Time for stricter gun legislation in the US yet??

[Mr Sparkle]

Changes I'd like to see:

1) Outlaw assault weapons, military grade weapons, or any that can be easily converted to automatic fire (there are actually a few semi-auto pistols that fall into the last category).

2) Eliminate all gun show sales except for antiques that don't fall under those listed in #1.

3) More thorough background checks, and make testimonials from 2 to 3 people (who are non-relatives and w/o any criminal or mental health record) mandatory.

4) Full US citizenship

if people sometimes use guns to defend themselves and their homes wouldn't denying resident aliens this advantage be kind of.....mean?

unless I misunderstood.

 

[demento]

if people sometimes use guns to defend themselves and their homes wouldn't denying resident aliens this advantage be kind of.....mean?

unless I misunderstood.

I hear you but what if said person has a criminal or mental health record in another country? I don't know how thorough the FBI is in researching such info so IMO, better to err on the side of safety. No doubt they'd check and see if there are any red flags re: terrorism and the like but that doesn't quite cover the gamut...

 

[kainedamo]

if people sometimes use guns to defend themselves and their homes wouldn't denying resident aliens this advantage be kind of.....mean?

unless I misunderstood.

But like... defend themselves against what??

The way people keep saying people need guns to defend their homes, it sounds like you guys are living in war time. You are not living in war time.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

I hear you but what if said person has a criminal or mental health record in another country? I don't know how thorough the FBI is in researching such info so IMO, better to err on the side of safety. No doubt they'd check and see if there are any red flags re: terrorism and the like but that doesn't quite cover the gamut...

oh, Ok, perhaps then a permit could be issued if gained through proper channels?
something were the information you stated would have to be provided.
I'm kind of ambivalent either way, but just so you wouldn't make targets out of a certain section of a population.

But like... defend themselves against what??

squirrels....FLYING squirrels!!!! ARGH there's one now!!!! *loads shotgun*

 

[demento]

oh, Ok, perhaps then a permit could be issued if gained through proper channels?
something were the information you stated would have to be provided.
I'm kind of ambivalent either way, but just so you wouldn't make targets out of a certain section of a population.

Yeah, I guess it would be ok so long as a non-citizen could provide the same degree of info that any citizen would. I think they should have to jump through a few extra hoops in order to get licensed to buy.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

But like... defend themselves against what??

The way people keep saying people need guns to defend their homes, it sounds like you guys are living in war time. You are not living in war time.

Sadly it pretty much is a war. The State of California not so long ago released the info that they spend a 1/2 billion dollars a year on foreign born criminals in the prison system. We have a massive flood of illegals flowing into the country nonstop. Recently the gov't said that a sizable percentage have criminal records. So not only do we have to contend with home grown criminals but criminals are coming here from all over the world because this is where the money is. The criminals are flowing across the Mexican border and are even shooting at Border Control Agents who try to intercept them. There is virtually nobody I know who hasn't been burglarized or had someone enter or try to enter their homes while they were there. The U.S. has the worlds largest economy and criminals all over the world have decided that they are entitled to a large share.

 

[GoldenAgeHero]

I just want to point out, while it hasn't been brought up on this page as far as I can see, the common pro-gun argument "criminals ignore the law" is completely ******ed, and I'm surprised ANYONE uses it.

If criminals ignore the law, whats the point in making ANY laws? If criminals are just going to ignore gun laws, ****, lets throw out the whole ****ing judicial system. The judges, the juries, everything. We've clearly been wasting our time making laws for society to abide by.

you're ******ed for thinking criminals obey the laws, because you know thats why thier criminals in the first place

to stop people from becoming potential criminals, duh!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kritish]

Here’s what would make sense, all firearms (except for air guns) require an “arms card”. To get an arms card you must be eighteen years old and you must have a clean metal heath record. Also, we’ll outlaw assault weapons and sniper rifles. You’ll also have to renew your arms card every five years. I think this would do wonders for the gun crime in America.

