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.
exnihilo said:
40.png
Duesenberg:
One has to be 18 to buy a long gun in the US. 21 for a handgun.
Click to expand...
I think this is state dependent. I don’t know of federal age laws but I’m pretty sure in my state you can purchase a handgun at 18.
Click to expand...
21 for a handgun is federal law since a handgun is “other than a shotgun or rifle,”

18 U.S. Code § 922 - Unlawful acts
(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver—
(1) any firearm or ammunition to any individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is less than eighteen years of age, and , if the firearm, or ammunition is other than a shotgun or rifle, or ammunition for a shotgun or rifle, to any individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is less than twenty-one years of age;
 
Last edited:
My state requires you to have a permit to purchase a pistol. My county’s sheriff’s website says this about age:
Must be 21 years of age or older to purchase from federal firearms dealer and 18 for a private sale.
Click to expand...
So if this is accurate it would seem the 21 age limit has to do with FFL sellers only. So that is an federal law that only applies to those who are licensed. A private sale or even a private gift would allow a person 18 years old to acquire a pistol. And there would be no restriction on him carrying one however obtained.
 
I found some information from the NC(i am guessing you live there) DOJ that also says 21 from FFL, 18 private. i learned something new today.
 
To the thread question, I’d say most of the gun control laws on the books RIGHT NOW are probably pretty good…

Like not being able to own a machine gun or a functional mortar. Yeah. Those are pretty good…
 
Nelka said:
No guns is the only common sense.
Click to expand...
“No guns” is hardly “common sense.” That would require gun confiscation that would remove the guns from law-abiding people, leaving only criminals with guns. A terrible and dangerous situation. It would also be an illegal act.
 
Last edited:
To me and you this makes sense, but I think to people that own guns and are responsible with owning them, that doesn’t make any sense at all.
 
Duesenberg said:
40.png
Nelka:
No guns is the only common sense.
Click to expand...
“No guns” is hardly “common sense.” That would require gun confiscation that would remove the guns from law-abiding people, leaving on criminals with guns. A terrible and dangerous situation. It would also be an illegal act.
Click to expand...
Note that I’m a man who owns and enjoys several different kinds of firearms. With that said, what you’re saying here is that we’d fall into a “terrible and dangerous” situation if we were to severely curtail legal ownership of firearms in the US. As there are countries that have tried this, lets see if their situations are any more “terrible and dangerous” for having done so.

Looks at the other countries, particularly noticing their far lower gun-crime and homicide rates

Nope. That doesn’t seem to be what happens in real life. It looks like it turns out pretty okay.
 
Last edited:
starshiptrooper said:
If not for the actions of a particular demographic, the US homicide rate would be much lower, about 50% of what it is now.
Click to expand...
That’s true… If the poor sections of Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles and St. Louis did not exist, that alone would be nearly 50% by itself.
 
Inisfallen said:
Yes, starshiptrooper, we know who you mean. You manage to inject your vile racial garbage into just about every thread you take part in.
Click to expand...
He was merely stating a fact. That does not make it vile racial garbage.
 
Last edited:
Apparently the FBI’s crime stats are now “vile racial garbage”.

I would be willing to pay a pretty penny to anyone for a thorough and accurate study of crime rates by race that does not lump Hispanics and Latinos indiscriminately with whites. I suspect that the results would be very interesting indeed.
 
The American left has a thing about “white privilege”, “microaggressions”, and “subconscious racism”.
 
No surprise there. All you brave realists just telling it like it is, right? While the rest of us are too chicken to speak the truth. Got it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top