Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, those pesky RULES! That big ol' mean government infringed on my rights just today when it forced me to stop a red lights and drive only 20 mph through school zones! I'm a responsible driver and I can decide what speed to drive and when to stop. It's all just a big government bureaucracy that taxes me to hire cops and buy stop lights and all sorts of signs and infringe upon my rights!
Really, isn't the issue with a lot of the "righties" that they just don't want anyone to ever tell them what to do, period? But that's the price you'll pay to live in a civilized society.
I think we can streamline all these rules and demands on citizens.
As an example I have a drivers licence, which once I obtained it, I could buy whatever and however many cars I want and drive them all over whenever I want.
Same here in PA, I go to get a "Licence to Carry Firearms" which requires 2 references and a background check and once I have that, I should not have to jump through all these hoops that impose stupid time and money demands on me.
Sure I understand civilized society and that we have laws that keep us from infringing on others and their space. However many of these laws are getting ridiculous to where it's now the government imposing on me for no other reason than to take my money, time and to control me. All these laws are designed to do is entrap you and entangle regular people in rules and penalties and taxes.
And no I don't believe government should be in the business of telling people what to do because those bozos are about the most ill equipped people around to do so. I don't worship government as my God.
Actually not. Someone mentioned that with all the various state and city firearm laws that there are 25,000 such laws in our nation. ONE set of national gun laws that applies everywhere will greatly REDUCE the "rules upon rules" that you mention, and it'll be a lot easier for everyone from gun owners to gun dealers to law enforcement to the court system.
As far as costing more, that's an unknown, but vastly fewer laws that apply to all should make overall costs a bit cheaper.
One reason that bad guys have guns in cities with tight laws is that the bad guys usually need to cross a state line to a state with lax laws to buy all the weapons they want. That's been the case with DC's tight laws and high gun deaths, the dudes just drive over the bridge into VA where it's like the wild west for buying guns. Straw buyers galore there.
If the laws are tighter everywhere with universal background checks for all buyers, then the ease of getting guns in DC or Chicago will eventually bring about a decline in death rates. We need a level playing field everywhere, but right now there is no level field of play for gun purchases.
Yes if you eliminate all those laws and start over, but I don't see that happening. What I do see happening is adding more and more laws, more and more expenses and more and more demands.
I didn't see the Colorado governor sit down and do any of that.
I've yet to see any streamlining and reducing of costs and other nonsense.
Ultimately as the facts show with concealed carry available in almost every state and laws in the vein of the castle doctrine becoming common since the mid 1980's, the homicide rate has been cut in half.
The problem with those cities is that the regular people have no reasonable access to firearms to defend themselves so they are prey for the criminals.
The lefties here think making ourselves defenseless will stop criminals. Never has worked anywhere tried. Focus on the criminals, not us.
The difference between a right and a privilege doesn't matter from the perspective that with both guns and cars require responsible ownership, care and usage. Guns and cars BOTH kill thousands of people per year in the USA. We do tests to assure we can safely operate a car and also require insurance coverage, so the same should be true of guns as well. I like the idea of gun buyers having to pass a written test (to assure they know the rules) and a hands-on test on a range to make sure they know how to safely handle and discharge a firearm. I don't see this as any sort of imposition on anyone, it's just common sense to assure public safety for guns and cars.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Oh, those pesky RULES! That big ol' mean government infringed on my rights just today when it forced me to stop a red lights and drive only 20 mph through school zones! I'm a responsible driver and I can decide what speed to drive and when to stop. It's all just a big government bureaucracy that taxes me to hire cops and buy stop lights and all sorts of signs and infringe upon my rights!
Really, isn't the issue with a lot of the "righties" that they just don't want anyone to ever tell them what to do, period? But that's the price you'll pay to live in a civilized society.
The issue is settled really, in our state, and soon nationally. I feel the same about gun control as I do about abortion rights, marriage equality, or for that matter, slavery and the womens' vote! These are settled matters, or soon to be fully settled. The righties will have to dragged into the 21st century.
The issue is settled really, in our state, and soon nationally. I feel the same about gun control as I do about abortion rights, marriage equality, or for that matter, slavery and the womens' vote! These are settled matters, or soon to be fully settled. The righties will have to dragged into the 21st century.
So, how would you feel if the US Government re-imposed slavery, a practice that was outlawed by an Amendment to the United States Constitution (the 13th Amendment, to be exact)? Would that get your dander up just a little bit? Legally, the right of people to bear arms without infringement in the United States is no different than the right of US citizens to live without slavery--both are guaranteed in Amendments to the United States Constitution. Apparently, government laws that run roughshod over the US Constitution are fine with you, as long as it's to support an issue that you like. If you want to impose strict gun control in the US, then marshal up a 2/3's majority vote in the US House of Representatives and the US Senate, or through a national convention requested by the state legislatures of 2/3's of the states, to repeal the Second Amendment and get 3/4's of the states to ratify it. Only then will the matter be "settled." Go take a civics class, you apparently missed out on that one.
If it were up to me, this is the regulation I would make:
1. Anybody can own a single shot firearm. This was the firearm available to the colonists at the time of the writing of the 2nd Amendment, so this is the firearm they had in mind when they wrote the Bill of Rights. There are no restrictions as to who can own a single shot firearm.