 

[kainedamo]

you're ******ed for thinking criminals obey the laws, because you know thats why thier criminals in the first place

to stop people from becoming potential criminals, duh!!!!!!!!!!

Oh my God, you COMPLETELY missed my point. I'll spell it out for you, like a child. Maybe, just MAYBE you'll understand what I'm getting at.

Now, the pro-gun people keep saying "criminals ignore the law" in an attempt to justify LESS gun laws, seeing as criminals ignore the law.

But if that is the case...

WHY
MAKE
ANY
LAWS
AT
ALL???

Understand now?

If criminals ignore gun laws, surely they also ignore the laws of the road. Surely they also ignore that it is against the law to murder people? So why make it illigal to murder? Surely they must ignore the fact that it is illigal to rob. So why make it illigal to rob?

See how ridiculous the "criminals ignore the law" argument is??

 

[Mr. Smash'n Bash]

Oh my God, you COMPLETELY missed my point. I'll spell it out for you, like a child. Maybe, just MAYBE you'll understand what I'm getting at.

Now, the pro-gun people keep saying "criminals ignore the law" in an attempt to justify LESS gun laws, seeing as criminals ignore the law.

But if that is the case...

WHY
MAKE
ANY
LAWS
AT
ALL???

Understand now?

If criminals ignore gun laws, surely they also ignore the laws of the road. Surely they also ignore that it is against the law to murder people? So why make it illigal to murder? Surely they must ignore the fact that it is illigal to rob. So why make it illigal to rob?

See how ridiculous the "criminals ignore the law" argument is??

Do you ride the short bus?

 

[hippie_hunter]

Changes I'd like to see:

1) Outlaw assault weapons, military grade weapons, or any that can be easily converted to automatic fire (there are actually a few semi-auto pistols that fall into the last category).

2) Eliminate all gun show sales except for antiques that don't fall under those listed in #1.

3) More thorough background checks, and make testimonials from 2 to 3 people (who are non-relatives and w/o any criminal or mental health record) mandatory.

4) Full US citizenship

Edit: One more

5) ALL transfers (even if it's from a father to his son) have to go through a FFL and be subject to the same background checks as any FFL purchase.

Now that is reasonable gun control.

 

[Danger Mouse]

I agree with kainedamo and GoldenAgeHero did indeed miss his point. Saying you don't need tighter gun control laws because criminals won't obey such laws anyway is akin to saying you don't need laws against murderers because criminals won't obey such laws anyway.

As it is, robbery, rape, murder, traffic violation offences, are being committed daily with little regard to the law. Does that mean that we need to do away with the law?

Having tighter gun controls would only make accessibility to firearms more difficult for the criminals. They would still procure them, perhaps, but with a great deal more difficulty and perhaps at an even dearer prices.

There are nations that even legislated the death penalty for possession of firearms and such legislation has proven to work.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

There are too many guns around and too many sources for new ones for any laws to keep them out of the hands of criminals. In addition, even if it were possible to eliminate guns entirely that would not be a good thing because the aggressive criminally inclined types would have an overwhelming advantage over the law abiding citizen. Before the practical gun was invented violent crime was much more common than it is today. One of the figures that I ran across once was that 3 out of 4 women were raped in their lifetime as opposed to 1/3 today. When Sam Colt invented the first practical handgun he was greatly praised by virtually everyone. The saying that was popular at that time was: " God made man but Colonel Colt made 'em equal". It was the first time in human history that women, children and smaller men had any sort of real protection.

 

[lazur]

I agree with kainedamo and GoldenAgeHero did indeed miss his point. Saying you don't need tighter gun control laws because criminals won't obey such laws anyway is akin to saying you don't need laws against murderers because criminals won't obey such laws anyway.

