Jimi

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

Where do you stand on gun control? Personally, I think that the constitution of the US states that we are permitted to bear arms. That is for a good reason. It limits the amount of power taken away from people. with weapons, we can still stand up to a tyrant government. On the other-hand, I believt aht it is right not to allow convicts the right to own these weapons. They have shown criminal intentions in the past, therefore, they may commit criminal acts in the future. I believe that as much as everyone has the right to own a gun, or many guns if they so wish, there is a certain standard that should be upheld. There needs to be some way to make it harder for guns to end up in the hands of these criminals. Despite that crime that obviously happens, as I said, it is OUR RIGHT as Americans to own guns.

kgilly

I completely agree. I think as long as a person can show they have not shown criminal intent of any sort in the past they should be allowed to bear arms. However I think as you do, that there must be a longer waiting period to evaluate in detail just who is getting htere hands on these weapons. I think the bill allowed to expire by Bush was not a great step in the right direction.

schutzenkonig

Ok...couple things here, why would you need a longer waiting period when all you have to do is look up on a system to see if they are a convicted felon, under a restraining order of certain types (the ones dealing with abuse, etc), if you've been dishonorably discharged from the military, or if you've been involentarily put in an institution. Those things are kept on record and we should work on smoothing out the database that contains it so as to let store owners run a check through that that is done relatively quickly. There's no reason to sit around and waste someone's time with a waiting period.
As for the "Assault Weapons" Ban that sunset 9 days ago...that isn't a step in the wrong direction because the ban did nothing to reduce crime in the first place.

Justin

Out of my cold dead hands!!!1 :holdsuprifle:

the_dude

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

There is nothing wrong with the system we have know with background checks and so on. A convicted criminal do not get there guns from a gun shop, there is no way they will be able to. Instead they get their guns illegaly, either by stealing one from somewhere or getting it out of the back of Tito's van in that back alley behind K-Mart. Many anti-gun politicans keep trying to make it harder for law-abiding citizens to have a firearm because they are an easy and more noticable target. If they try to stop the illegal gun trade it would be much tougher and there won't be as much press about it so these politicans won't get the air time they want. You can ban guns all together but you won't be seeing criminals handing their (illegal) guns in, no it will be open season and you will see a rise in crime. It has happened in other countries that have imposed a total ban.
I was raised with guns in my home in California, I am now at the moment living in England and believe me I felt alot safer back in California, the crime here is unbelievable!

schutzenkonig

Yep...all true.
You notice a drop in crime in states that have imposed a conceal carry program of some sort. NY's though, is of practically 0 worth. They grant the permit to celebraties without even thinking about it but hardly ever grant one to the common citizen, also, no other state's permit is valid in NY. VT though, it is legal for anyone 21 and over to conceal a pistol (well...provided that they are eligible to purchase one that is). Most states lie in between though. In VA for example, you have to take a class, show that you are competant with small arms, and apply for a permit. There are no questions about purpose. If you are eligible, you get it with no questions asked.

Jimi

Then how do we stop the guns from getting into the wrong hands? These criminals use guns that were at one time registered to a particular owner. Some of the people COULD have stolen them from houses, but the chances of that are slim. There SHOULD be a change in the condtions of buying weapons. No one owns an arsenal.... if people are buying a good amount of guns at a time, they should be looked at. They could be buying these guns and selling them to criminals, which does happen. For those who are responsible, they should be able to own these weapons without question, so it seems, such as Schutzenkonig.

schutzenkonig

Thank Jimi...I will say that the only guns that I do own are a .22 competition rifle, a presision air rifle, and my grandfather's 20 gauge from 1916. That doesn't mean that I don't intend on getting more...:rock:
I can't tell you how to stop the illegal gun trade. I'm not going to bs anyone on that. What I can do is tell you what happens to those who do sell firearms to unauthorized individuals (felons, etc.). The penalty is up to a $10,000 fine and 10 years in prison. This is for class 2 firearms...class 3s (machineguns) you'd get a lot more. Thankfully there's not anyone that sells a legally purchased class 3 to someone illegally, for the reason that the liscense is hard to acquire and costs you 200 a year plus whatever you have to pay in the beginning (I think it's a thousand and some, but don't quote me on that). The people that do get these tend to be collectors, those that get it for a status symbol, and those that just like the idea of going down to the range and firing one...all are law-abiding citizens. Bear in mind that what regulated machineguns was the National Firearms Act in 1934...NOT the "Assault Weapons" Ban that Feinstien concocted.

Jimi

Feinstein is a hypocritical idiot. Just thought I'd say that.

schutzenkonig

:rock:
One thing that is better about her than the rest of the anti-gun crowd (and by NO means do I agree with her, support her, like her, or respect her), is that she at least comes out and says she wants to ban all guns. The rest of them beat around the bush and say that they are all for the 2nd amendment but support "common sense" gun legislation. This legislation (3 day waiting periods, 1 gun per month, madatory gun locks, the assault weapons ban, and a proposed ban on all .50 caliber rifles) though, does not make any sense what so ever. It shows that common sense is simply...not.

Jimi

Except, do you not remember when someone saw a gun in her house, and when questioend about it, she admitted that she kept it for protection? As far as the 3 day waiting period, that's probably so someone doesn't buy a gun in the heat of anger. It gives them time to calm down before doing something wrong.

schutzenkonig

I don't remember that one (mmm...more ammo against Feistein...). The 3 day waiting period was started for that reason, but when it's been shown that it isn't effective, and people have used their guns defensively 2 days, sometimes only one day after they buy it...I think the idea of a waiting period needs to be dropped.

Jimi

I don't know, I think it's a good idea regardless. I mean, you're going to get the gun if you want it, and it's only three days, why rush? That incident happened like... I don't know over 10 years ago.

schutzenkonig

I don't think that the incident that I'm thinking of happened over 10 years ago, I think it was more recent than that. I do remember that last mother's day a man working at a local stop-n-rob out in Ohio got a conceal weapons permit (Ohio just passed concealed carry) and in the first 3 days of having it shot a man that robbed the store and turned around to shoot him as he was leaving.
Also...this ARTICLE shows that the 3 day waiting period law has an effect of zero.