my gun controll idea,... feel free to chime in!

1. 79

   stclairjackposted 10 years ago

   1) i have no problem banning the civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons (already illegal, has been for years, so its like me saying have no qualms with the sun coming up in the morning)
   
   2) i have NO problem banning the import, manufacture, or sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, and also banning the import, manufacture, and sale of weapons that by design hold more than 10 rounds.
   
   3) i suggest we grandfather in all magazines and firearms that fall into this category and allow the ownership of these with the caveat that they cannot be sold or traded, they must be held indefinitely by the owner, be that owner a licensed gun shop, or an individual... and that a government bounty be offered for these items equal to market value +20%, paid for the item should it be turned into a local law enforcement division, funded through a federal program (gona create at least 5000 new gov jobs there! lol)
   
   4) each state should institute a gun license program, licensing gun owners, requiring a one day course or a waiver of said course from your county sheriff to acquire the license. it should be carried on your person at all times, the same as your state issued drivers license. this license should automatically grant the right to the concealed carry of a fire arm, and should cost the license holder no more than 20$ total to obtain. it should be a life time license unless revoked by a court.
   
   5) after passage of this total package, there will be a 25 year moratorium on firearms laws. (this is so the current generation of gun haters might have to breed the next, remember ,... make love, not war?.... perhaps what we all need is a pleasant diversion????)
   
   i say this as a life long gun owner, collector, shooter, hunter,... and advocate for freedom.
   
   i also say this as an advocate for personal responsibility,... and community responsibility..... as a nation we regulate vehicles to death,.... there is little regulation on guns in comparison.
   
   crucify me if you will,.... but I’ve thought this out,... discussed it with friends,.... all gun owners,.... it seems logical and proportional.
   
   all this said,....... crazy, angry, deranged, and plain normal people will ALWAYS kill other people,.... if pushed far enough,..... they will run them down with cars, stab them with knives, or beat them with ball bats,....... but,..... if this gives the left the false sense of security that they want,.... YEE HAW,.... but Americans will still be just as armed.
   
   i will not miss 30 round banana clips,..... they are like nude pictures,.... once you’ve seen one hot naked body,... you pretty much,... wana see em all,...... so if you have a 30 rd mag,..... you'll spend a lot of $$$$ on ammo,..... my wallet could use the rest.
   
   if you truly believe in gun control as i do,.... bullet placement is key,.... i have great faith in my ability to do more with 5 well placed rounds,..... than any childish amateur that played video kill 2000, and got mad cause someone made fun of his pimples, and his mother didn’t buy him video kill 3000.
   
   ok,.... i stand ready for the assault,... no quarter asked,... none given

   replyreport
   1. 72

      galleryofgraceposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Please send this to your local congressman. He can use it.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         my local congresswoman is rep. vicky hartzler,.... she needs a kick in the pants and a strong cup of coffee, lol!

         replyreport
   2. 97

      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      1)  Needs a little work as fully automatic weapons are legal to own.  They are quite restricted and very expensive, but quite legal.  I would support the current law as is.
      
      2) and 3) - great as is
      
      4)  I have never been through such a course.  Is 1 day really adequate for a CCW?  It doesn't seem nearly enough, but I really have no experience there.
      
      5)  Needs work, merely because new technology, gun design etc. will always happen and could need addressed with new gun laws.  A few other things that might be considered as well:
      should guns all come with trigger locks?
      are ID systems realistic and should they be required?
      should gun owners be required to prove they have a gun safe?
      .22 caliber rifles and handguns often hold more than 10 rounds and I have no problem with that. 
      Do we need to address steel, explosive or "tracer" ammunition?
      
      I'm sure there are others as well, which is why I think a 25 year moratorium is unrealistic.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         first let me say that a certain amount of sarcasm was at play here.... that said....
         
         1) i'm well aware that fully automatic weapons are legal, but as you state, the regulations re; it are HORIBLY restrictive. i personal have no need or recreational use for one, and after looking into the details of owning one,... would rather go to a range and pay to shoot one for an hour,... and not have the hassle. (the gun safes and security that you mention later is actualy required to get the permits for fully auto) so in essence,.. yea,... i'm suporting the law as it is.
         
         2) & 3)..... cool! thanx!
         
         4) yea,... scary but true,... you can get a CC permit in some areas in a day,... kid you not. in missouri its harder to get a hunting licence than to get a CC permit,.... because the gun safety course thats involved in the hunting licence program is far more well rounded..... i suggest the MO hunters ED course to anyone wishing to learn more about fire arms.
         
         5) this was the sarcasm coupled with sexual refference..... but i must say,.... it would be VERY NICE to not hear the argument for a quarter century.
         
         A) trigger locks render a weapon useless in a home or personal deffense situation,.. might as well have a brick when your suprised in the dark.
         
         B) if you licence and therefor ID the gun owner, you no longer need to ID the gun.
         C) gun owners should be made aware of thier responsability to store thier firearms safely, and that thier failure to do so could leave them open to civil or criminal liability (as taught in firearms course, see 4)
         
         D) the idea that a .22 is somehow less dangerous than a 30.06... lets not go there,... the next mass shooter will use a .22.... let the rage begin. see item 3) and let weapons made after the law hold only 10. if i havent shot the squirel by round 10 i'm going back to the house.
         
