constitution was written or from actions of other countries that happened in the past. Why can't we just deal with the here and now?

This hidden agenda or the "slippery slope" as you call it, is pumped into your brains to scare you into blind opposition of EVERYTHING proposed and you fail to attempt to do or propose anything to help the problem. Not many solutions are not being proposed by pro-gunners in this forum so far... mostly just complaints and ridicule.

I appreciate the one guy that could admit that background checks are useful and should be supported and another early on in the thread who suggested that training and certification be used to allow license and carry permits. I guess 2 out of 200 posts is a start

How about you stop playing stupid games? The Founders of this country knew full well that once government gets to a certain level of power it turns to tyranny. It is the natural evolution of governmental systems. Thus they wished to ensure that that moment was delayed for as long as possible.

You all claim that we need to compromise but one thing I have noticed, the anti gun side never seems to compromise at all. What exactly are YOU giving up? What exactly are YOU doing without? I don't see YOU giving ANYTHING up. I see all of the giving coming from my side and frankly I am sick of it.

How about you stop lying about your motives. Your goal is confiscation. That is plain. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. How many more gun laws do you wish to see passed until you are finished with your "well, it won't really have an effect on crime, but it's a good first step" bullshit?

I see 20,000 "first steps". I don't see any effort to actually reduce crime.

How about we try the right gun laws. You know, the ones that work in every other industrialized nation.

Show me a country where there is no gun crime.

Ooooh, I get it now. So if it's not completed eliminated, it's not effective. Is that the route we're going?

So I guess modern medicine isn't any good since we still have disease.

No, you don't get it at all. That much is obvious. You compare Europe to the USA (actually you compare single countries) and claim you are safer when the facts are the opposite. If you take Europe as a whole (a much fairer comparison though still ignoring the millions of third world aliens who bring their violent cultures with them) the rates of gun violence is similar. Furthermore in only TWO mass shootings (Norway and Paris) you have witnessed the murder of more people than ALL of the US mass shootings over the last 20 years.

Sure you want to compare facts and figures?

 

[Slade3200]

No…we don't object to everything proposed……we oppose licensing gun owners, registering guns and universal background checks.

We support prison sentences for criminals who use guns to commit crimes…long ones. And for most felons, they should not be able to own guns..and if they are caught with a gun they should be sent immediately to jail….

Those two points cover just about everything you need to keep gun crime down….we just aren't doing either one...

Stronger law enforcement and harsher punishments are fine if you thats what you want to promote, I could agree with you on that. I personally don't believe you are going to scare people away from committing crimes... Many do it out of desperation, poverty, or because they survive in a gang or criminal type environment, and there are tons of ways we can also work on that. If background checks or stricter regulations reduces gun exposure, reduces gun related accidents, theft, accessibility, suicides, etc. , even if its only by a fraction then I believe that is a good thing. Yes you as a gun owner may need to spend a little more time to get your license or you may have to pay a little more to buy a gun, but in the long run if it reduces death then does even a little bit to help weed out some of the wreckless people who own guns it may be a worthy sacrifice.

 

[Slade3200]

No. There is none. 20,000 gun laws on the books and the only thing that has been PROVEN to reduce crime is to incarcerate the bad guys. That works. Everything else doesn't. The discussion is not exaggerated. We have over 1500 years of history that shows weapons being registered, then confiscated, then the country turning totalitarian and mass murder ensues. It is a pattern that THINKING people recognize. First is tribal, then autocracy, then Republic, then some form of socialism, which then devolves to totalitarianism which after a period of time leads to another revolution and then a Republic again if you're lucky.

Here's the deal. There are lots of other governmental systems out there. How about you move to the one you like and leave this one alone. We have ONE true Constitutional Republic on this planet. It has progressed further, faster, than any country before it. How about you leave this country alone and go live in the other countries you think are better.

You speak to gun crime but there is a wider conversation about gun related deaths... It is a responsibility and misuse issue. We aren't going to let a 5 year old or a blind person behind the wheel of a car because it is unsafe for others. In the same right we shouldn't let a reckless person own a gun so making our system better to help with that is a good thing. Like I said, it is a small step to a big problem with many other solutions. Why do you all fight so hard to discredit good ideas and block initiatives when you could be working towards a better solution. Do you not see how your tone in the conversation is polarizing and destructive?

 

[westwall]

No…we don't object to everything proposed……we oppose licensing gun owners, registering guns and universal background checks.

We support prison sentences for criminals who use guns to commit crimes…long ones. And for most felons, they should not be able to own guns..and if they are caught with a gun they should be sent immediately to jail….

Those two points cover just about everything you need to keep gun crime down….we just aren't doing either one...

