Gun Control

[mtangelsfan]

I want to have a good discussion on this subject.

 

If you are a gun fanatic that doesn't believe in almost any gun control measures this thread is not for you.

 

If you are an anti-gun fanatic that wants to make all guns illegal this thread is not for you.

 

So I do not believe it should be legal for any guns to be sold over the internet.  I do not believe that gun parts should be sold over the internet.  I do not believe that gun shows should be given an exception for background checks.  I am fine with solid background checks to purchase any kind of firearms.

 

What are some of your guy's (and gals) thoughts?

[nate]

I think they should be treated like children.  If you lose one out of negligence, it should be a criminal offense.

 

I also think that all gun owners should be compelled to show they are still in possession of all of their registered firearms once a year.

 

I also think that if a crime is committed by someone else with a gun that is registered to you, you should be held criminally responsible for that crime.

Edited December 3, 2015 by nate

[mtangelsfan]

Don't you think all guns should be illegal?

[nate]

I am trying to be realistic and participate in your discussion, otherwise this thread is not for me.

[mtangelsfan]

This country isn't for you commie!

[mtangelsfan]

Seriously though I would be interested to see what your second suggestion would look like.  I think every other year maximum.

 

Also, I would be willing to agree that a gun owner should be responsible for what happens with it.  I don't think they should be charged with murder if someone is killed with a gun but I do think a lighter charge could be in order.

 

As far as losing a gun, I think if that happens their license should be taken away and a long (ten years or so) ban on owning a gun.

[nate]

I agree

 

I also think that with the technology we have, they should come up with a way of putting serial numbers or some sort of fingerprint on bullets that can trace them back to the owner.

 

I think the biggest problem with any reforms like this is they require funding and effort that will be objected too, especially by the gun manufactures lobby.

[Jason]

The libs are calling for "sensible gun control" California has those and then some. They didn't work. As a gun owner I am OK with background checks to acquire them but here in Cali we don't need anymore laws. 

[mtangelsfan]

I agree

 

I also think that with the technology we have, they should come up with a way of putting serial numbers or some sort of fingerprint on bullets that can trace them back to the owner.

 

I think the biggest problem with any reforms like this is they require funding and effort that will be objected too, especially by the gun manufactures lobby.

 

Probably, we aren't fixing anything here but I would guess that a majority of us aren't as far apart as the rhetoric makes it seem.

[mtangelsfan]

The libs are calling for "sensible gun control" California has those and then some. They didn't work. As a gun owner I am OK with background checks to acquire them but here in Cali we don't need anymore laws. 

 

Then why aren't they working?

[nate]

Probably, we aren't fixing anything here but I would guess that a majority of us aren't as far apart as the rhetoric makes it seem.

 

By far the hardest part will be the fact that the volume of guns owned in the US is unparalleled.  Just because it is hard doesn't mean nothing should be done about it.  If not for our generation, for our grand kids.

 

What about waiting periods?  I think at least a 3 day waiting period should exist for hand guns.  Maybe an exception process could exist in the case of a restraining order or imminent threat?  CA had 11 day waiting periods and I think that is too long, but I think being able to go buy a handgun in a half hour is a problem.  Not for mass shootings but definitely has an effect on inner city violence IMO.  Dude finds someone sleeping with his baby mama, buys a hand gun and blows him away etc.

[red321]

I think there is more to the story on the California one. Did they purchase directly or was it a strawman purchase...which is an issue that we need to address. Gun show loopholes need to be addressed. The fact our laws forbid the study of gun violence/ownership is asinine.

 

I agree on the 3 day waiting period and mandatory education/training.

 

And I think we need to take a serious look at military style weapons. I'm not talking about handguns or hunting style guns...but these military style weapons and ammo. Nobody is hunting with an AK, it's designed to maximize carnage. I've fired one, it's a rush...but I'll give that rush up to not figure out exit routes when I'm in public places.

[mtangelsfan]

By far the hardest part will be the fact that the volume of guns owned in the US is unparalleled.  Just because it is hard doesn't mean nothing should be done about it.  If not for our generation, for our grand kids.

 

What about waiting periods?  I think at least a 3 day waiting period should exist for hand guns.  Maybe an exception process could exist in the case of a restraining order or imminent threat?  CA had 11 day waiting periods and I think that is too long, but I think being able to go buy a handgun in a half hour is a problem.  Not for mass shootings but definitely has an effect on inner city violence IMO.  Dude finds someone sleeping with his baby mama, buys a hand gun and blows him away etc.

 

I would think a background check should take a few days.  I'm fine with a waiting period.  Guns aren't toys and should come with a lot of responsibility.

 

I can tell that here in Montana it is taken very seriously.  Gun safety classes are required for initial hunting licenses.

[mtangelsfan]

I think there is more to the story on the California one. Did they purchase directly or was it a strawman purchase...which is an issue that we need to address. Gun show loopholes need to be addressed. The fact our laws forbid the study of gun violence/ownership is asinine.

 

I agree on the 3 day waiting period and mandatory education/training.

 

And I think we need to take a serious look at military style weapons. I'm not talking about handguns or hunting style guns...but these military style weapons and ammo. Nobody is hunting with an AK, it's designed to maximize carnage. I've fired one, it's a rush...but I'll give that rush up to not figure out exit routes when I'm in public places.

 

I think many gun owners would be fine with your last suggestion red.  However, if such a law were in effect I would like the wording to include the protection of gun ownership.  I think many gun owners believe (maybe correctly) that giving up some weapons will lead to giving up all of them.  

