- Status
D
Dan202
Guest
@Jaguar where should it stop?
I would like background checks for every gun transfer and every purchase of ammunition. Or at least a comparison to a “no buy list” that includes a list of people with criminal activity and people that are not mentally sound. Along with that would need to be a free method to challenge inclusion on the “no buy list” that does not require the individual to have a lawyer just fill out forms and provide evidence that whatever the original problem was is no longer an issue. Contrary to popular belief many people who have been identified as a threat to themselves or others are able to purchase weapons. People with restraining orders, people engaging in spousal abuse, people in drug treatment should all have extra trouble buying a gun/amo. Of course this would need to be federal so that guns are not just imported across state lines.
What steps if any would other folks support?
I would like background checks for every gun transfer and every purchase of ammunition. Or at least a comparison to a “no buy list” that includes a list of people with criminal activity and people that are not mentally sound. Along with that would need to be a free method to challenge inclusion on the “no buy list” that does not require the individual to have a lawyer just fill out forms and provide evidence that whatever the original problem was is no longer an issue. Contrary to popular belief many people who have been identified as a threat to themselves or others are able to purchase weapons. People with restraining orders, people engaging in spousal abuse, people in drug treatment should all have extra trouble buying a gun/amo. Of course this would need to be federal so that guns are not just imported across state lines.
What steps if any would other folks support?
T
TK421
Guest
England had a lower homicide rate in 1910 than it did in 2010. What you find is that states and countries that already have low violent gun crime sometimes decide to sort of posthumously ban private firearms, and then you’ll have some ardent supporters of it attempt to claim that it’s the reason they have a low homicide rate. It’s a classic error of putting the cart before the horse, and it doesn’t actually make any sense unless you reinvent the history (which plenty of people don’t have a problem doing, if they think it will further their cause)
This is what happened in the UK in 1997. The UK was/is a country with low violent crime, and after a shooting occurred that went viral throughout the news, opportunistic politicians were able to successfully seize upon the story and the emotions of the moment as a rallying cry in order to pass the gun ban. The results of the ban are dubious, but it makes a lot of people feel better.
J
Jaguar
Guest
There is no list, nor will there ever be, of people that are mentally ill. How would you do that? Who makes the call? Obviously we know that the choice will be made by the US Gov. EX: there has been mentions of keeping guns from people that take various medications. As far as background checks, I can live with that, however in CA you have to wait 10 days, after a purchase. When I lived in MO it took 5 minutes. In CA it’s just a way to squeeze out more time. The thought of the government, "the longer the wait, the fewer incidents. That’s nonsense, and only proves there real intentions.
Most of the mom & pop gun stores have been shut down by the state. According to one that is still open, the gov. sends out people that check paperwork for any errors. Even if it’s a wrong date w/I a day. That’s why even WalMart does not sell guns in this state anymore. A date error was made on the sale, and the buyer picked his gun up a day before the 10 day wait.
There is a lot more to say with little time. The answer to your question is, it should have stopped a long time ago. In the eyes of the Legislatures, it never will. If things are done quietly and slowly, most of us will not notice. Before you know it, our right has been taken away.
IMO, parents, friends and relatives, need to seek professional help for those that need it. Denying your child is ill, or just sweeping it under a rug is a huge problem with this entire subject. Where is the parental & individual responsibility?
P
phil19034
Guest
Depending on where you live, I would expect that statement to be true or false.
R
Rau
Guest
I trust you didn’t go skeet shooting in a suburban backyard?
The thing to be concerned with is the notion that everyone has a gun or two in their bed-side table drawer, not the idea of a sport involving a gun and an inanimate target.
Sometimes in this debate you’d think people can’t see the difference.
I
Ignatius
Guest
Chicago has the tightest gun control laws AND the most murders per capita in the country. It is virtually impossible for an average citizen to legally get a gun in Chicago, consequently only the criminals have weapons and the citizenry is defenseless.
