2nd Amendment friendly gun laws

[techs]

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.

And what is your criteria for mentally ill?

Who decides?

 

[herm0016]

are you a vegan dcal?


I belive it is the very respectful to kill, process and use all that you can from a game animal, more so than factory farms and feed lots.

should those who own knives, cars, etc... also have limited rights? how should we create a precident that will allow you to limit the rights of others, yet not have your own rights limited?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Why not hold the owner liable for any crimes commited with their gun.

If the mother had not been killed she should have been jailed for life. She knew her son was unstable yet kept guns in the house.

What about the OR mall shooting? Those guns were stolen.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

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.

None of this would of prevented the tragedy in Connecticut.

 

[CycloWizard]

I'm not telling you guys to shut up. Talk all you want. It will be no different than the anti-gun circle-jerks on CNN, NBC, etc.

I'm simply saying there is no reason it would be advantageous to have a discussion at this time, 3 days after the incident. I'll wait until you blow your wads and see what still remains a month from now.

If you want to comment, comment. Otherwise, why post at all? Any time something happens that calls attention to a certain topic, more threads will appear about that topic because it brings it to mind. If you want to start a new thread in a month, by all means please do so and I'll be happy to discuss it with you at your leisure.

 

[DCal430]

are you a vegan dcal?


I belive it is the very respectful to kill, process and use all that you can from a game animal, more so than factory farms and feed lots.

should those who own knives, cars, etc... also have limited rights? how should we create a precident that will allow you to limit the rights of others, yet not have your own rights limited?

No I am not, but I should be.

 

[Todd33]

.. none of which come in the aftermath of a gun-related tragedy.

Seems to be the time to talk about it, it is on everyone's mind.

 

[highland145]

Seems to be the time to talk about it, it is on everyone's mind.

Must have missed "sensible. "

 

[Smoblikat]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Every gun and the magazines for that gun should be registered with the government.

Every gun should have an RFID tag inserted into it that cannot be removed without some effort. The tag would also identify the owner, its type and the magazines that go with the gun.

Every gun owner must take and pass a gun safety test and do so at least once every three years.

Every gun owner must visually inspect each gun at least once every seven days to make sure it is not missing.

There should be a zero tolerance for being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while in possession of gun. Penalties should be severe.

All guns in a residence must be secured. Quick release retainers that open biometrically would still make guns readily availabe for home defense.



If I can be found by cell phone, then guns should also be. If the Sandy Hook school had readers surrounding the property the police would immediately have known there was a gun on the premises and may have arrived before the shooter finished his deadly task.

Registering guns clearly falls under the "well regulated militia" proviso.

These rules do not infringe in any way on owning a gun. The legitimate gun owner loses no rights by having an rfid in his gun. The criminal can be readily identified because he will have the gun without an rfid.

1. No............No. Big brother should have NOTHING to do with MY guns, they are here for me to use against them should the need arise. If I tell them what I have they will come looking for them.
2.No, I see your point, but again I do not want big brother knowing everything about how I protect myself. Whats to stop them from mandating that all guns need to have electronic shutoffs that are controlled by RF?
3. 105% yes times a million.
4. This shouldnt be a mandate, but common practice. These sort of procedures should be taught in the training course.
5. On public property I am 100% for this. And on private property you should have to pass a breathalyzer (only if there is an incident).
6. No biometrics. I would never keep my guns in a place that is electronically locked. Too much can go wrong. Guns shouldnt have to be stored in any specific way if they are on private property.

 

[Nintendesert]

And what is your criteria for mentally ill?

Who decides?

Hmmm if only there was this entire medical profession revolving around the treatment and diagnosis of mentally ill people. :hmm:

 

[Jaskalas]

Every gun should have an RFID tag inserted into it that cannot be removed without some effort. The tag would also identify the owner, its type and the magazines that go with the gun.

So... smash the tag, and/or place it next to a magnet? Also.. if the guy gained entry by shooting out the window, isn't that enough of an alert already? Wouldn't have changed a thing.

 

[xj0hnx]

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.

You are a totalitarian fascist. You do not believe in freedom. You should not be allowed to reproduce, and your parents should be put in prison for reproducing.

 

[PrinceofWands]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Every gun and the magazines for that gun should be registered with the government.

Every gun should have an RFID tag inserted into it that cannot be removed without some effort. The tag would also identify the owner, its type and the magazines that go with the gun.

Every gun owner must take and pass a gun safety test and do so at least once every three years.

Every gun owner must visually inspect each gun at least once every seven days to make sure it is not missing.

There should be a zero tolerance for being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while in possession of gun. Penalties should be severe.

All guns in a residence must be secured. Quick release retainers that open biometrically would still make guns readily availabe for home defense.



If I can be found by cell phone, then guns should also be. If the Sandy Hook school had readers surrounding the property the police would immediately have known there was a gun on the premises and may have arrived before the shooter finished his deadly task.

Registering guns clearly falls under the "well regulated militia" proviso.

These rules do not infringe in any way on owning a gun. The legitimate gun owner loses no rights by having an rfid in his gun. The criminal can be readily identified because he will have the gun without an rfid.

I would personally execute any person attempting to implement that package of laws.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I think that we may need to institute mandatory mental health screenings for certain individuals. It seems that a lot of men in this country have become very mentally unstable over the last few years. Perhaps this is something that Obamacare can handle.
\

 

[zsdersw]

No I am not, but I should be.

Why? Because the government says so?