What should the end goal of our gun policy be?

[easyt65]

See 'Constitition' for my answer.

 

[Little-Acorn]

It limits government

Correct. In a few places it imposes concrete restrictions on our various governments. And it also says that if there is any power NOT mentioned in the Constitution, the Fed govt is forbidden to exercise that power, but the states and the people still can.

Are you one of those that think if it isn't mentioned in the constitution the law has no right to impose on your doings?

No. You?

 

[Wilbur Right]

Dateline 1779.

Today a crazed minute man took his loaded cannon to his child's school and killed 23 students. Using a combination of canister and solid shot (double shot) he was able to fire his cannon once before being shot himself by a passing militia man.

The hue and cry for restricting cannons to militias continues.

George Washington says we should eliminate gun free zones and people with cannons wouldn't have the two minutes needed to serve the cannon.

Thomas Jefferson thanked the militia man for his prompt action in shooting the crazed cannon shooter.

The NRA has called for everyone to have a cannon.

The mother's of the children killed want no cannons allowed anywhere.

In the beginning there was controversy about guns.

 

[whitehall]

The "end goal"? What the hell is that, some teenager's pipe dream? The goal isn't to restrict or eliminate gun ownership. These are methods for achieving the goal which is of course to eliminate gun violence.

 

[Steven_R]

Carry what you want, where you want, when you want, how you want unless there is a reason for you to not carry (specifically convicted of a felony or adjudicated as mentally incapable). No restrictions without due process.

You know, that liberty thing we pretend to love.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I have proposed a solution here a few times. Instead of registering guns and limiting magazine sizes and whatnot, we should register gun buyers.

If you apply to be a gun buyer, and pass a mental health and criminal background check, your name goes on a list. Sort of like those people who can now get pre-screened before flying.

If you wish to purchase a firearm, the retailer simply looks to see if your name is on the approved gun buyer list. If it is, you can buy as many guns and any size magazines you wish, and no record is kept of what you bought.

If you are a certified nutjob, your name does not get on the list and you cannot buy a gun.

If you are on the list, and then get convicted of whatever crime the people of your state decide warrants your removal from the list, then you are taken off the list.

If you are on the registered gun buyer list, it does not necessarily mean you have bought a gun. Nor does it indicate how many guns you own. Nor does it indicate how much ammo or magazines you own. It just indicates you are an upstanding citizen whose Second Amendment rights shall not be infringed or taken away without due process.

I've posted a number of times we need to license anyone over the age of 20 who wants to own, possess or have in his/her custody or control a gun. We need to allow every state to determine the age to own, possess or have in their custody and control a gun within the state of residence of the person seeking a license. Thus each state can determine who can have in their possession within their state a gun, and decide the standards necessary for someone to receive a license in their state.

Each state can determine who can be denied a license, of course only the fools and NRA feel everyone ought to have a gun until they misuse it, but rational people understand that those addicted to alcohol or drugs, convicted of battery, domestic violence and violent felonies ought not to be licensed, nor those who have been detained on a civil commitment of being a danger to themselves or others should ever own, possess or have a gun in their possession and or control.

 

[Timmy]

What does the constitution say about limiting clip capacity ??

 

[Steven_R]

What does the constitution say about limiting clip capacity ??

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

[Timmy]

What does the constitution say about limiting clip capacity ??

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Ah, so it says nothing about it . Then states can elect to have laws controlling such things .

None of our rights are absolute . All of them have at least some limitations .

 

[Steven_R]

Miller v. US says that if it's good to go on the battlefield it should be made available to the militia, meaning the common citizenry. Outside of that can be regulated, but magazines can't.

Not that it stops the states and courts from doing what they want anyways.

Your rights are only a court ruling away from being gone. Each and every one of them.

 

[Timmy]

Miller v. US says that if it's good to go on the battlefield it should be made available to the militia, meaning the common citizenry. Outside of that can be regulated, but magazines can't.

Not that it stops the states and courts from doing what they want anyways.

Your rights are only a court ruling away from being gone. Each and every one of them.

The militia is no longer the common citizenry .

Have you seen what kind of weapons are available to our military ? That should be available to everyone!?

 

[Timmy]

Hey. Can we at least agree that we want to keep guns away from criminals and those who would do bad things wh them??

 

[Contumacious]

The "mentally ill" thing is a smokescreen. Sure, some mass shootings are carried out by people with a history of mental illness. Mass shootings make a big splash in the media and in the fearful mind.

But we are not losing 16,000 Americans a year to mass shootings or the mentally ill. We are losing them to one-on-one gun homicides.

No one on the Right is offering a viable solution to this problem. They toss out "mental health" red herrings after a mass shooting, and call it a day.

It's a good point that the mass shootings like the Colorado theater and Newtown were a huge splash, but as awful as they were, they account for not many of the gun deaths in this country. Most killings one-on-one or one-on-two are by people who aren't mentally ill. Since it is impossible (I think) to know who would take another citizen's life when you sell them the gun (except for the restrictions we already have in place) that is why it seems like the only way to put a big dent in these killings is to severely restrict the number and type of guns available for general consumption.
I know lots of people with guns and none of them worry me. I don't like the thought of disarming them. But what else can be done, except to shrug and give up and let the killings keep going on and on?