California has very tight gun control laws and some of the most devastating mass murders.
Switzerland has universal gun ownership and the lowest instance of violent crime in Europe.
What you are “pointing out” is patently false.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
I might make one concession to my point of view. If Australia had mountain loins on the loose in country areas… I think a gun would be a fine accessory for every woman. They sound pretty scary.
J
Jaguar
Guest
I believe that if a gun owner has reason to believe that it is needed at his area of residence, then he has every right to do so. It’s his home and he should decide. The only caveat is that if children, untrusted people, irresponsible adults or mentally ill people are ever present in the home.
By the way, for some folks there are small gun safes that can be opened very quickly by only one individual, while all others can not.
J
Jaguar
Guest
I don’t know … all those venomous snakes and spiders down there would worry me a tot more.I might make one concession to my point of view. If Australia had mountain loins on the loose in country areas… I think a gun would be a fine accessory for every woman. They sound pretty scary.
R
Rau
Guest
It is not a question of rights, it’s a question of what’s best for the society.
D
Dan202
Guest
CA has strict gun laws but neighboring states dont, the same goes for Chicago the guns just come in from Indiana and other states with weak gun laws, many times they are purchased legally and then sold to others who transport them across state/municipal lines the same is true in DC.
Switzerland has universal gun ownership by law abiding sane citizens in the military/reserve not just handed out to everyone with an ID.
J
Jaguar
Guest
Does the Swed. Gov. decide who is sane & who is not? What do you mean by law abiding?
D
Dan202
Guest
To be fair I grew up with a gun in the house, love target practice and would be happy to go hunting if I had a bigger freezer.
The research shows that having a gun particularly a handgun in the home is more likely to cause problems (like injury or death) than to prevent injury or death.
medscape.com/viewarticle/753058_5
aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full
bradycampaign.org/risks-of-having-a-gun-in-the-home
J
Jaguar
Guest
Yeah, and a family with a car stands a greater chance of being in a fatal car accident.
As far as your links are concerned … not surprised to read that on the Brady Foundation website. One can pull apart any of those %'s. If you want I’ll find articles that show the opposite.
IMO, the bottom line remains in my post above.:" if a gun owner has reason to believe that it is needed at his area of residence, then he has every right to do so. It’s his home and he should decide. The only caveat is that if children, untrusted people, irresponsible adults or mentally ill people are ever present in the home.
If you do not feel safe with a handgun in your home, you have the freedom of not having one. I want one because I don’t want to have to throw my toothbrush at a home invader.
R
Rau
Guest
If you truly believe your community is safer when all are armed, then I do understand. For me, I am glad I live where that is not the prevailing mindset.
D
Dan202
Guest
I am not suggesting no guns, just more restrictions and protections for society. I think we should be making evidence based decisions when it comes to policy.Yeah, and a family with a car stands a greater chance of being in a fatal car accident.
As far as your links are concerned … not surprised to read that on the Brady Foundation website. One can pull apart any of those %'s. If you want I’ll find articles that show the opposite.
IMO, the bottom line remains in my post above.:" if a gun owner has reason to believe that it is needed at his area of residence, then he has every right to do so. It’s his home and he should decide. The only caveat is that if children, untrusted people, irresponsible adults or mentally ill people are ever present in the home.
If you do not feel safe with a handgun in your home, you have the freedom of not having one. I want one because I don’t want to have to throw my toothbrush at a home invader.
I would be interested in the studies that show that having a gun in the home decreases chances of having a gun related accident or that you are more likely to use a gun in self defense than etc.
Again I am not saying no guns just more restrictions about who has access to weapons and ammo.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
All able bodied males in Switzerland do military service and are issued with a gun. Their guns are stored securely in readiness for some military type use if the need arises. Nobody has a gun for private ‘self defense’. To me that sounds like the proper and true meaning of a ‘militia’.
D
Dan202
Guest
I agree
- Status