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.
I really don't see how gun control solves tragedies. As someone who is considered a liberal by many, I just don't buy it. The thing with gun control is that if you have it, you take guns away from law abiding citizens who weren't going to do any harm anyway, and that's it. People willing to kill and threaten people with guns (both illegal), are not going to say 'woah, owning a gun is illegal; I'm not gonna get one.' That's unrealistic.
While I don't agree that guns actually protect liberty, I see the value in them to an extent. It's in the constitution, and even though the founding fathers likely owned other men, they were in favor of freedom. I understand the logic used to justify it, and the logic to justify taking guns away, while with good intentions, isn't actually a solution (or, not the best one).
I really don't see how gun control solves tragedies. As someone who is considered a liberal by many, I just don't buy it. The thing with gun control is that if you have it, you take guns away from law abiding citizens who weren't going to do any harm anyway, and that's it. People willing to kill and threaten people with guns (both illegal), are not going to say 'woah, owning a gun is illegal; I'm not gonna get one.' That's unrealistic.
While I don't agree that guns actually protect liberty, I see the value in them to an extent. It's in the constitution, and even though the founding fathers likely owned other men, they were in favor of freedom. I understand the logic used to justify it, and the logic to justify taking guns away, while with good intentions, isn't actually a solution (or, not the best one).
Gun control doesn't mean preventing law-abiding citizens from owning guns. It means making sure that people who shouldn't own guns --- those who are violent --- from owning them.
Since you are trying to be reasonable I won't be rude, but No, any registry is out of the question. The feds can not and shall not be trusted. They have already proven beyond any shadow of any doubt they can not be trusted to lead or assist in any hope for the betterment of society.
The feds have divided We the People and take powers they were never to have assumed. In fact are creating a Police State of the Nation.
Every power they have assumed has been abused and what little hasn't has been dealt with in the most inept fashions.
I am, still stuck back with Bill Clinton selling us to red commie china. Everyone wants to know where industry went..... read up on Bill Clinton and his lying scum wife.
Long time since back then.... Younger people have no idea.
Biden wrote that 1994 gun ban and he is the enemy as well.
In the USA anymore we have 2 kinds of people. The Elite and us peasants. Some peasants think they are important to the Elite.
I'm not exactly sure what you are saying. Let me clarify my position.
1.) I am NOT in favor of gun control of the banning of weapons.
2.) I AM in favor having some method of chain of custody of weapons to know where these guns go. Right now, any of us who buy guns at a gun dealer, gun show, etc., already have our information on file. If the government were to want to confiscate our guns they already have our names and addresses. Effectively we are already in a government data base. But it is what happens if the gun is sold to another or stolen. If a crime is committed the gun will be traced back to the original buyer who may long ago have sold the gun perfectly legally. There is not now a paper trail. The only people I see who benefit are the crooks, criminals and lunatics. No one wants them to have guns.
3.) My point about Texas was that they have a custom of what I will call "loose control" of guns in that as I said, I could (or anyone) could buy a gun from a registered dealer and sell it, or give it to someone who has no business with it. There is no paper trail. When I lived in Missouri, I had to go to the local sheriff's office and complete the documentation to purchase a handgun and there was a nominal fee. I bought the gun and found it was more than I needed and resold it back to the gun dealer and a resale document was prepared that proved I no longer had it and I filed it in my safe deposit box as I do with all guns I have owned. I don't want some police officer turning up on my doorstep in the middle of the night telling me that a gun I had owned was involved in a fatal shooting any more than I would sell a car and not see that the registration was transferred to the new owner and being involved in an illegal or fatal accident. If I sell my house, the closing documents are prepared and the titles are registered over at the local court house and I no longer have an interest or liability for such property. I think it would be "nice" to know that when I dispose of a weapon legally that it can't come back to bite me in the rear at some future date.
4.) Clearly if guns are showing up in cities where gun fatalities are happening, what is the argument to be made that it is not in everyone's interest to see how those guns came to be possessed by the criminals on the street? I'm not seeing it. If someone is buying guns as a "straw buyer" and then taking them to some drug dealer and distributing them to his lieutenants to enforce his territory, I would think most sane people would want to see this stopped and that buyer barred from future purchases if not jailed for knowingly participating in a sham project to provide weapons to the bad guys.
In summary, you, I and everyone else who purchases our weapons legally, passes our background checks are already in a data base somewhere. If I no longer own such weapons I want my name erased from any data base so I'm not on the hook for something I no longer possess or can control.