Disarming America would require us to repeal the Second Amendment. And when you are willing to start denying rights in the name of the common good, then you cannot make an argument against the banning of dissent.

No, you are going to have to come up with a better plan.

Don't some people think the Second Amendment actually speaks to a militia, not individual citizens?

It says “militia” in the Amendment but we’re supposed to think the framers were just being generous with words that day it was written and chunked it in for shits and giggles.

Fascinating

Are we a FREE people?

Or did the framers lead us to believe that the new Country was a FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC for shits and giggles?

.


.


.

 

[my2¢]

The goal should be responsible ownership. Enough of hearing that the parent has suffered enough, gun owners that allow their weapon to be found and discharged by a child should be treated much the same as those guilty of DUI.

 

[Leweman]

What gun laws are NOT being enforced ?!

The one I have mentioned several times. And that supersedes any law that is not part of the Constitution.

Oh you mean you incorrect ramblings about the 2nd. You can just quote the whole thing, it's not very long. Instead you made up your own version

2nd amendment : " everyone can own guns , and no one can do nothing about it . Neener neener neener!! "

Not true. Another amendment could be passed as per the rules of the constitution that limit gun ownership. Constitution is pretty straight forward contrary to the opinions of moronic liberal judges who "interpret" things that don't exist.

Yeah those stupid judges with thier law degrees and devades of experience ! You rubes know the law much better than them .

Should we just have guns available out of vending machines ?

Yet there are judges who don't feel the same way. After the same degrees and same experience. It only takes one to throw doubt. By the way I took constitutional law in college and got an A + from a very liberal professor. The only logical way is to read it literally and change any thing that may be vague by the amendment process.

 

[2aguy]

All it should take is giving your drivers license or other state I.d. To the gun shop....they run it like cops do...and if you aren't flagged as a felon or adjudicated...in a court, of being dangerously mentally ill...you get the gun....


What is the problem with that....no special I.d........no record on la abiding gun owners........

 

[Leweman]

All it should take is giving your drivers license or other state I.d. To the gun shop....they run it like cops do...and if you aren't flagged as a felon or adjudicated...in a court, of being dangerously mentally ill...you get the gun....


What is the problem with that....no special I.d........no record on la abiding gun owners........

Why should felons not be allowed to own guns?

 

[2aguy]

I went with regulated but I would prefer no open carry of handguns. I think there are two issues here, one is the gun and the other is the gun owner.

gun - no fully automatic weapons nor any with a caliber over .45. Just seems like common sense limits that 99.9% of buyers should be fine with.

gun owner - adult, citizen, with no severe mental or violent criminal history (some exceptions...?), trained and tested in gun use. If I know you have a weapon I want to react the same as I do when I see a cop, I know that cop is trained when and how to use that gun safely and, just as importantly, when not to use a weapon. I have no problem is the gov't offers this training for free and then tests those that graduate to ensure they really know what they are doing. The training would be much less for those that don't intend to routinely carry a gun but comparable to what police go through if they want a carry permit.

SOrry...Europeans use training requirements to deny access to guns.......the gun grabbers here would eventually make the training too expensive and time consuming for all but the rich and politically connected to be able to do it.....

With our system now......357,000,000 million guns in private hands....and only 8,124 gun murders....and of those 90% are committed by people who have multiple felony convictions! and cannot own or carry the gun they use to commit the murder.....and they murder people who 70-80% of the time are also multiple felons......

So everything you want....is unnecessary. ..since our normal gun owners are not the problem......

Why don't you actually focus on the criminals....why is it you guys only target normal, law abiding gun owners....do you really think criminals will get your training to carry illegal guns?

 

[2aguy]

All it should take is giving your drivers license or other state I.d. To the gun shop....they run it like cops do...and if you aren't flagged as a felon or adjudicated...in a court, of being dangerously mentally ill...you get the gun....


What is the problem with that....no special I.d........no record on la abiding gun owners........

Why should felons not be allowed to own guns?

They gave up their rights when they became felons......I am willing to listen to idea on restoring all of their rights....but attempted mureder, murder and rape....as well as violent criminal assault...should all be life sentences.

 

[2aguy]

The "mentally ill" thing is a smokescreen. Sure, some mass shootings are carried out by people with a history of mental illness. Mass shootings make a big splash in the media and in the fearful mind.

But we are not losing 16,000 Americans a year to mass shootings or the mentally ill. We are losing them to one-on-one gun homicides.

No one on the Right is offering a viable solution to this problem. They toss out "mental health" red herrings after a mass shooting, and call it a day.

The actual number from the FBI table 8 homicide....from 2014 was 8,124 gun murders.....


And normal people are not doing the shooting...90% of the shooters have long criminal histories and are known to the police........

So stop blaming normal gun owners...target actual criminals.......if you actually want to stop gun murder......

We have offered an actual solution...arrest gun criminals when you catch them...do not bargain away the gun charge in crimes or when you catch felons carrying illegal guns.....that is how you stop gun crime...not by attacking people who don't use guns to commit crimes.