Discussion: Guns, The Second Amendment, NRA - Part II

I'm fine with them starting with assault style rifles, but the goal should be for American firearm laws & regulations to fall in line with vast majority of other developed countries throughout the world.

Owning a firearm should be more of a privilege than a right which is the way it currently seems in the States.

No "seems" about it. In the United States, owning a gun is a legal right, according to our Constitution. That's why we struggle with this more than other countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B
Changing an entire culture like that is impossible. It's easy to sit there and say it but how about you come up with a plan that will work to enact it? What is the solution to getting all these people who will literally die before giving up their guns? Do you suggest they actually be shot and killed? Do you imprison them? What do you do when there is a shootout with a bunch of heavily armed people who have been waiting decades for the government to come take their guns?

Simple as "take away the guns" sounds it is a joke to think it is realistic.

Hypothetically if the plan was to ban all weapons immediately cold turkey style, 8 week grace period for all owners to turn in their firearms after which if you're found to be in possession of one it should be treated as an act of potential terrorism & align the punishments with that.
 
Last edited:
No "seems" about it. In the United States, owning a gun is a legal right, according to our Constitution. That's why struggle with this more than other countries.

Exactly, it shouldn't be considered a legal right, make it a privileged to own a weapon.

If you want to own one you should need to produce a valid reason other than just owning one to own one which is the way it works throughout the UK, handguns I believe are also banned everywhere other than Northern Ireland who obviously had/have more of a gun problem than anywhere else in the UK.
 
Something I meant to ask, in the US, is there a limit to how many firearms a person can legally own? and furthermore, does it differ State to State.. ?
 
Nope, you can have all the guns you want. Be a collector - keep 2,000 of them in a shed somewhere.
 
Nope, you can have all the guns you want. Be a collector - keep 2,000 of them in a shed somewhere.

What about ammunition? Can you buy as much of that as you want or it it capped?
 
Something I meant to ask, in the US, is there a limit to how many firearms a person can legally own? and furthermore, does it differ State to State.. ?

Massachusetts has the strongest gun laws in the country and there is no weapons limit. I doubt any state has one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B
What about ammunition? Can you buy as much of that as you want or it it capped?

There are caps on how much you can buy at one time, and how much ammunition is held in your clip, but overall ownership? I don't think so. If you wanted to store a million shells somewhere, I don't think there's a law stopping you.
 
There are caps on how much you can buy at one time, and how much ammunition is held in your clip, but overall ownership? I don't think so. If you wanted to store a million shells somewhere, I don't think there's a law stopping you.

This is something else that should be addressed in gun control/regulation, it shouldn't be possible for 1 person to amass a large collection of weaponry & ammunition capable of weaponizing a small army.

If you want to be a collector the weapons shouldn't be functional.
 
Gun control advocates have been asking for bans in assault and military style rifles; they're not asking to ban all the guns like handguns.

And yet handguns were illegal in some cities, gun control advocates had gone that far at the local level, until the Supreme Court (in 5-4 decisions) overturned the ban and Hillary Clinton said the decisions should be overturned.

Literally, this is the default Democratic Party position. People shouldn't have assault weapons and people shouldn't be banned from owning handguns. No one is coming for your handguns.

Not the position of its last presidential nominee (who was generally regarded as quite a moderate).
 
Not the position of its last presidential nominee (who was generally regarded as quite a moderate).

It was not Clinton's position that all hand guns should be illegal. There has never been a Presidential candidate who has pushed that position.
 
Just that the Supreme Court decisions that prevented them from being banned in cities should be overturned.
 
Just that the Supreme Court decisions that prevented them from being banned in cities should be overturned.

I don't doubt that there were some local principalities that went too far with gun regs... and as you say, SCOTUS stopped it, as is their duty under the constitution.

But it was not Hillary's position that handguns should be banned. It's not a commonly accepted or talked about position by any metric.
 
Damn it Abbott. Just increase your background checks. I like that he is promoting awareness on racism and hate, but he just couldn't go the distance.
 
Damn it Abbott. Just increase your background checks. I like that he is promoting awareness on racism and hate, but he just couldn't go the distance.
And he won't. He'll create some nice looking optics and spout some promising words, and then, when it actually matters, he won't do a goddamn thing.
 
Just that the Supreme Court decisions that prevented them from being banned in cities should be overturned.
No one but the fringiest of fringe in the Democratic Party with even an iota of actual power is looking to ban guns and take them away from you.

The great disarming conservatives fear NEVER HAPPENS when Democrats are in charge. Haven't you gotten that it is sma tactic used to get votes by now that does nothing but poisin the populace with fear and distrust? Obama, Clinton, Carter... They all were supposed to go after your guns and take them away... None did.

What a majority of Americans want is across the board common sense gun regulations. Background checks, data bases, cooperation between agencies.

But due to the GOP being swayed by the NRA and the GOP reliance on 45 years worth of reactionary conspiracy theories to drive voters to polls we can't even get the CDC to do studies on gun violence in America. Think about that. Just Google it if you don't WANT to believe me.
 
I do suspect that something will actually get passed this time. And then, the GOP and the President are going to do a big old victory lap, claiming themselves champions of gun safety. "Look at how reasonable we are? Let no one say that our party is inflexible or old fashioned now! When the times demanded it, we were able to compromise." Makes me feel like vomiting a little, but you better believe that they will milk this for all it's worth, while the people who have literally fought decades for this issue will get nothing.... only a base that feels more and more like their vote doesn't matter; voters who may even want to punish Dems for giving the win to Republicans; voters who will probably argue it isn't enough, and will actually punish reps for voting on a half measure.

Decades of intransigence, jujitsued by President Trump, actually convincing Republicans to do a 180 on something they've fought against for decades... and for them to actually look like the good guys while doing it. Some conservatives say that Trump is going to get a lot of blow back from the rank and file. I doubt it honestly. He's right... they believe what he tells them to believe. Sigh.......this timeline blows.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,574
Messages
21,763,885
Members
45,596
Latest member
iamjonahlobe
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"