2nd Amendment friendly gun laws

[HomerJS]

Making a bureaucratic statement like "you can't have gun ownership without responsibility" makes you lose credibility.

So irresponsible gun ownership is ok with you???

 

[highland145]

Thats all well and good but why do you folks oppose Voter ID's so much?

:awe::awe:

 

[zsdersw]

So you are in favor of some/reasonable regulation of weapons. We just now have to define resonable.

Reasonable? What we have in place right now is plenty reasonable.

Also remember even "reasonable laws" sometines require revision.

To become less reasonable and more hysterical? No.

 

[zsdersw]

So irresponsible gun ownership is ok with you???

Irresponsible gun ownership is what criminals and people who want to kill other people do. Everyone else is responsible.

 

[highland145]

Irresponsible gun ownership is what criminals and people who want to kill other people do. Everyone else is responsible.

Actually, irresponsible would include not keeping them secure from kids/crazies and such.

 

[Druidx]

I would add the following:

1. Gun owners must undergo mental health evaluations every 6 months.

2. A random 10-20% of gun onwers will find themself and their property subject to random police searches. Basically the police will enter your home without any prior notice and search around your property for any criminal activity.

3. Current gun owners must hand in current guns for new ones that are tagged and tracked. Those who fail will face steep penalities, ie very long jail time.

4. All bullets shall be registered, anyone who uses an unregistered bullet will face steep panalties.

5. Actually I would also add gun owners themself should have tracking devices implanted into them. They cannot be trusted were they go.

Not sure if serious....

 

[HomerJS]

Reasonable? What we have in place right now is plenty reasonable.



To become less reasonable and more hysterical? No.

Is this less about gun safety or just more about anti-federal govt?

I would say the right to life trumps 2nd amendment. Remember the OP did not propose anything that would infringe on the "right to bear arms" These are all safety/responsibility measures.

BTW - Don't you think we need a way to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

This thread delivers!!!! I haven't laughed this hard in weeks.

 

[HomerJS]

Irresponsible gun ownership is what criminals and people who want to kill other people do. Everyone else is responsible.

So was that mother responsible or irresponsible allowing access to guns in her home to someone mentally unstable?

Remember someone mentally unstable may not know it.

 

[zsdersw]

Actually, irresponsible would include not keeping them secure from kids/crazies and such.

... which is a crime already in some jurisdictions.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Is this less about gun safety or just more about anti-federal govt?

I would say the right to life trumps 2nd amendment. Remember the OP did not propose anything that would infringe on the "right to bear arms" These are all safety/responsibility measures.

BTW - Don't you think we need a way to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

Mentally Ill
1) do not allow them to purchase.
2) If living within a household; guns and ammo have to be secured
3) Not allowed to handle even with a licensed person.

Not much more that that can be done.

 

[piasabird]

Guns are sold and traded too often. Registering will not work. Registration works for cars because you drive cars around and they require plates. Registration will not work. However, I think gun sales could be tracked. Just write down the or the drivers license/state ID at time of sale. At least you could keep track of people who purchase lots of guns. They could track high volume purchases and have the cops stop by and demand to see if they still have the guns. Often people purchase guns legally, and then sell them to criminals. It is a constitutionally guaranteed right to own a firearm. It is the last defense against tyrany.

 

[zsdersw]

Is this less about gun safety or just more about anti-federal govt?

Both.

I would say the right to life trumps 2nd amendment. Remember the OP did not propose anything that would infringe on the "right to bear arms" These are all safety/responsibility measures.

Safety/responsibility measures the enforcement of which would require a level of competence never before demonstrated by government/police. That's why I said any such proposals are both stupid and hysterical knee-jerk reactions.

BTW - Don't you think we need a way to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

We already have a way, but if they're not diagnosed as "mentally ill" and therefore still have access to a gun.. and then do something we, in hindsight, would describe as mentally ill, there's nothing you can do to prevent that.

Hindsight fools us into thinking we can somehow have it, gain it, or will possess it before something bad happens the next time.

 

[Ausm]

This thread delivers!!!! I haven't laughed this hard in weeks.

You won't be laughing when Obama takes away your guns! :sneaky)

 

[xj0hnx]

Guns are sold and traded too often. Registering will not work. Registration works for cars because you drive cars around and they require plates. Registration will not work. However, I think gun sales could be tracked. Just write down the or the drivers license/state ID at time of sale. At least you could keep track of people who purchase lots of guns. They could track high volume purchases and have the cops stop by and demand to see if they still have the guns. Often people purchase guns legally, and then sell them to criminals. It is a constitutionally guaranteed right to own a firearm. It is the last defense against tyrany.

