Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What level of gun restrictions is right?
I believe private citizens should not be allowed to own firearms (total ban). 7 3.78%
I believe private citizens should have many more restrictions on firearms (no military-style weapons, magazines of a certain size, etc). 37 20.00%
I believe existing gun laws are fine, we just need better enforcement. 70 37.84%
I believe existing gun laws are too restrictive; they should be loosened. 31 16.76%
I believe there should be no laws on firearm ownership, since it is a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. 40 21.62%
Voters: 185. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2016, 06:31 PM
 
Location: USA
31,039 posts, read 22,070,533 times
Reputation: 19081

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobdreamz View Post
I don't own or ever have owned any Guns , however have family & friends who do and are very responsible.
I voted for the #2 option military-style weapons since mass shootings started to increase in frequency after the Assault Weapons Ban expired over a decade ago. Who needs to own a weapon like that unless you are living in Syria?
But, gun murders have gone down since then

 
Old 01-23-2016, 06:35 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
1,951 posts, read 1,636,212 times
Reputation: 1577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobdreamz View Post
I don't own or ever have owned any Guns , however have family & friends who do and are very responsible.
I voted for the #2 option military-style weapons since mass shootings started to increase in frequency after the Assault Weapons Ban expired over a decade ago. Who needs to own a weapon like that unless you are living in Syria?
It looks like there are about 20 active shooter situations per year, with 25% being from assault rifles. 50% are from handguns. The number has stayed flat for 34 years, not increasing. The assault weapon ban expired in 1994, so it looks like that didn't have an effect on mass shootings either.

This means 5 active shooter situations per year involve a military-style weapon. And there are an estimated 4 million rifles in America. This means that 0.000125% of military-style rifles are used for mass shootings. The other 99.999875% are not.

It looks like military-style weapons aren't the problem. The media exaggerates.

Active shooter source
Number of military-style weapon source
 
Old 01-23-2016, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Secure, Undisclosed
1,984 posts, read 1,700,367 times
Reputation: 3728
Criminologist here...

You are focusing on the tool the offender uses, not the offender himself.

We are lucky to be living in 2016, where we can look back at the sentencing experiment from 1985 to 2010. When congress mandated tougher sentencing for crack cocaine, the US experienced an unprecedented drop in all types of crime. HUGE drop.

That experiment tells us that if you want to significantly reduce future weapons offending, mandate very tough sentences for all crimes involving guns. Straw purchasing, illegal possession, using a firearm to commit a felony - all of it. Make it 20 years minimum mandatory. Inside five years, you will see a marked reduction in gun crime. History does not lie.

Just sayin'....
 
Old 01-23-2016, 07:16 PM
 
26,694 posts, read 14,563,173 times
Reputation: 8094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3 View Post
Criminologist here...

You are focusing on the tool the offender uses, not the offender himself.

We are lucky to be living in 2016, where we can look back at the sentencing experiment from 1985 to 2010. When congress mandated tougher sentencing for crack cocaine, the US experienced an unprecedented drop in all types of crime. HUGE drop.

That experiment tells us that if you want to significantly reduce future weapons offending, mandate very tough sentences for all crimes involving guns. Straw purchasing, illegal possession, using a firearm to commit a felony - all of it. Make it 20 years minimum mandatory. Inside five years, you will see a marked reduction in gun crime. History does not lie.

Just sayin'....
We don't want any real solutions, buddy!
 
Old 01-23-2016, 07:40 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY 🇺🇸
36,754 posts, read 14,825,823 times
Reputation: 35584
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
I own fully automatic firearms!

Why shouldn't you be able to own them too.


Exactly. Firearms collecting is alive and well. As it should be.
 
Old 01-23-2016, 07:49 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
783 posts, read 695,411 times
Reputation: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3 View Post
Criminologist here...

You are focusing on the tool the offender uses, not the offender himself.

We are lucky to be living in 2016, where we can look back at the sentencing experiment from 1985 to 2010. When congress mandated tougher sentencing for crack cocaine, the US experienced an unprecedented drop in all types of crime. HUGE drop.

