What should the end goal of our gun policy be?

[Little-Acorn]

The end goal of our gun policies should be exactly what the 2nd amendment declares as the Law of the Land: That no government has any say in who can own and carry a gun.

 

[Jarlaxle]

gun - no fully automatic weapons nor any with a caliber over .45

This is quite ignorant. I have a .338 caliber rifle that will drop a polar bear in one shot, or a Cape buffalo. So why the arbitrary .45 caliber limit, please explain.

Any line would be arbitrary but the next step up from a .45 is a ma duce and that is over the top.

Pablum. You do not even know that you do not know how much you do not know. Rifles in various .50 caliber loadings were commin in the 19th century! (Offhand, the .50-70 rifle round dates to 1866.)

 

[Jarlaxle]

I like how Mass. Does it . gun safety class and background check . You get your license from the local PD. ( who would better know if the guy is a psycho). Buying n selling works a lot like cars when u register the transaction .

Surprisingly enough , the carry laws are pretty liberal in Mass .

I think it works well . Gun crime is low in our state , the "illegal guns " usually come from loose gun law states .

Bullshit. In Massachusetts, the only way you can generally get a permit to carry is if you are "connected". Some sheriffs simply reject ALL applications, and have publicly stated so!

 

[sealybobo]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

 

[Jarlaxle]

gun - no fully automatic weapons nor any with a caliber over .45

This is quite ignorant. I have a .338 caliber rifle that will drop a polar bear in one shot, or a Cape buffalo. So why the arbitrary .45 caliber limit, please explain.

Any line would be arbitrary but the next step up from a .45 is a ma duce and that is over the top.

Why? Is this just your personal opinion or do you have some logical reasoning behind this? Black powder musket balls can be .50 to .70 caliber.

So far as I know .45 is the largest commercially available caliber ammunition available. Muskets are like antique cars they would fall in an entirely different status and the rules would be unique to them.

Pablum. Larger than .45 caliber, off the top of my head...
.460 Weatherby
.458 Winchester
.454 Casull
.460 Smith & Wesson
.460 Weatherby
.460 Rowland
.480 Ruger
.500 Smith & Wesson
.500 Nitro Express
.577 Nitro Express
.600 Nitro Express
.577 Tyrannosaur

Almost all shotguns except a 410 are much larger than .45"--a 12-gauge is .73 caliber, and even a 28-gauge is .55 caliber..

 

[Timmy]

The end goal of our gun policies should be exactly what the 2nd amendment declares as the Law of the Land: That no government has any say in who can own and carry a gun.

So guns should be avialable out of vending machines?

 

[Timmy]

I like how Mass. Does it . gun safety class and background check . You get your license from the local PD. ( who would better know if the guy is a psycho). Buying n selling works a lot like cars when u register the transaction .

Surprisingly enough , the carry laws are pretty liberal in Mass .

I think it works well . Gun crime is low in our state , the "illegal guns " usually come from loose gun law states .

Bullshit. In Massachusetts, the only way you can generally get a permit to carry is if you are "connected". Some sheriffs simply reject ALL applications, and have publicly stated so!

Do you have your license ?

 

[Jarlaxle]

So far as I know .45 is the largest commercially available caliber ammunition available. Muskets are like antique cars they would fall in an entirely different status and the rules would be unique to them.

I regularly shoot solid slugs from a 12ga Mossy shotgun with a rifled barrel and iron sights. Their diameter is .729 inches. Perfectly legal (which is more than I can say about the laws restricting bore diameters). And they resolve disputes even better than a .45.

BTW.... -50-cal-325-grain-jhp,MRI .50AE 300 Grain JHP (DEP50JHP300B), MRI .50AE 350 Grain JSP (DEP50JSP350B), MRI .50AE 300 Grain HP/XTP (DEP50HP/XTP300), Desert Eagle, .50 AE, Burnt Bronze, Desert Eagle Pistol Charm (ACCLPDE50)

I stand corrected but my main point is that there needs to be an arbitrary line between what the public and buy and what is restricted (to military, police, special groups, etc.) Where that line is drawn would depend on people making a case for or against. Does anyone really want unrestricted sales of M2 machine guns?

Honestly? Fine by me.

 

[Contumacious]

“What should the end goal of our gun policy be?”

Wrong question.

Correct question: “What standard of judicial review should firearm regulatory measures be subject to?"

Answer: strict scrutiny.

Rationale: the right of individuals to possess firearms pursuant to the right of self-defense is fundamental, where regulations and restrictions must be supported by a compelling governmental interest, narrowly tailored to address that interest, and applied in a comprehensive, consistent manner.

Examples of firearm regulatory measures which would pass Constitutional muster per strict scrutiny:

Background checks

The designation of felons, the mentally ill, and undocumented immigrants as prohibited persons.