2. If you want anything more powerful than a single shot firearm, then you must go jump some hurdles:
a. all multiple shot firearms must be registered.
b. all multiple shot firearms must have liability insurance.
c. all multiple shot firearms must have their "ballistic fingerprint" on file.
d. all multiple shot firearms must have a "title" that must be shown when buying ammunition.
3. All owners must have a license. To get a license, a person must undergo a background check and complete a general gun safety course. This would enable a person to get a handgun that fires up to 8 bullets/shells before it needs to be reloaded.
4. People who want to own firearms with a capacity greater than 8 bullets/shells need to undergo a psych evaluation as well as take an advanced safety course.
5. All owners must renew their licenses every 3-5 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo
It's more rules upon more rules upon more rules, more fees, more taxes, more bureaucracy and it will do nothing about nothing.
Lefties only solutions ever involve complicating everything and making it more expensive.
Try another tact for once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo
I think we can streamline all these rules and demands on citizens.
As an example I have a drivers licence, which once I obtained it, I could buy whatever and however many cars I want and drive them all over whenever I want.
Same here in PA, I go to get a "Licence to Carry Firearms" which requires 2 references and a background check and once I have that, I should not have to jump through all these hoops that impose stupid time and money demands on me.
Sure I understand civilized society and that we have laws that keep us from infringing on others and their space. However many of these laws are getting ridiculous to where it's now the government imposing on me for no other reason than to take my money, time and to control me. All these laws are designed to do is entrap you and entangle regular people in rules and penalties and taxes.
And no I don't believe government should be in the business of telling people what to do because those bozos are about the most ill equipped people around to do so. I don't worship government as my God.
HAH! You came around to my way of thinking.
My idea is like your driver's license analogy. Each person who wants more than a single shot firearm needs to get a license. Once he/she gets the license, he/she can own as many guns as he/she wants.
To get the gun license, a person must undergo firearms training and pass a test just as a prospective driver must undergo driving training and pass a test.
If you want to drive bigger vehicles, you must undergo more advanced training, to own and use more advanced firearms you must undergo advanced training and a more advanced test.
You must renew your driver's license. Under my proposal, the same is true for your firearms license.
I will admit that the psych eval is one hurdle that a driver does not have to jump over. My reasoning for this is that because the purpose of a firearm is to shoot a bullet into a target. We need to be reasonably sure that the firearm owner does not have tendencies that make him/her want to use other humans as that target. (And before you make the strawman argument that cars can kill too, the purpose of the car is to provide transportation, not crash into a target.)
What you seem to forget about your cars is all the things you need to do in order to drive that car:
Your car needs a title. Under my proposal, your gun would need a "title."
Your car needs proof of insurance. Under my proposal, your gun would need liability insurance.
You need valid registration, license plates and yearly tags (and in PA, you need a safety inspection) for your car in part so that it can be identified if someone uses it for wrongdoing. Under my proposal, your gun needs to have its ballistic fingerprint registered for the same purpose.
You see, I based my proposal on the driver's license and auto registration system. Nowhere did I state that there is a limit on the number of guns or the types of guns, I just want to make sure that people who get them are safe and responsible with their guns, and that there is a system in place to help catch those who are not safe and responsible with their guns.
It's more rules upon more rules upon more rules, more fees, more taxes, more bureaucracy and it will do nothing about nothing.
Lefties only solutions ever involve complicating everything and making it more expensive.
Try another tact for once.
What a shame that you reduce America to camps of lefties and righties.
I guess I'm a lefty. But I think there are too many rules and laws.
But then, for a couple of years I lived in a country where there weren't so many laws and rules and what did I see? Mass bribery as a way of life. Riots where no one -- not the army, not the police, and not the government -- was in charge.
The vast majority of people are not right or left. They are on a spectrum where their every belief is not predictable.
My idea is like your driver's license analogy. Each person who wants more than a single shot firearm needs to get a license. Once he/she gets the license, he/she can own as many guns as he/she wants.
To get the gun license, a person must undergo firearms training and pass a test just as a prospective driver must undergo driving training and pass a test.
If you want to drive bigger vehicles, you must undergo more advanced training, to own and use more advanced firearms you must undergo advanced training and a more advanced test.
You must renew your driver's license. Under my proposal, the same is true for your firearms license.
I will admit that the psych eval is one hurdle that a driver does not have to jump over. My reasoning for this is that because the purpose of a firearm is to shoot a bullet into a target. We need to be reasonably sure that the firearm owner does not have tendencies that make him/her want to use other humans as that target. (And before you make the strawman argument that cars can kill too, the purpose of the car is to provide transportation, not crash into a target.)
What you seem to forget about your cars is all the things you need to do in order to drive that car:
Your car needs a title. Under my proposal, your gun would need a "title."
Your car needs proof of insurance. Under my proposal, your gun would need liability insurance.
You need valid registration, license plates and yearly tags (and in PA, you need a safety inspection) for your car in part so that it can be identified if someone uses it for wrongdoing. Under my proposal, your gun needs to have its ballistic fingerprint registered for the same purpose.
You see, I based my proposal on the driver's license and auto registration system. Nowhere did I state that there is a limit on the number of guns or the types of guns, I just want to make sure that people who get them are safe and responsible with their guns, and that there is a system in place to help catch those who are not safe and responsible with their guns.
I haven't come around to any of your thinking at all, so I don't know where you got that from.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
