Gun control

Raoul said:
Both sides are on the gun control debate are being a bit disingenuous. Those advocating for more gun control should just come out and say that they want to have a look at the 2nd amendment, instead of delicately tapdancing around the issue by going after one style of one weapon.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is the case though and unfortunately the message is mixed. I agree with you that there was no clear message, more just a march for their lives. William Legate has been amazing on Twitter proposing serious changes to gun laws.

The trouble being the mixed message plays right in to the hands of the opponents. However, serious change is needed. Some of the proposals were....

Banning sale of weapons in supermarkets and restricting sale to licensed gun stores.

Increasing background checks and waiting times.

Reducing magazine size to 5 max for rifles.

Repeal ALL open carry laws

Complete ban on weapon advertising the same as tobacco laws in the UK

License to purchase

Mandatory training

Eliminate gun show loophole

Safe gun storage laws

Ban semi-auto rifles

Mandatory gun liability insurance

Mandatory waiting period

More extensive bg checks

Mandatory annual mental evaluation

Required reporting of lost/stolen firearms

Gun buyback programs

Lifetime gun ban for convicted domestic abusers

Minimum purchase age of 21

Limit ammo purchases

Sensible ideas one and all imho. And as Bill Maher said... Attitudes need to change and owning a gun should be a privilege NOT a right for all.
 
langster said:
I don't think that is the case though and unfortunately the message is mixed. I agree with you that there was no clear message, more just a march for their lives. William Legate has been amazing on Twitter proposing serious changes to gun laws.

The trouble being the mixed message plays right in to the hands of the opponents. However, serious change is needed. Some of the proposals were....

Banning sale of weapons in supermarkets and restricting sale to licensed gun stores.

Increasing background checks and waiting times.

Reducing magazine size to 5 max for rifles.

Repeal ALL open carry laws

Complete ban on weapon advertising the same as tobacco laws in the UK

License to purchase

Mandatory training

Eliminate gun show loophole

Safe gun storage laws

Ban semi-auto rifles

Mandatory gun liability insurance

Mandatory waiting period

More extensive bg checks

Mandatory annual mental evaluation

Required reporting of lost/stolen firearms

Gun buyback programs

Lifetime gun ban for convicted domestic abusers

Minimum purchase age of 21

Limit ammo purchases

Sensible ideas one and all imho. And as Bill Maher said... Attitudes need to change and owning a gun should be a privilege NOT a right for all.
Click to expand...

Some of these with the obvious exception of banning semi-auto weapons, annual mental evaluation, gun liability insurance, and license to purchase; are realistically implementable, but gun control advocates should simply come out of the closet and say that we need to have a 2nd look at the 2nd amendment since it is the legal framework that puts gun ownership on equal footing as freedom of speech, and until that is removed, legal gun owners will continue to view this as a "government infringing on my rights" issue as opposed to a public safety one. If the 2nd amendment is amended, then the federal government would have a much broader gravitas to make sweeping reforms in the nation's gun laws.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
Not sure where this entire movement is going. They are obviously not going to ban AR15s and there are already about 3-4 million of them owned by legal owners who aren't going to give them back.
Click to expand...

Maybe... but that's more of the same old "it's too hard, so we're going to do nothing" spiel. We can't do it, there are too many guns in circulation. We can't do it, there are too many different states with different laws. We can't do it, the guns would just come through Mexico (which might be true, although it would reverse the current flow of weapons which is decidedly from the US into Mexico). At some point you have to do something, or nothing is ever going to change. Which, I suppose, is what many want.
 
Raoul said:
Some of these with the obvious exception of banning semi-auto weapons, annual mental evaluation, gun liability insurance, and license to purchase are realistically implementable, but gun control advocates should simply come out of the closet and say that we need to have a 2nd look at the 2nd amendment since it is the legal framework that puts gun ownership on equal footing as freedom of speech, and until that is removed, legal gun owners will continue to view this as a "government infringing on my rights" issue as opposed to a public safety one. If the 2nd amendment is amended, then the federal government would have a much broader gravitas to make sweeping reforms in the nation's gun laws.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with that and that is EXACTLY what Bill Maher said a week or so ago. The trouble is by saying that then the NRA and gun nuts will 100% come out and say that everyone is after their guns as they twist the arguments every time and the ignorant and angry followers fall for it.
 
langster said:
Yes, I agree with that and that is EXACTLY what Bill Maher said a week or so ago. The trouble is by saying that then the NRA and gun nuts will 100% come out and say that everyone is after their guns as they twist the arguments every time and the ignorant and angry followers fall for it.
Click to expand...

The kids are still at an early stage of their movement. I saw on TV the other day that they have just acquired an office space and are starting to build an actual organization for the future. They would also do well to actually come up with a coherent strategy other than simply ban AR15s. A vast majority of the things in the list you posted are a good idea and could be the beginnings of a platform for the kids to start from.
 
Carolina Red said:
Historical context. The Anti-Federalists demanded a Bill of Rights in order to get their votes to ratify the Constitution. They were fearful of tyrannical government and of standing armies, like the one they’d just defeated in the Revolution and instead favored militias recruited ad hoc from the local populace, which is why for much of America’s history the actual federal military was quite small. The 2nd Amendment would ensure that this was always feasible, leading to an armed, trained population that could defend and defeat the smaller federal military if necessary.
Click to expand...

Weren't some of the colonies still fearful that another colony/group of colonies could break off at some point and potentially attack their colony/allied colonies?

I mean, that was basically the history of the world to date - groups/regions fighting each other, sometimes internally.
 
MrMarcello said:
Weren't some of the colonies still fearful that another colony/group of colonies could break off at some point and potentially attack their colony/allied colonies?

I mean, that was basically the history of the world to date - groups/regions fighting each other, sometimes internally.
Click to expand...
I’ve don’t recall reading that, but I wouldn’t be surprised to read it, or to have read it and forgotten.

I know the previous poster referenced Washington’s “army” and the Whiskey Rebellion, but the context of that event is actually that a rebel group went into rebellion over a legitimate law (non-tyrannical) and a militia of some 12,000 men was raised from the populace to put it down. It’s not exactly the best event to bring up in arguing against the 2nd Amendment.
 
Rob said:
Just read about him in Danish news as well. What an absolute lunatic. Unfortunately, him being a survivor from the Bataclan will somehow make his appalling views important.
Click to expand...

Aye. I sort of gave his stupid comments after the Bataclan attack a pass given it must have been a horrible experience for him but if you keep saying awful things......
 
Ted Nugent is a cnut. Just read how he dodged the draft...cnut.
 
According to the ordinance, which the the Village Board of Trustees unanimously approved Monday night, it is unlawful for a person "to carry, keep, bear, transport or possess an assault weapon in the Village," except if the weapon is "broken down in a non-functioning state," is "not immediately accessible to any person," or is "unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card."
Click to expand...

So not quite banned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.