[nate]

I think the background checks only take like 15 minutes.  It is electronic, verifies that they are the real person and no criminal history.

 

Crazy that I had to go through a lot more to get my job.

 

It probably surprises some here that I own a Mossberg 930 12ga.  Police response here is not that quick since I am in a small town.  I got something for home defense.  Since it is locked up and not loaded it wont really be very useful if I had to quickly act though so sometimes I wonder why I even own it.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Then why aren't they working?

 

Because some people are ****ing crazy (terrorists), some have no regard for the lives of others (gang members) and some people have mental issues that aren't properly addressed while they have access to guns that may not even be theirs.  

 

I don't own a gun but I've been wanting to take a course, pass the required test and get one that I keep locked up at home.  I don't know much beyond what is required in CA and even then I know the bare minimum but I don't think someone should be able to just up buy guns over the internet or at a gun show.  Over the internet you can claim to be whoever you want and anyone can walk into a gun show and find someone who will sell to them.  I also don't see the need for anyone outside of military or police/swat to have assault weapons.  I don't know what the solution is because there isn't an easy or cheap one.  I'm not trying to put a value on human lives rather as mentioned there's so many guns already out there that any massive legislation requiring registration, background checks, mental health checks and so isn't really feasible.  In the end I think it would just lead to more bureaucratic mess and inefficient government oversight.  That said obviously the current setup isn't working.      

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

I think the background checks only take like 15 minutes.  It is electronic, verifies that they are the real person and no criminal history.

 

Crazy that I had to go through a lot more to get my job.

 

It probably surprises some here that I own a Mossberg 930 12ga.  Police response here is not that quick since I am in a small town.  I got something for home defense.  Since it is locked up and not loaded it wont really be very useful if I had to quickly act though so sometimes I wonder why I even own it.

 

Peace of mind.  Better to have and not need than need and not have even if the reality is as you mentioned that you couldn't act quickly with it.  Ultimately I want one at home when I think of stories I've read like when some drugged out loser was breaking into a house while a wife was home with her children.  She was able to get the gun out and loaded and defend herself with the only downside in my opinion being that the guy survived multiple gun shots.  I think in most cases you aren't dealing with people who know what they're doing who are organized so that unloaded gun in your safe will suffice.    

[the dude abides]

I want to have a good discussion on this subject.

 

If you are a gun fanatic that doesn't believe in almost any gun control measures this thread is not for you.

 

If you are an anti-gun fanatic that wants to make all guns illegal this thread is not for you.

 

So I do not believe it should be legal for any guns to be sold over the internet.  I do not believe that gun parts should be sold over the internet.  I do not believe that gun shows should be given an exception for background checks.  I am fine with solid background checks to purchase any kind of firearms.

 

What are some of your guy's (and gals) thoughts?

 

Agree with all of these, but I'd add a high capacity magazine ban.

 

There is no logical reason why a civilian should have more than a 10 round magazine.  None whatsoever.

[nate]

Peace of mind.  Better to have and not need than need and not have even if the reality is as you mentioned that you couldn't act quickly with it.  Ultimately I want one at home when I think of stories I've read like when some drugged out loser was breaking into a house while a wife was home with her children.  She was able to get the gun out and loaded and defend herself with the only downside in my opinion being that the guy survived multiple gun shots.  I think in most cases you aren't dealing with people who know what they're doing who are organized so that unloaded gun in your safe will suffice.    

 

I definitely don't own a gun for peace of mind.

[Thomas]

And I think we need to take a serious look at military style weapons. I'm not talking about handguns or hunting style guns...but these military style weapons and ammo. Nobody is hunting with an AK, it's designed to maximize carnage. I've fired one, it's a rush...but I'll give that rush up to not figure out exit routes when I'm in public places.

 

I think the term assault weapons has done a great disservice to the left since so much of it is a just a sell job made to satisfy a demographic.  The 90's semi-automatic assault weapon ban was a great example where there were two versions of the same weapon with minor cosmetic differences with the military style/looking one being banned. However the capabilities of the two firearms were still equivalent.  But mission accomplished, right? It's funny that the military is seemingly always moving to smaller ammo as a compromise to other considerations in the mission such as portability. The non-military ammo may well be more lethal if portability isn't as much a concern.

[Guest]

Then why aren't they working?

Because a criminal can just buy a gun in Arizona/ Nevada where gun laws are lax and just drive back to California. Durrhurrr Edited December 3, 2015 by failos

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Call it what you will - you have it at home for security purposes to make yourself feel safer.     

[red321]

Agree with all of these, but I'd add a high capacity magazine ban.

 

There is no logical reason why a civilian should have more than a 10 round magazine.  None whatsoever.

 

Maybe they saw the deer twitch after the first 10 shots?

 

I was at the range with a friend and he was complaining that in California there was a hard to reach button you had to press to eject the magazine....and I thought to myself...big deal...it's not like the paper target was going anywhere.

[mtangelsfan]

Because a criminal can just buy a gun in Arizona/ Nevada where gun laws are lax and just drive back to California. Durrhurrr

 

take it easy, this is going to be a good thread with no insults.  If you want to participate, do so in a polite manner.

 

As for your point, it is quite possible that happens a lot.  But I doubt every gun used each year in California was purchased out of state.

[Crampknees]

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/02/gun-tv-home-shopping-channel