Just what is "common sense gun control?" How about a few examples?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duesenberg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Isca said:
I’m not talking about bomb or other terrorist attacks here @Duesenberg, because the topic is just about gun control. No-one can stop someone driving a van into a group of people, stabbing someone or secretly making a bomb, sadly, and you unfortunately know all about massive-scale non-gun terrorism in the USA.
Click to expand...
Right
Isca said:
However, we can stop Mr Joe Public going to a shop, legally buying a powerful gun and then taking it home to sort out a domestic dispute, or taking it into a school or a concert venue.
Click to expand...
No you cannot.
Isca said:
Of course, there will always be illegal weapons around for people who know where to go. But if you can’t buy them in the open without a good reason (farmers’ shotguns, for instance, or target shooting where handling is strictly controlled), then there won’t be so many of them around.
Click to expand...
There are already more than 350 MILLION firearms in the US. Criminals will always be able to illegally procure guns.
 
AngelusDomini said:
Also from the UK here. I agree with Isca. Unless you can prove you need to have a firearm for a legitimate purpose you shouldn’t have one.
Click to expand...
Who determines a “need” or “legitimate purpose”? The gov’t? LOL!
 
LilyM said:
Cars are lethal. Where I live we make.people wait until they are over 16 years of age and pass written and practical tests demonstrating their ability to drive safely. As well as police checks and eyesight tests.

Come to think of it - why NOT one person one gun? You’ve only got one pair of hands to shoot with after all. Yes, we can make an exception for those who possibly need more - provided they can prove genuine need rather than just want.
Click to expand...
One has to be 18 to buy a long gun in the US. 21 for a handgun.

Because different guns are used for different types of hungting, self/home/business defense, marksmanship competition, etc.

“…one person, one gun…” LOL!!!
 
LilyM said:
As the saying goes, no-one ever got rich underestimating the stupidity of the public. I’ll place my faith in tougher legal controls any day.
Click to expand...
Gun control has been proven not to work. There is a mountain of hard data on the subject that has been analyzed by a number of different, respected organizations including the FBI.
 
steve-b said:
Now compare that to 1.5 million abortions / year in the U.S. alone. That’s 4,109 murders/day of innocent children by elective procedure.

Our sense of proportion is more than a bit screwed up
Click to expand...
BOTH are tragic!
 
Yes, because they are our elected representatives and have the authority to create laws. We may also petition them if we do not agree with a stance and call for a debate in Parliament. Who else would be able to do it? Those who sell firearms or a rifle association? I can really see that working!
 
So who else would put gun control in place? Who ultimately would enshrine it in law? For the UK that would be Parliament. Surely it is the job of politicians to work for the safety and wellbeing of all in society, so yes it is a political issue.
 
AngelusDomini said:
So who else would put gun control in place? Who ultimately would enshrine it in law? For the UK that would be Parliament. Surely it is the job of politicians to work for the safety and wellbeing of all in society, so yes it is a political issue.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t make any changes at all during times of great political pressure. That’s how most of the ridiculous gun control laws came to being in the US.
 
Have enjoyed reading your thoughts on this topic. I have been asking the same question myself on other topics on the forum and I get the same liberal political answers from many people who do not seem to know much about the topic. This has become the cause celeb re for the Democrats who never utter a peep when we continue to hear of the shootings in Chicago (with some of the most restrictive laws). Wonder why that is?
 
marybobo said:
Have enjoyed reading your thoughts on this topic. I have been asking the same question myself on other topics on the forum and I get the same liberal political answers from many people who do not seem to know much about the topic. This has become the cause celeb re for the Democrats who never utter a peep when we continue to hear of the shootings in Chicago (with some of the most restrictive laws). Wonder why that is?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t call them “liberal political answers”, just ignorant ones. I don’t think many that opine on the matter have really studied the history of gun control and its lack of efficacy. They’re just reacting to horror without doing enough homework.
 
Duesenberg said:
It what way? You offer no constructive idea on this matter, that’s for certain.
Click to expand...
What is for certain is that he stole his mother’s Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle from his mother’s stockpile and murdered 20 children between six and seven years old, as well as six adult staff members. Apparently her effort to lock up her weapons was not effective.
Every gun should be insured to pay out damages to the wounded victims and to the families of those killed. The insurance company would pay out the damages. Similar to the case of cars. When you own a car, you have to buy insurance to cover for accidents and property damage. You need to hold the insurance whether or not you ever have an accident. It is required by law as part of the registration process in many states.
This is not my idea, but something that seems very reasonable to me.
 
In my experience, when someone says we need “common sense gun control”, they mean nothing short of banning and confiscating all firearms. Using the term “common sense” also suggests that the laws we already have aren’t common sense.
 
Solutions that ultimately people won’t want because it will damage their cred in polite society as well as make them do more work.
 
AlNg said:
It made a lot of sense to Adam Lanza. Perhaps you never heard of him, so you discount the possibility that someone can steal a gun from a stockpile. Locks can be broken into.
Click to expand...
Adam Lanza had a mental disability. Do you really want to use him as your point of reference here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top