The prohibition of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.

Regulations concerning the commercial sales of firearms.

Prohibitions of weapons determined to be dangerous and unusual and not in common use by the general public.

Examples of firearm regulatory measures which would not pass Constitutional muster per strict scrutiny:

Purchase permits and registration requirements.

Licensing requirements (save that of concealed carry).

Prohibitions of firearms based on appearance, configuration, or functionality, such as banning AR and AK platform rifles, or other weapons in common use by the general public not determined to be dangerous or unusual.

Training requirements.

Bans, restrictions, and limitations on magazine capacity or types of magazines.

Ammunition bans.

Waiting periods.

Restrictions on the number of firearms that may be purchased during a given time period.

“What standard of judicial review should firearm regulatory measures be subject to?"


Given the FACT that we are FREE PEOPLE and that NO AUTHORITY was ever granted to fedgov to regulate firearms then

the federal government must IMMEDIATELY ABOLISH:

1- The Gun Control Act of 1968
2-The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993
3- The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA)
4- National Firearms Act (NFA) 26 USC 53

The purpose of those laws are to incite violence against WE THE PEOPLE and to provide pretexts to fedgov to persecute law abiding citizens.

BATF cocksuckers used the National Firearms Act - 26 USC 53 - to persecute, terrorize and incinerate the Davidians alive


Senator Schumer (D-TelAviv) concluded that incinerating the Davidians was lawful because they were not Jews.


.

“What standard of judicial review should firearm regulatory measures be subject to?"


Given the FACT that we are FREE PEOPLE and that NO AUTHORITY was ever granted to fedgov to regulate firearms then

the federal government must IMMEDIATELY ABOLISH:

1- The Gun Control Act of 1968
2-The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993
3- The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA)
4- National Firearms Act (NFA) 26 USC 53

The purpose of those laws are to incite violence against WE THE PEOPLE and to provide pretexts to fedgov to persecute law abiding citizens.

BATF cocksuckers used the National Firearms Act - 26 USC 53 - to persecute, terrorize and incinerate the Davidians alive.


.

The Gun-Free School Zones Act was found unconstitutional over 20 years ago in 1995. In US v. Lopez, C.J. Rehnquist wrote in the decision (5-4) that it was volitive of the Commerce Clause.

Regarding the purging of 26 USC 53, are you really suggesting that the "destructive devices" defined in § 5845 of that Chapter should be allowed open access for all without restrictions? Have you thought that through or do you just not give a shit?

Following the Lopez decision, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno proposed changes to 18 U.S.C.§ 922(q) that were adopted in section 657 of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, Pub.L. 104–208, 110 Stat.3009, enacted September 30, 1996. The "Law" , as amended, has been upheld by several circuits.

The devices allegedly prohibited by 26 USC 5845(f) were used against the Davidians in 1993. Furthermore, if and when Americans conclude that the government has become a tyranny they may required those devices.

Have you thought that through or do you just not give a shit?


.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The devices allegedly prohibited by 26 USC 5845(f) were used against the Davidians in 1993. Furthermore, if and when Americans conclude that the government has become a tyranny they may required those devices.

Landmines, grenades, lethal gases, RPG's, bombs and other dangerous and explosive devices listed you want to be made available under the colour of Amendment II? Talk about giving a boost to domestic terrorism!

Have you thought that through or do you just not give a shit?

It's not that I haven't thought about it OR that I don't give a shit! The thing is I'm not afraid of my shadow and I don't see black helicopters hovering everywhere. You can live your life in foolish, misplaced distrust of everything in this cruel, cruel world if you wish, but I'll choose freedom and reject your self imposed prison of your fears!

 

[Rustic]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

 

[Rustic]

Firearms should be 100% tax write off, plus a progressive tax credit from year to year depending on how many are bought along with ammo...
Thats a real stimulus... Lol

 

[Contumacious]

The devices allegedly prohibited by 26 USC 5845(f) were used against the Davidians in 1993. Furthermore, if and when Americans conclude that the government has become a tyranny they may required those devices.

Landmines, grenades, lethal gases, RPG's, bombs and other dangerous and explosive devices listed you want to be made available under the colour of Amendment II? Talk about giving a boost to domestic terrorism!

Have you thought that through or do you just not give a shit?

It's not that I haven't thought about it OR that I don't give a shit! The thing is I'm not afraid of my shadow and I don't see black helicopters hovering everywhere. You can live your life in foolish, misplaced distrust of everything in this cruel, cruel world if you wish, but I'll choose freedom and reject your self imposed prison of your fears!

Again , Uncle Sam will be more that happy to use any of those devices against you. Ask the Davidians.


You don't see helicopters hovering everywhere but unfortunately the Davidians did.