Stronger law enforcement and harsher punishments are fine if you thats what you want to promote, I could agree with you on that. I personally don't believe you are going to scare people away from committing crimes... Many do it out of desperation, poverty, or because they survive in a gang or criminal type environment, and there are tons of ways we can also work on that. If background checks or stricter regulations reduces gun exposure, reduces gun related accidents, theft, accessibility, suicides, etc. , even if its only by a fraction then I believe that is a good thing. Yes you as a gun owner may need to spend a little more time to get your license or you may have to pay a little more to buy a gun, but in the long run if it reduces death then does even a little bit to help weed out some of the wreckless people who own guns it may be a worthy sacrifice.

You don't scare people away from crime, that is true. However, if they are behind bars for committing crimes it's pretty hard for them to commit more now isn't it?

 

[westwall]

No. There is none. 20,000 gun laws on the books and the only thing that has been PROVEN to reduce crime is to incarcerate the bad guys. That works. Everything else doesn't. The discussion is not exaggerated. We have over 1500 years of history that shows weapons being registered, then confiscated, then the country turning totalitarian and mass murder ensues. It is a pattern that THINKING people recognize. First is tribal, then autocracy, then Republic, then some form of socialism, which then devolves to totalitarianism which after a period of time leads to another revolution and then a Republic again if you're lucky.

Here's the deal. There are lots of other governmental systems out there. How about you move to the one you like and leave this one alone. We have ONE true Constitutional Republic on this planet. It has progressed further, faster, than any country before it. How about you leave this country alone and go live in the other countries you think are better.

You speak to gun crime but there is a wider conversation about gun related deaths... It is a responsibility and misuse issue. We aren't going to let a 5 year old or a blind person behind the wheel of a car because it is unsafe for others. In the same right we shouldn't let a reckless person own a gun so making our system better to help with that is a good thing. Like I said, it is a small step to a big problem with many other solutions. Why do you all fight so hard to discredit good ideas and block initiatives when you could be working towards a better solution. Do you not see how your tone in the conversation is polarizing and destructive?

Ahhhh yes, the ever popular accidental death meme. More people die falling down stairs than died from gun accidents. There are an admitted 330 million guns in this country and they kill 30,000 per year (the majority being suicides which given the far higher rate of suicide in Japan, Korea, and the Scandinavian countries who all have strict gun control laws, would not go down) so less than 1 percent of all guns kill someone.

On the other hand there are 800,000 doctors and they kill 120,000 people per year due to mistakes, malpractice, misdiagnosis, errors in drug prescription etc.

If you truly cared about reducing the number of people who die work on that number. It is far easier to reduce a huge number than it is to make a small number smaller.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No. There is none. 20,000 gun laws on the books and the only thing that has been PROVEN to reduce crime is to incarcerate the bad guys. That works. Everything else doesn't. The discussion is not exaggerated. We have over 1500 years of history that shows weapons being registered, then confiscated, then the country turning totalitarian and mass murder ensues. It is a pattern that THINKING people recognize. First is tribal, then autocracy, then Republic, then some form of socialism, which then devolves to totalitarianism which after a period of time leads to another revolution and then a Republic again if you're lucky.

Here's the deal. There are lots of other governmental systems out there. How about you move to the one you like and leave this one alone. We have ONE true Constitutional Republic on this planet. It has progressed further, faster, than any country before it. How about you leave this country alone and go live in the other countries you think are better.

You speak to gun crime but there is a wider conversation about gun related deaths... It is a responsibility and misuse issue. We aren't going to let a 5 year old or a blind person behind the wheel of a car because it is unsafe for others. In the same right we shouldn't let a reckless person own a gun so making our system better to help with that is a good thing. Like I said, it is a small step to a big problem with many other solutions. Why do you all fight so hard to discredit good ideas and block initiatives when you could be working towards a better solution. Do you not see how your tone in the conversation is polarizing and destructive?

When you can prove any such legislation can work, we're all behind you.

But the fact is that making new laws won't help because they address the legal way people get firearms which criminals don't use. They go around the law, and they will any new laws as well, and we end up right back to where we started. Then when that doesn't work, more laws that won't help will be introduced by another leftist.

 

[Slade3200]

When you can prove any such legislation can work, we're all behind you.

But the fact is that making new laws won't help because they address the legal way people get firearms which criminals don't use. They go around the law, and they will any new laws as well, and we end up right back to where we started. Then when that doesn't work, more laws that won't help will be introduced by another leftist.

Ok, thats a fair statement... Let me ask, which of President Obama's Executive orders do you consider a new law that you hold objections to? (Please don't respond with "all of them" give me some examples)

 

[Pogo]

Rustic... would you please stop littering the forum with your quote photos? The grown ups are trying to talk... Use your words

So long as they apply to the discussion they have every right to be here. Just like you have the right to spew your propaganda. It's a free country. Live with it. That's what "adults" do....

Ummm.... no, it ain't. All he's doing is trolling, and trolling I might add with fake quotes made up on the internet. And he's been called on it a dozen times now and yet persists with the same thing. It's as if facts don't even apply for him.

Case in point: post 202 above. Even after I already demonstrated that his quote is bogus ----- he quotes the debunking................... and then posts the same thing over again. Abject denial of what's sitting right there in his own post.

If that ain't trolling, grits ain't groceries.