There is no law that you have to keep a gun once you buy it. They already investigate people that buy lots of guns at a time, or in a specific time frame.

 

[piasabird]

I could see how the government could legislate some protections for gun ownership. One big problem we have is we need a crossmatch between people who have mental problems and people who own guns. Especially people who take drugs for psychological conditions and own firearms. That could be grounds for a police intervention to take the firearms if the person is deemed a threat. People that take controlled substances for depression should not be allowed to own firearms. This is perfectly trackable. Doctors are often to blame if they give out too many prescriptions for happy pills.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Guns are sold and traded too often. Registering will not work. Registration works for cars because you drive cars around and they require plates. Registration will not work. However, I think gun sales could be tracked. Just write down the or the drivers license/state ID at time of sale. At least you could keep track of people who purchase lots of guns. They could track high volume purchases and have the cops stop by and demand to see if they still have the guns. Often people purchase guns legally, and then sell them to criminals. It is a constitutionally guaranteed right to own a firearm. It is the last defense against tyrany.

You know all this already happens right? Sales are logged by the dealer. Volume purchases are sent on a form to the ATF for them to follow up. And selling them to someone otherwise prohibited from owning a firearm is already a crime.

 

[dank69]

...

If we can cut these mass murders down to one every 12 years instead of 12 every year, its a win.

This is false as stated.

 

[dank69]

I would add the following:

1. Gun owners must undergo mental health evaluations every 6 months.

2. A random 10-20% of gun onwers will find themself and their property subject to random police searches. Basically the police will enter your home without any prior notice and search around your property for any criminal activity.

3. Current gun owners must hand in current guns for new ones that are tagged and tracked. Those who fail will face steep penalities, ie very long jail time.

4. All bullets shall be registered, anyone who uses an unregistered bullet will face steep panalties.

5. Actually I would also add gun owners themself should have tracking devices implanted into them. They cannot be trusted were they go.

Mentally Ill
1) do not allow them to purchase.
2) If living within a household; guns and ammo have to be secured
3) Not allowed to handle even with a licensed person.

Not much more that that can be done.

Is this less about gun safety or just more about anti-federal govt?

I would say the right to life trumps 2nd amendment. Remember the OP did not propose anything that would infringe on the "right to bear arms" These are all safety/responsibility measures.

BTW - Don't you think we need a way to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

Mental health is a subjective qualification that can be used by those in power for their own goals.

 

[dmens]

Hey look, the think-of-the-children crowd targeting the ACLU now:

Connecticut Mental Health Bill Defeated Months Before Deadly School Shooting: http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/201...efeated-months-before-deadly-school-shooting/

 

[DCal430]

Not sure if serious....

Ultimately I support a total ban on guns, short of that I support any law that makes it as uncomfortable as possible to own a gun including limiting your other rights. Guns have one purpose to maim and murder, that is it. A civilized society doesn't need weapons of murder and mayhem.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

lol how is this 2nd amendment friendly? looks like there are too many restrictions that gun ownership will be a huge hassle for anyone. this is not what i call sensible gun control.

 

[herm0016]

Ultimately I support a total ban on guns, short of that I support any law that makes it as uncomfortable as possible to own a gun including limiting your other rights. Guns have one purpose to maim and murder, that is it. A civilized society doesn't need weapons of murder and mayhem.

you support going against most of the other things in the bill of rights too... basically you are saying you support the government having total control over every aspect of everyones lives. unreasnable search and seizure being the most obviouse.

I like to murder animals to help feed people... is this unreasnable?

do you also support a ban on archery?

 

[DCal430]

you support going against most of the other things in the bill of rights too... basically you are saying you support the government having total control over every aspect of everyones lives. unreasnable search and seizure being the most obviouse.

I like to murder animals to help feed people... is this unreasnable?

do you also support a ban on archery?

Actually I do not support unreasonable search and seizure, I just think those who own guns should have their rights limited, and even treated like criminals. If you want to own a gun then here are the consequences.

If a gun ban should extend to archery I don't know, but it most definitely should extend to hunting rifles. If any case hunting should be ban, it is barbaric.

 

[dank69]

Ultimately I support a total ban on guns, short of that I support any law that makes it as uncomfortable as possible to own a gun including limiting your other rights. Guns have one purpose to maim and murder, that is it. A civilized society doesn't need weapons of murder and mayhem.

Protection. Guns are the great equalizer as well. Women can defend themselves against rapists and scrawny geeks can defend their families.