Helicopters were spraying the compound from overhead. All that in order to serve a "peaceful" warrant.

It is your prerogative to be naive and gullible.

.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The devices allegedly prohibited by 26 USC 5845(f) were used against the Davidians in 1993. Furthermore, if and when Americans conclude that the government has become a tyranny they may required those devices.

Landmines, grenades, lethal gases, RPG's, bombs and other dangerous and explosive devices listed you want to be made available under the colour of Amendment II? Talk about giving a boost to domestic terrorism!

Have you thought that through or do you just not give a shit?

It's not that I haven't thought about it OR that I don't give a shit! The thing is I'm not afraid of my shadow and I don't see black helicopters hovering everywhere. You can live your life in foolish, misplaced distrust of everything in this cruel, cruel world if you wish, but I'll choose freedom and reject your self imposed prison of your fears!

Again , Uncle Sam will be more that happy to use any of those devices against you. Ask the Davidians.


You don't see helicopters hovering everywhere but unfortunately the Davidians did.

Helicopters were spraying the compound from overhead. All that in order to serve a "peaceful" warrant.

It is your prerogative to be naive and gullible.

.

More importantly, it's my choice to live fully and free, unencumbered by paralyzing fears of the boogeyman under my bed! We are both free to choose for ourselves, but your quaking is the price for your choice.

 

[kaz]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

Can we charge a $1000 tax on abortions?

 

[SmokeALib]

Our "policy" is written in black and white (woops, that was probably racist.)
Criminals will always find a way to get firearms.
Democrats want to take away our right to protect ourselves from these criminals.
This policy arms criminals, disarms law-abiding citizens.
They say the police will protect us.
But the democrats hate them, too.
And by the time the police show up, the criminals have already killed you and your family.
Doesn't sound right to me.

 

[sealybobo]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

Can we charge a $1000 tax on abortions?

No we should give poor people a tax credit if they get one. You having a baby or a gun isn't doing any of us any good.

 

[sealybobo]

Our "policy" is written in black and white (woops, that was probably racist.)
Criminals will always find a way to get firearms.
Democrats want to take away our right to protect ourselves from these criminals.
This policy arms criminals, disarms law-abiding citizens.
They say the police will protect us.
But the democrats hate them, too.
And by the time the police show up, the criminals have already killed you and your family.
Doesn't sound right to me.

No we don't stupid. If you want a handgun go get one. And if you want to carry it get a ccw. If you are a law abiding citizen I'm cool with you owning a gun. But the process has to be much better regulated.

I heard in one state they are making it a law every gun sold has to be taken in and shot so that if that gun is used in a crime they can tell who's gun did the killing. There are lots of regulations we could have in place if not for you and the NRA.

 

[kaz]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

Can we charge a $1000 tax on abortions?

No we should give poor people a tax credit if they get one. You having a baby or a gun isn't doing any of us any good.

Swish. Missed the point. Abortions aren't doing the fetus any good and you're saying it's OK to tax guns, which are in the bill of rights. So let's tax abortions $1,000 and raise revenue

 

[kaz]

Our "policy" is written in black and white (woops, that was probably racist.)
Criminals will always find a way to get firearms.
Democrats want to take away our right to protect ourselves from these criminals.
This policy arms criminals, disarms law-abiding citizens.
They say the police will protect us.
But the democrats hate them, too.
And by the time the police show up, the criminals have already killed you and your family.
Doesn't sound right to me.

No we don't stupid. If you want a handgun go get one. And if you want to carry it get a ccw. If you are a law abiding citizen I'm cool with you owning a gun. But the process has to be much better regulated.

I heard in one state they are making it a law every gun sold has to be taken in and shot so that if that gun is used in a crime they can tell who's gun did the killing. There are lots of regulations we could have in place if not for you and the NRA.

Yep, the NRA does liberty a great service

 

[sealybobo]

For those who don't find an exact match, just pick the closest one. It's impossible to cover every possible choice in a poll like this.

Note this is a goal question, not a question what the policies are to get there.

$1000 tax on assault rifles and every gun is shot before sold and registered so if that gun committed a crime we can trace it.

Can we charge a $1000 tax on abortions?

No we should give poor people a tax credit if they get one. You having a baby or a gun isn't doing any of us any good.

Swish. Missed the point. Abortions aren't doing the fetus any good and you're saying it's OK to tax guns, which are in the bill of rights. So let's tax abortions $1,000 and raise revenue

But it will cost you $2000 to take care of the kids that the breeders can't afford to have. I don't give a fuck about a fetus. It has no rights. And this planet is over populated so do us a favor and abort yourself. It isn't too late.

You are free to have a gun if you can afford to have one.

Can you make your own gun? Can anyone make their own make shift weapon?

And don't we already tax gun purchases? Just tax them more.