There'd be a slew of Jehova''s Witnesses dead under CD standard lol
Attack in Times Square
- Thread starter Dr.L.ThugU
- Start date
Creepy Chris has decreed what must be law in creepville
I agree with this for the most part. I also believe that most gun owners favor at least some restrictions. Finding agreement on those restrictions seems to be the hard part. My dad bought me my first rifle at age 6. It was a Marlin semi automatic 22 with an 18 shot magazine. I am now on my 3rd such gun. Many consider this to be an assault rifle for some reason. While I could do some damage with this gun it's not going to be someone's first choice if they actually want to kill people. For 49 years I have owned one of these guns and never shot at or even pointed it at anyone in all that time. I do have a problem that there are some out there that want to take this gun from me when I have done nothing wrong. I wish that I was smart enough to come up with the perfect solution on this matter but to me that solution doesn't include punishing those who have done nothing wrong and simply own a gun that some don't like.
Stop letting those same criminals out of prison early assbag and you'll significantly cut those problems down. Thank your daddy Obama for all of those problems.
No...not the kind of assault rifle I was referring to exactly although I am not a fan of any of them personally.
My concern is although i realize anyone that really wants access to a gun can get it, i don't care for the idea we just sit around and say everyone should have a gun...that will solve these problems.
That's crazy. First of all having the right to own a gun doesn't mean everyone wants one....or will use one if they had it. I am a big believer as it sounds like you are, that you don't even point one at someone unless you are willing to use it. The expectation should never be we should all be killers.
My main concern is lawlessness. Relying on guns to solve our disputes. That's how the west was settled. We need proper law enforcement taking lead. I never take my gun out of my house except if i am on a family trip. People take guns everywhere these days. Including bars in south carolina. Liquor and guns....now what could possibly go wrong?
I am no anti guns....but we have this idea just anyone should own one....and if something pops off more people should have had one.
You don't hear people saying if only more people were on foodstamps we wouldn't have so many abuses....lol
I believe in common sense gun control reform.
I think that at the outset, we have to realize that there is no such thing as a "full proof" plan, and that regardless of what laws are enacted, there will always be a black market for guns and people are going to acquire guns regardless of whether we do nothing or completely abolish the Second Amendment. But I believe we can still a positive impact on society through common sense gun control reform.
For me, the issue has to be divided into automatic v. semi-automatic weapons.
On this issue of AUTOMATIC weapons, I think it is a STATE SPECIFIC ISSUE. I don't think someone living in Downtown Miami on Brickell Ave. should have the right to own an automatic weapon. There are no elk, moose, deer, bears, bandits, or ISIS fighters running around downtown Miami. I don't see a reason for people living in ANY metropolis-like, high density area to own an automatic weapon. Now, someone living outside of Bismark, South Dakota, where there may be 100 humans in a 10 mile square radius- that is different. I could see an argument to be made about owning an automatic weapon in an uber urban area. On the issue of automatic weapons, I think that issue should be left to the voters of that particular state. Citizens of Alaska may have a different opinion about owning an automatic firearm than citizens of New York.
On the issue of SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons, I believe that citizens of all 50 States should be allowed to own a semi-automatic weapon, subject to a comprehensive background.
Whether it is semi-automatic or automatic, there HAS to be a comprehensive background check to own that gun. That comprehensive background check should be 5-10 pages, ask specific questions (created by psychologists, gun experts, and law enforcement officials), require 3 personal references. Ultimately, should want to be able to answer the following three questions beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) is this person mentally fit to own a gun; (2) has this person been convicted of a felony?; and (3) is this person more likely than not to inflict great bodily harm? The applicant's application for owning a firearm should then be run through the FBI, DHS, and CIA databases. If two or more of these three agencies say that the applicant should not own a firearm, then the applicant is denied the right to own a firearm, and may not re-apply for a firearm for a period of 24 months from the date of denial. That is the type of language I would like to see. Have a federal standard like this across the board for all 50 states, but then leave the issue of owning an AUTOMATIC firearm to the States, letting each State decide what it wants and needs based on that State's SPECIFIC situation.
No amendment is without limitation... Even the First Amendment's Free Speech has limitations (hate speech, prior restraint in unique circumstances, etc.). The Second Amendment is the same way.