That experiment tells us that if you want to significantly reduce future weapons offending, mandate very tough sentences for all crimes involving guns. Straw purchasing, illegal possession, using a firearm to commit a felony - all of it. Make it 20 years minimum mandatory. Inside five years, you will see a marked reduction in gun crime. History does not lie.

Just sayin'....
Do you have statistics using countries as well? I know that Singapore for instance has very tough laws and very little crime. I do not know statistics across countries and am wondering how effective tough laws work in real life. However I think that Sweden also is relatively safe and they do not have tough laws.
 
Old 01-23-2016, 08:00 PM
 
45,226 posts, read 26,437,203 times
Reputation: 24980
No gun laws, period.
 
Old 01-23-2016, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Iowa, USA
6,542 posts, read 4,094,282 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker View Post
So you believe fully automatic weapons should be legal? You believe felons should be able to own guns? You believe anyone one who has the money should be able to buy whatever guns they want even people who are just visiting this country? Do you?
The government has the authority to take rights away with due process. Meaning you can have fully automatic weapons be legal and still make it so felons cannot legally purchase one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3 View Post
Criminologist here...

You are focusing on the tool the offender uses, not the offender himself.

We are lucky to be living in 2016, where we can look back at the sentencing experiment from 1985 to 2010. When congress mandated tougher sentencing for crack cocaine, the US experienced an unprecedented drop in all types of crime. HUGE drop.

That experiment tells us that if you want to significantly reduce future weapons offending, mandate very tough sentences for all crimes involving guns. Straw purchasing, illegal possession, using a firearm to commit a felony - all of it. Make it 20 years minimum mandatory. Inside five years, you will see a marked reduction in gun crime. History does not lie.

Just sayin'....
This is always a solution that comes up. I compare it to shoving things under your bed when mom tells you to clean your room. The problem is still there, just out of the way. Which isn't a solution in my mind.

You start off by saying we should focus on the offended, but the solution does not address the offenders actions. US prisons are garbage. This isn't really up for debate any more. Despite leading the world in many areas, our criminal justice system is surprisingly archaic. The best examples of this I can provide is our recidivism rate and high prison population.

These are not good things. Recidivism speaks for itself, and some think that having more people in prison means less crime on the streets, but in order for someone to go to prison, crime has to happen on the streets, and since most crimes are non violent, they are unlikely to be in their for more than a decade, and with our high recidivism means that the crime still shows up on the streets.

The problem is that prisons don't do **** to adjust behavior. They ignore psychology and science, as we Americans love to do, apparently, which is appalling, and abandon any of our apparent Christian values for beliefs that call for 'bad' people to suffer.

Meanwhile, Norway has a max prison sentence of 20 years, a heavy focus on rehabilitation, and also one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world. This is usually dismissed with 'cultural differences,' which (1) is not an argument, and (2) means American culture is inferior and needs to change. If our culture means having a results based criminal justice system is impossible, then the culture has to change. I do not consider longer prison sentences to be a proper solution that a society that values human life can support.
 
Old 01-23-2016, 09:13 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker View Post
So you believe fully automatic weapons should be legal? You believe felons should be able to own guns? You believe anyone one who has the money should be able to buy whatever guns they want even people who are just visiting this country? Do you?



fully automatic weapons are already legal to own. if you do not want a criminal to own a firearm, then keep them in prison.

yes to the rest of your questions.
 
Old 01-23-2016, 09:17 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobdreamz View Post
I don't own or ever have owned any Guns , however have family & friends who do and are very responsible.
I voted for the #2 option military-style weapons since mass shootings started to increase in frequency after the Assault Weapons Ban expired over a decade ago. Who needs to own a weapon like that unless you are living in Syria?



why does anyone need a car that drives over 70 miles per hour? why do you need more than 1 tv, computer or phone in your home?

civilian military lookalike rifles are not military rifles. wish you gun haters would learn that before spouting off about something in which you have no idea.

also, the media and liberal politicians talk about high capacity magazines. guess what, a 20-30 round magazine is a standard capacity magazine.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:13 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top