Sensible Gun Control

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Sensible Gun Control

    Look to Canada:

    -  Prohibits the domestic manufacture of 19 different types of assault weapons, and the importation of foreign-made assault weapons.

    - Requires a gun safety training course before you can apply for a license to own.

    - limits magazine capacity to 10 in a handgun, 5 in a rifle, 3 in a shotgun.

    - Register all handguns and track transfer of ownership

    - Requires a five-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    Look to Canada?

    Canada has no Second Amendment.

    Are you suggesting we should repeal the 2d Amendment?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    Move to Canada! Because we are not Canada!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Look to Canada?

    Canada has no Second Amendment.

    Are you suggesting we should repeal the 2d Amendment?

    [/QUOTE]


    No.  For better or worse, the debate over whether there is a right to bear arms is over - the Supreme Court has ruled that there is such a right and there is no reasonable chance that such right will be rescinded in the foreseeable future.

    Doesn't mean we can't have reasonable rules and restrictions though.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No.  For better or worse, the debate over whether there is a right to bear arms is over - the Supreme Court has ruled that there is such a right and there is no reasonable chance that such right will be rescinded in the foreseeable future.

    Doesn't mean we can't have reasonable rules and restrictions though.

    [/QUOTE]


    I think we have "reasonable rules and restrictions". Background checks are required, no fully automatic weapons are allowed and no armor piercing rounds!

    That's sensible!

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    Can we please stop calling it "gun control"?  Because it's really not.

     

    I don't want to control guns.  I want guns and gun ownership limited to people who can operate them in a safe and prudent manner.

     

    "Gun safety" is far better...it addresses the concerns better and might actually be achievable.

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Clearly the difference between Canada and US is a cultural thing. It's not like there is a shortage of guns in Canada. 

    [/QUOTE]

    So, are Americans just dumber?  More paranoid?  More disturbed?  More sadistic?

    Or, do we just like shooting things...?

     

    I don't buy the 'independence' or 'protection from govt' arguments for a second.  Neither is rational.

     

     

     

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    I don't understand the purpose of gun control of legal, legitimate gun owners.

    let me know when you want to focus on illegal weapons, then you'll have my ear.

    until the, the liberal position on gun control inonsensically.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    ...

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    ..

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    ...

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    ...another day has gone by and none of my high capacity ammo clips have caused any harm....

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to macnh1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ...another day has gone by and none of my high capacity ammo clips have caused any harm....

    [/QUOTE]

    it scares me.

    is that enough harm?

    (kidding)

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to macnh1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ...another day has gone by and none of my high capacity ammo clips have caused any harm....

    [/QUOTE]

    Another day gone by and my nuclear weapon has caused no harm...

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to Newtster's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Look to Canada:

    -  Prohibits the domestic manufacture of 19 different types of assault weapons, and the importation of foreign-made assault weapons.

    - Requires a gun safety training course before you can apply for a license to own.

    - limits magazine capacity to 10 in a handgun, 5 in a rifle, 3 in a shotgun.

    - Register all handguns and track transfer of ownership

    - Requires a five-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns

    [/QUOTE]

    THe problem is not guns. IT'S PEOPLE.  

    When there was a slew of drunk driver accidents and homicides, did we blame cars? No, we cracked down on PEOPLE that chose to drive drunk.

    [/QUOTE]

    And we took away their "right" to drive a car.

    Of course, that itself won't stop people whose licenses are revoked from going out and driving anyway, drunk or sober.

    But the fact is that a car (like a gun) is a machine that is dangerous - a public safety threat - in the hands of some people most of the time and other people some of the time.

    In the end, all the state can do is issue or revoke licenses and arrest people AFTER a  violation.

    So, maybe until we stop selling cars that can go 150 miles per hour, we really have no business taking certain guns off the streets.

     

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Newtster's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Look to Canada:

    -  Prohibits the domestic manufacture of 19 different types of assault weapons, and the importation of foreign-made assault weapons.

    - Requires a gun safety training course before you can apply for a license to own.

    - limits magazine capacity to 10 in a handgun, 5 in a rifle, 3 in a shotgun.

    - Register all handguns and track transfer of ownership

    - Requires a five-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns

    [/QUOTE]

    THe problem is not guns. IT'S PEOPLE.  

    When there was a slew of drunk driver accidents and homicides, did we blame cars? No, we cracked down on PEOPLE that chose to drive drunk.

    [/QUOTE]

    And we took away their "right" to drive a car.

    Of course, that itself won't stop people whose licenses are revoked from going out and driving anyway, drunk or sober.

    But the fact is that a car (like a gun) is a machine that is dangerous - a public safety threat - in the hands of some people most of the time and other people some of the time.

    In the end, all the state can do is issue or revoke licenses and arrest people AFTER a  violation.

    So, maybe until we stop selling cars that can go 150 miles per hour, we really have no business taking certain guns off the streets.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It is a bit odd that the highest speed we can legally go in this country is 65 yet cars are built to go 100+

    I dunno, how about making cars that can't exceed 100? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Or making guns that can't fire off dozens of rounds per second.

    (I thought I recalled that there were a couple of no-speed-limit highways out west...Montana, maybe.)

    But that's probably where this is all going.  A well-intentioned law that will barely get enforced.

    At least until the next mass shooting....

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we please stop calling it "gun control"?  Because it's really not.

     

    I don't want to control guns.  I want guns and gun ownership limited to people who can operate them in a safe and prudent manner.

     

    "Gun safety" is far better...it addresses the concerns better and might actually be achievable.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Limiting types of weapons is gun control.

    Licensing requirements such as background checks to keep guns from those who shouldn't have them is smart policy.

    Licensing requirement to take a course and be certified for a weapon is gun safety

    I had my 2 day basic pistol course last year and I'm currently deciding on which Sig Sauer 22 pistol to puchase the 226 or 229 in either the 15 or 20 round magazine with the the 9mm caliber x-change kit.  I guess I'm going to have to order soon.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Sensible Gun Control

    Well you knew it was coming; the second amendment is one of the third rails of politics.

    From politico:

    Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) is threatening to file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he moves to change gun regulations through executive order.

    “I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said.

    In a statement, Stockman didn’t hold back, saying Obama is launching an “attack on the very founding principles of this republic.”

    “The President’s actions are an existential threat to this nation,” Stockman said in a statement. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what has kept this nation free and secure for over 200 years.  The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny. Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible.”

     

Share