I think that at the outset, we have to realize that there is no such thing as a "full proof" plan, and that regardless of what laws are enacted, there will always be a black market for guns and people are going to acquire guns regardless of whether we do nothing or completely abolish the Second Amendment. But I believe we can still a positive impact on society through common sense gun control reform.
For me, the issue has to be divided into automatic v. semi-automatic weapons.
On this issue of AUTOMATIC weapons, I think it is a STATE SPECIFIC ISSUE. I don't think someone living in Downtown Miami on Brickell Ave. should have the right to own an automatic weapon. There are no elk, moose, deer, bears, bandits, or ISIS fighters running around downtown Miami. I don't see a reason for people living in ANY metropolis-like, high density area to own an automatic weapon. Now, someone living outside of Bismark, South Dakota, where there may be 100 humans in a 10 mile square radius- that is different. I could see an argument to be made about owning an automatic weapon in an uber urban area. On the issue of automatic weapons, I think that issue should be left to the voters of that particular state. Citizens of Alaska may have a different opinion about owning an automatic firearm than citizens of New York.
On the issue of SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons, I believe that citizens of all 50 States should be allowed to own a semi-automatic weapon, subject to a comprehensive background.
Whether it is semi-automatic or automatic, there HAS to be a comprehensive background check to own that gun. That comprehensive background check should be 5-10 pages, ask specific questions (created by psychologists, gun experts, and law enforcement officials), require 3 personal references. Ultimately, should want to be able to answer the following three questions beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) is this person mentally fit to own a gun; (2) has this person been convicted of a felony?; and (3) is this person more likely than not to inflict great bodily harm? The applicant's application for owning a firearm should then be run through the FBI, DHS, and CIA databases. If two or more of these three agencies say that the applicant should not own a firearm, then the applicant is denied the right to own a firearm, and may not re-apply for a firearm for a period of 24 months from the date of denial. That is the type of language I would like to see. Have a federal standard like this across the board for all 50 states, but then leave the issue of owning an AUTOMATIC firearm to the States, letting each State decide what it wants and needs based on that State's SPECIFIC situation.
No amendment is without limitation... Even the First Amendment's Free Speech has limitations (hate speech, prior restraint in unique circumstances, etc.). The Second Amendment is the same way.
Last edited:
My dad was the one that taught me gun safety and that included the never point a gun unless you are going to use it part, and I've tried my best to pass along what he taught me to my three children. Here in Utah it's just about as easy to get a concealed weapons permit as it is to get a soda from the local convenience store and you can carry them just about anywhere you want to. I have no doubt that some of these people shouldn't be anywhere near a weapon. My guns stay in the closet unless I take it out to do some target shooting in the desert out here and I hope with all my heart that I'm never forced to use it for anything else.
We just passed legislation legalizing surpressors and short barreled rifles. Originally it included automatic weapons but since has been amended and automatic weapons was taken out. Love it!
I agree with most of this. This is a good start and if it were the law of the land I could go along with this. A couple of points regarding felons though. Was it a violent felony that was on their record? Also, I was raised that if you did your time then you have paid your debt to society and should be free to resume your life. Naturally if you have been involved with gun violence that would change things. Also there are many that run into trouble when they are younger and are able to turn their lives around and for some of those I don't know that a lifetime ban should be in order. These are just my opinions though and like I said you do have a good position on this. Nice post. BTW I have no felonies on my record.
If a fine upstanding American such as myself was interested in buying a firearm for them self what would you guys suggest?? I'm thinking handgun!! Lots of long drives, Tampa to Miami usually. Just looking for extra protection.
.357
P.S. I am of the belief that if a fine upstanding citizen as yourself wanted to buy an assault weapon he should have the right to do so. Screw this BS Common sense gun reform crap. It's not the guns that kill.
Last edited:
It is tough for me to speak to certain criminal law issues because I'm a civil constitutional law attorney in business litigation. Perhaps there should be a distinction between violent felonies i.e., arson, robbery, rape, versus non-violent felonies like check fraud or something? No lifetime ban- that's why I am in favor of affording someone the opportunity to re-apply 24 months after date of official denial. Give someone a chance to rehabilitate and make improvements and show positive change deserving right to own.