That logic would work if carrying a gun was equal to murdering someone, but it's not. To me, it's the same thing as suspending someone's license. Just because you suspend someone's license, making it illegal for that person to drive a car on a public road, doesn't mean they will suddenly stop driving a car on a public road. Yet, getting rid of all cars because there are some people who can't legally drive them is just ridiculous, don't you think?

As it is, robbery, rape, murder, traffic violation offences, are being committed daily with little regard to the law. Does that mean that we need to do away with the law?

No, but there are already tons of laws on the books. I'm all for enforcing the current laws and even for creating new laws, as long as the new laws do not penalize law abiding citizens by making them less safe from criminals who do not abide by the law.

Having tighter gun controls would only make accessibility to firearms more difficult for the criminals. They would still procure them, perhaps, but with a great deal more difficulty and perhaps at an even dearer prices.

As I said, it depends on the law. Some laws create unfair blanket restrictions. If you create a law that restricts someone who's deemed 'mentally unstable', fine. But if you create a law that restricts everyone within a certain area/city, not fine.

There are nations that even legislated the death penalty for possession of firearms and such legislation has proven to work.

Not in this nation. If that's how you feel, maybe you should move there.

 

[SoulManX]

That logic would work if carrying a gun was equal to murdering someone, but it's not. To me, it's the same thing as suspending someone's license. Just because you suspend someone's license, making it illegal for that person to drive a car on a public road, doesn't mean they will suddenly stop driving a car on a public road. Yet, getting rid of all cars because there are some people who can't legally drive them is just ridiculous, don't you think?



No, but there are already tons of laws on the books. I'm all for enforcing the current laws and even for creating new laws, as long as the new laws do not penalize law abiding citizens by making them less safe from criminals who do not abide by the law.



As I said, it depends on the law. Some laws create unfair blanket restrictions. If you create a law that restricts someone who's deemed 'mentally unstable', fine. But if you restrict a law that restricts everyone within a certain area/city, not fine.



Not in this nation. If that's how you feel, maybe you should move there.

 

[lazur]

There are too many guns around and too many sources for new ones for any laws to keep them out of the hands of criminals. In addition, even if it were possible to eliminate guns entirely that would not be a good thing because the aggressive criminally inclined types would have an overwhelming advantage over the law abiding citizen. Before the practical gun was invented violent crime was much more common than it is today. One of the figures that I ran across once was that 3 out of 4 women were raped in their lifetime as opposed to 1/3 today. When Sam Colt invented the first practical handgun he was greatly praised by virtually everyone. The saying that was popular at that time was: " God made man but Colonel Colt made 'em equal". It was the first time in human history that women, children and smaller men had any sort of real protection.

Good point. It's been proven time and time again that in areas of the country where gun control laws are more relaxed, there's less violent crime. Criminals do not commit crimes in areas where it's likely they will be met face to face with a firearm. For example, in Florida, they conducted a study between 1987 and 1996, after passing a right-to-carry law, which found that the total homicide rate in the entire state dropped by 36%, the total firearm homicidal rate dropped by 37%, and the total handgun homicidal rate dropped by 41%.

Anyone who argues with statistics like that is just certifiably nuts and themselves probably shouldn't own a gun.

 

[lazur]

Oh my God, you COMPLETELY missed my point. I'll spell it out for you, like a child. Maybe, just MAYBE you'll understand what I'm getting at.

Now, the pro-gun people keep saying "criminals ignore the law" in an attempt to justify LESS gun laws, seeing as criminals ignore the law.

But if that is the case...

WHY
MAKE
ANY
LAWS
AT
ALL???

Understand now?

If criminals ignore gun laws, surely they also ignore the laws of the road. Surely they also ignore that it is against the law to murder people? So why make it illigal to murder? Surely they must ignore the fact that it is illigal to rob. So why make it illigal to rob?

See how ridiculous the "criminals ignore the law" argument is??