I'm not exactly sure what you are saying. Let me clarify my position.
1.) I am NOT in favor of gun control of the banning of weapons.
2.) I AM in favor having some method of chain of custody of weapons to know where these guns go. Right now, any of us who buy guns at a gun dealer, gun show, etc., already have our information on file. If the government were to want to confiscate our guns they already have our names and addresses. Effectively we are already in a government data base. But it is what happens if the gun is sold to another or stolen. If a crime is committed the gun will be traced back to the original buyer who may long ago have sold the gun perfectly legally. There is not now a paper trail. The only people I see who benefit are the crooks, criminals and lunatics. No one wants them to have guns.
3.) My point about Texas was that they have a custom of what I will call "loose control" of guns in that as I said, I could (or anyone) could buy a gun from a registered dealer and sell it, or give it to someone who has no business with it. There is no paper trail. When I lived in Missouri, I had to go to the local sheriff's office and complete the documentation to purchase a handgun and there was a nominal fee. I bought the gun and found it was more than I needed and resold it back to the gun dealer and a resale document was prepared that proved I no longer had it and I filed it in my safe deposit box as I do with all guns I have owned. I don't want some police officer turning up on my doorstep in the middle of the night telling me that a gun I had owned was involved in a fatal shooting any more than I would sell a car and not see that the registration was transferred to the new owner and being involved in an illegal or fatal accident. If I sell my house, the closing documents are prepared and the titles are registered over at the local court house and I no longer have an interest or liability for such property. I think it would be "nice" to know that when I dispose of a weapon legally that it can't come back to bite me in the rear at some future date.
4.) Clearly if guns are showing up in cities where gun fatalities are happening, what is the argument to be made that it is not in everyone's interest to see how those guns came to be possessed by the criminals on the street? I'm not seeing it. If someone is buying guns as a "straw buyer" and then taking them to some drug dealer and distributing them to his lieutenants to enforce his territory, I would think most sane people would want to see this stopped and that buyer barred from future purchases if not jailed for knowingly participating in a sham project to provide weapons to the bad guys.
In summary, you, I and everyone else who purchases our weapons legally, passes our background checks are already in a data base somewhere. If I no longer own such weapons I want my name erased from any data base so I'm not on the hook for something I no longer possess or can control.
it leads to confiscation of arms, and criminals don't obey the law, how hard is it to understand?
it leas to confiscation of arms, and criminals don't obey the law, how hard is it to understand?
How is that? If there is no chain of custody how will the criminals have their guns taken? It will be us. We need to stop the flow of guns to criminals. This is not that hard to understand. We, the legal gun owners, are ALREADY in the data base. Our guns could be confiscated the way the current system ALREADY operates. The criminals would have their guns and we would be disarmed. Now does this make any sense?
Gun control doesn't mean preventing law-abiding citizens from owning guns. It means making sure that people who shouldn't own guns --- those who are violent --- from owning them.
So gang members that buy and sell guns will be subjected to these background checks too??
You do realize that medical records are currently NOT included in the background check system right?
How is that? If there is no chain of custody how will the criminals have their guns taken? It will be us. We need to stop the flow of guns to criminals. This is not that hard to understand. We, the legal gun owners, are ALREADY in the data base. Our guns could be confiscated the way the current system ALREADY operates. The criminals would have their guns and we would be disarmed. Now does this make any sense?
From what I understand. Those records get deleted after a few days.
How is that? If there is no chain of custody how will the criminals have their guns taken? It will be us. We need to stop the flow of guns to criminals. This is not that hard to understand. We, the legal gun owners, are ALREADY in the data base. Our guns could be confiscated the way the current system ALREADY operates. The criminals would have their guns and we would be disarmed. Now does this make any sense?
How can we stop the flow of guns to criminal, they wont obey any laws we pass....why cant you understand this?
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 27 days ago)
11,788 posts, read 5,798,330 times
Reputation: 14213
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
There's real potential here. The next step is to direct your attention to the relationship between being awash in shooters and the way society is today.
Sorry - you won't sway me. If I'm alone and someone's breaking in - believe me he won't be walking out. I may not like them but I'm not afraid to use them!
I am so sick of getting this same empty platitude from gun nut constitutionalists.
What expertise do you have that would allow you to determine how the US Constitution should be interpreted? Why do gun nut right wingers seem to think that they get to personally decide what laws are valid? If you decide that something is getting too far away from your version of what the constitution means does that somehow give you the right to just start killing anyone that disagrees with you?
A basic understanding of English.
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.