"Guns don't kill people; death kills people." - Ted Nugent
Like I said, I've only owned rifles. My wife is thinking about buying a handgun so a couple of questions. Why would you choose a 357 and would that be a good choice for a female? Thanks.
Exactly. I have an Australian friend that used to tell me how great it had worked out since they took away everyone's guns. Murder and rape had actually gone up as had robberies, but it was stabbings not shootings so that was much better...
.357 for a man because it's reliable , revolvers won't jam on you, it packs enough punch but wont tear your arm off like a .50. It's a good gun.
For a lady, I guess a .38
Thanks for the response. Like I said these were just some concerns that I had and probably don't mean much in the grand scheme of things to the people that are going to be making these decisions.
Dirty Harry style I like it!! Need something I can keep in glove box!!
Thanks bro!! Have looked at Sig Sauers, got a class for conceal and carry next weekend.
On the flip side, Chicago has the most intense gun restrictions, while murder/gun victim rate is..........
And also Imam Obama's hand picked boy as mayor!!
Exactamundo. Now Creepy Chris will chime in with some long winded BS that will contain "That's just silly...lol...smh" ....
That's no lady that's my wife. Her and my youngest son have been going to one of the local shooting ranges out here for about a year and a half now and for the past couple of months she has been thinking about getting her own gun. Thanks for the info.
You're still on that roll you've been on since yesterday.....gotta be careful with you.
It does seem to be a pattern in this country that wherever the strictest gun laws are, the death rate by guns goes up. Must be just a coincidence.
Nah I'm pretty harmless. That brownie on the other hand.....
Europe provides much lower sentencing. The neo Nazi who killed 98 people in Norway is getting out in 15 years. Yet lower gUn murders. US has draconian sentencing laws and higher gun deaths. Only thing that will work is federal nationwide ban.
It's worked wonders in Australia Europe and anywhere ban is imposed.
You're a retard grub. Dumb as a stump.
NRA has way too much money involved. There are a ton of politicians bought and paid for.
We have too much money in politics in general.
We have too much money in politics in general.
More money more info, bet you busted a nut when Obama broke record in donations.
Most popular prep ever. Couldn't help self. We progressive dems have lots to give.
Kinda like your mom and her kangaroo like pouch.
Lmao you literally just made that up and then had the audacity to call me dumb. The only thing you think you know is what you were brainwashed with. You are an example of how retarded the left wing party is.
"The 2015 statistics show the estimated rate of violent crime was 372.6 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants" USA
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2015-crime-statistics
There are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the U.K., making it the most violent place in Europe. Austria is second, with a rate of 1,677 per 100,000 people, followed by Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Holland.
Interesting you say our rights are for citizens abiding by the law, yet non-citizen illegals are OK to have rights in sanctuary cities?
He wants to give them phones, food, money and guns while we work they can eat free and shot each other!! Good Americans getting affected due to savages Imam Obama brought in for a vote!! "Dreamers" and Muslims come here kill people and Americans hear get shit about it!! It's a mess!!
Yes but why let facts get in the way of a nice debate? Oh wait, I can see you're kind of new here.
Still playing by the dozen, telling you find your Dad don't waste time here! He ain't got the $9 a month!
The Europeans record pillow and slap fights are very thorough in statistics. They also record less than 100 gun homicides per year while we record more tHan 30,000. Do you understand that most walk away from pillow and fist fight's and even stabbings but a homicide is different?
You're not very bright are you?
You lied. You omitted the property crimes from US stats. Abut 2500 per population of 100K. You included property crimes for Europeans skewing results. So properly combined the US rate is 3000 higher than even Europe's most sordid hooligans, the Brexit Engish who hover at 2000.
So you're not only dumb. You're a G damned liar. I really hate liars btw.
No I did not. See this is exactly where you're out of your league but you'll keep spewing your bullsh#t. Under UCR stats Viokent crimes and property crimes are separated into two different field. You can't confuse the two. The European stats are strictly violent crimes. Youre just sad!
You're absolutely full of sh-t and don't know what you're talking about. A reported violent crime is just that. You also use the term "pillow fight" to downplay the seriousness of it which is a common trait for liars. Dude this is my wheel house and I know this sh#t inside and out. Please stop before you embarrass yourself
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Transfer Portal and Comprehensive Rankings after 2024 Spring Window
- Latest: BenjaminRivals
-
-
-