When one refuses to acknowledge reality, no rational discourse is possible. Ergo it's trolling and that's all it is.

Ironically the one sitting above is actually a genuine quote. But it's also off the topic -- the citation refers to national military preparedness, not personal firearms.

 

[Pogo]

Next to nothing is something so what's the harm in taking a small step? And why do you bring up banning guns again??? NOBODY IS SAYING BAN OR CONFISCATE!!!

Can't we just deal with that if its brought to the table... which it isn't!!!

This is the problem with small steps….we know the history of gun confiscation…it always starts with small steps…meant to protect people from guns…….and ends in confiscation….

And after each step fails to reduce the gun crime the way it was said it would…then comes the next "small" step……and when that doesn't work…the next "small" step…….

Firearms policy in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first British firearm controls were introduced as part of the Vagrancy Act 1824, which was set up in a reaction against the large number of people roaming the country with weapons brought back from the Napoleonic wars.

The Act allowed the police to arrest "any person with any gun, pistol, hanger [dagger], cutlass, bludgeon or other offensive weapon ... with intent to commit a felonious act". This was followed by the Night Poaching Act 1828 and Night Poaching Act 1844, the Game Act 1831, and the Poaching Prevention Act 1862, which made it an offence to illegally shoot game using a firearm.

The Gun Licence Act 1870 was created to raise revenue. It required a person to obtain a licence to carry a gun outside his own property for any reason. A licence was not required to buy a gun. The licences cost 10 shillings (about £31 in 2005 terms), lasted one year, and could be bought over the counter at Post Offices.

Pistols Act 1903[edit]

The Pistols Act 1903 was the first to place restrictions on the sale of firearms.

Titled "An Act to regulate the sale and use of Pistols or other Firearms", it was a short Act of just nine sections, and applied solely to pistols.

It defined a pistol as a firearm whose barrel did not exceed 9 in (230 mm) in length and made it illegal to sell or rent a pistol to anyone unless they could produce a current gun licence or game licence, were exempt from the Gun Licence Act, could prove that they planned to use the pistol on their own property, or had a statement signed by a police officer of Inspector's rank or above or a Justice of the Peace to the effect that they were about to go abroad for six months or more.

The Act was more or less ineffective, as anyone wishing to buy a pistol commercially merely had to purchase a licence on demand over the counter from a Post Office before doing so. In addition, it did not regulate private sales of such firearms.


Does this sound familiar to anyone…….


The legislators laid some emphasis on the dangers of pistols in the hands of children and drunkards and made specific provisions regarding sales to these two groups: persons under 18 could be fined 40 shillings if they bought, hired, or carried a pistol, while anyone who sold a pistol to such a person could be fined £5.


Anyone who sold a pistol to someone who was "intoxicated or of unsound mind" was liable to a fine of £25 or 3 months' imprisonment with hard labour.

However, it was not an offence under the Act to give or lend a pistol to anyone belonging to these two groups.[64]

Not sure if you're aware of this but ---- restating a Slippery Slope fallacy over and over and over and over and over and over and over ---- doesn't make it any le&ss a Slippery Slope fallacy.

Please show us ONE country that adopted registration of weapons and then didn't follow up with confiscation. Just one. I can go all the way back to the Byzantine Empire and their registration of swords followed up by the confiscation and murder of 32,000 sword owners for my timeline.

You?

I've never looked into that and frankly, don't give a shit.

The point stands: Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy is Slippery Slope fallacy. Doesn't matter one iota how many times you repeat the same thing in hope that somebody will believe it.

Oh? So you admit that you ignore very easily researched history and instead merely parrot what your masters tell you? In other words it is you who are closed minded. Like I stated earlier dude, you talk AT people, you don't discuss anything.

Once more for the slow readers ------- I neither know nor care about that particular info. Get it? My post isn't about that. It's about logic -- which is what about 90% of my posts on this site have always been about.

It's a Slippery Slope Fallacy, that's just a fact and there ain't a damn thing any of you can do about that except to abandon it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Incrementalism is the problem.

Plus the fact that the proposals would prevent no criminal from acquiring a firearm.

Deal with the criminals and the insane. Take them off the street, permanently if necessary. Leave the real people alone.

Define "insane"; Define "Real People"; and Define "Criminal". They are all subjective terms having no worth beyond being an echo of others who work so hard to derail real debate on the issue of Guns in America.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I am curious....could you state the measures and then explain how they actually work. You seem to be new here, and I have asked the other people who support your position to do the same...they can't or won't...will you?

I don't need to write it all out... It is listed at this link you can read it for yourself. Which ones are you objecting to?

President Obama’s 2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control

I read your post. To summarize, what it says is a massive expansion of bureaucracies and spending. In other words, even bigger government yet.

It imposes massive fines and imprisonment to anybody not licensed with the federal government to sell a firearm. What that means is if I sell my neighbor a gun, I can end up in jail for five years and a $250,000 fine.

So what is accomplished by all this--more non-criminal Americans in prison?