If you really feel this way and you are completely against guns, then walk the walk and go get yourself a sign with big, bold letters, which declares "ANTI-GUN HOMEOWNER. NO GUNS OWNED ON PROPERTY." - and then park it on your front lawn.

 

[kainedamo]

If you really feel this way and you are completely against guns, then walk the walk and go get yourself a sign with big, bold letters, which declares "ANTI-GUN HOMEOWNER. NO GUNS OWNED ON PROPERTY." - and then park it on your front lawn.

I don't even live in the US. What would be the point of that?

If I lived in the US, I'd be signing petitions, and voting for guys that want stricter gun laws.

 

[lazur]

I don't even live in the US. What would be the point of that?

If I lived in the US, I'd be signing petitions, and voting for guys that want stricter gun laws.

Stricter gun laws are fine, as long as we're careful when we define 'stricter' so we don't unnecessarily penalize law-abiding citizens.

 

[kainedamo]

Stricter gun laws are fine, as long as we're careful when we define 'stricter' so we don't unnecessarily penalize law-abiding citizens.

Do you also consider it "penalizing" law-abiding citizens when a city or state decides to ban smoking in public, or is that something that serves the greater good?

 

[Silicon Surfer]

There was a town that passed a law that required every home to have a gun and the people who lived there to be proficient in it's use. They also said that anyone who shot a criminal would not be prosecuted. Crime stopped completely. A few years later they did an update and there were no violent crimes, and no burglaries. The only thing the police had to do was write traffic tickets. And there weren't many of them.

 

[Varient]

God oh god how I wish they'd respond to the nation's drug problem with a solution like that. "There are too many drugs out there. Let's make sure everyone gets some drugs! "

I find it interesting that no one can "talk" about this w/o being polarized.

For example:
I would say that you obviously were not aware that in parts of the middle east terrorists, (interesting word - no one reads it or what it really means.), "USED" to cruise up into schools and other public places and start shooting.

After the civilian population started packing in direct response to having their children killed in school,.. the random killings were reduced to almost zero,..

terrorist do almost exclusivly explosives because THEY KNOW that they pull a gun in a public place,.. theres a GREAT chance someone in sight is packing and will kill them after they start shooting.

All that to say this:
Gun control Yes,.. Banning of the right for LAW-ABIDING PEOPLE to carry arms No.

Look at history. More Countries / nations / empires in Human history "fall"/fail that take steps to disarm the general population than those that are not afraid to have full citizens bear arms as a matter of course.

V.

 

[Danger Mouse]

Not in this nation. If that's how you feel, maybe you should move there.

I already have.

And I am able to walk the streets of my city with my little daughter in the middle of the night without having the fear of being gunned down senselessly.

Possession of firearms is an offence punishable by death in my country. And we sleep better at night. We have no need to bear firearms to protect ourselves. We're phenomenal archers and swordsmen.

 

[Elijya]

haha, Lazur, DM lives in Asia, everyone and their grandmother knows that

And besides the whole "if you don't like it, move someplace else" attitude is the stupidest and most deflective argument ever. Seriously, I lose respect for everyone foolish enough to use it.

Now, I don't recall all of your specific politics, lazur, but I'll go out on a limb and assume you're anti-abortion, right? Well, Abortion is legal here. You don't like that, so would you ever move to a country where abortion is illegal instead? No, of course not. So stop using that BS "like it or get out" mentality, since you don't qualify for it either.

America is a country where individuals can effect change. If someone doesn't like the way something is, they have the freedom and the right to speak to community and political leaders, campaign, even run for office themselves to make the changes they see fit. You're not required to bend over, give in, and move someplace else, you're allowed to affect your community. For some people, that might mean petitioning for stronger gun control. For others, that might mean petitioning for stricter abortion laws. We all have the same rights.

 

[Elijya]

We're phenomenal archers and swordsmen.

Don't forget that you can all do that "YIYIYIYIYIYIYI!" yell, that's pretty scary