         E) ammo is useless without the gun,... let us focus on the gun.
         
         p.s..... always love a well thought out response such as yours!

         replyreport
         1. 97

            wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Gun ID - I meant those electronic systems built into the gun that ID the owner and won't fire for anyone else.  Those would make a stolen gun useless and prevent accidents where children play with the weapons.  I don't believe they are really viable yet, but are getting close and could save some lives, but have no idea what the cost would be.  Whether we like it or not cost is always a part of it.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               like you i think the tech has lagged behind the need,.... if you could show me that it worked and make it cost effective,... i believe 90% of gun owners would willing buy it as an accesory,.... you wouldnt need to mandate it,.... but you could encentivise it through a tax credit or rebate program (cue the screaming of gun nuts "they'll use your rebate info to track your guns")

               replyreport
         2. 61

            tirelesstravelerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            In my county you may as well quit trying for a CC license they are reluctant to give them to police. The sheriff gives them out in our state.  The sheriff across the bay was convicted of abusing his wife and has numerous traffic violations and doesn't believe in gun.  But that is the San Francisco Bay area for you.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               sorry to hear that,... i dont live there,... mercifuly.... but on the other hand, it does seem to be a poster child case for nationalizing the issue to a degree,.... for the sake of leveling the playing field.

               replyreport
   3. 60

      SomewayOuttaHereposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      i'm not even sure what the US does now in relation to regulation, safety etc.  I just try to understand what both sides in the US have to say and btw it's difficult to understand amongst a bunch of white noise about the constitution, the  left, the right, and  even god gets thrown into the mix etc......  Based on the above SCJ, I figure being able to own and shoot a gun is no different than being able to drive a car....lessons are definitely necessary and/or learning to safely operate one and finally you must pass a test before you can safely drive on the same road i'm driving on.....my 2 cents....so i'd hope folks who own guns know how to safely handle them....as for criminals using guns - well...regulations don't really matter anyway.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         amen!

         replyreport
      2. 55

         whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Driving a car is a privilege not a right! Being able to own a firearm in the United States is a right. The constitution is not white noise but our governing document.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Interesting - so you don't think it needs updating when it was written so many years before cars were invented? Shouldn't cars be a right also?

            replyreport
            1. 55

               whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               No I don't think it needs to be changed, will we then change all the other rights to suit our government?

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  So - no matter the technological developments - they should never become a right? Such as free internet access and Twitter? I would say the Internet is more of a threat to Government control than guns. Boy - they sure got you didn't they?

                  replyreport
                  1. 55

                     whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     I don't think they got me, If someone wants to give away the internet its fine with me.

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        Yes - I understand that you don't understand the full potential of the Internet, or how it could be a threat to Government control. Boy - they got you good. All you can think about is your AK 47, and how safe it makes you.

                        replyreport
                        1. 55

                           whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                           Please Mark, why do you constantly change the subject?

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                              Please, no name hidden persona - I did not. I asked about changing the constitution to cover new technological developments and tried to explain why they may be a better threat to Government control than old technology is now.

                              replyreport
                              1. 55

                                 whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                 You know my name, anyway, no need to change the constitution in any way. The internet is a threat to government control as witnessed by this.
                                 
                                 http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-575 … ge-swartz/
                                 
                                 They didn't need any changes to the constitution to accomplish it.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 59

                                    Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                    You don't think free internet access should be a right - I understand. Odd how quick you gave that one up.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 55

                                       whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                       I don't care if its free or not, somebody somewhere will be able to hack into it anyway.

                                       report
                                       1. 59

                                          Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                          Not my point at all. Information is more powerful than a gun any day. Odd you don't care about it. They got you good.

                                          report
                                          1. 55

                                             whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                             Really? Throw some information at me and I'll shoot at you and tell me which hurts more.

                                             report
                                             1. 59

                                                Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                                ciao

                                                report
                                                1. 55

                                                   whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                                   Bye

                                                   report
                                             2. 59

                                                Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                                Right. You win.
                                                
                                                ciao

                                                report
                                                1. 55

                                                   whoisitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                                   I know I win.

                                                   report
   4. 60

      UnknownAuthor72posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Your # 4 requirement (sic)  "each state should institute a gun license program, licensing gun owners, requiring a one day course or a waiver of said course from your county sheriff to acquire the license. "
      
      I am wondering if you think one day course would be sufficent? I mean in the words of our Vice President "It's a big freaking deal". I had tried to shoot one time. It was an old saw off shot gun. I was suppose to hit the can.
      I ended up on my can in the cold snow! I didn't like the jerk back and I know I will need more than one session!  As far as a waiver, please specify.  I would like to as well ask how does one stop *favors* for those who are connected with the Sheriff office?  I like all the other ones you listed. It makes sense to me. Interesting topic.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         "i tried to shoot one time" is usualy the experience some one has with guns when they realy needed a good instructor,.... a long time friend and his father laughed when they talked about letting his daughter (16) shoot a large bore hand gun, knowing full well that her grip and stance were wrong, it kicked back and nailed her in the forehead,... i stood up from the campfire and looked both of them in the eye and said "thats the dumbest damn thing i've ever heard from your mouth, and knowing you all these years thats a hell of an acomplishment, be glad i wasnt there when you done it to her."...... i turned to leave and when they questioned me further i said... "if i had been there i woulda beat you with your pistole, and YOU,(turning to my long time friend) THATS YOUR DAUGHTER ... GROW UP AND BE A DAD".......... we didnt speak for a couple days.
         
         my point is that with good instruction, firearms safty is not hard, its just unfamiliar to many. in a few days my friend called me and then he and his daughter drove over and we spent an afternoon shooting, and she enjoyed it. i hope she walked away with a valuanle education on the subject, rather than just the gigles of some idiots.
         
         the MO dept of conservation hunters ed course is actualy two days, one of which is related to firearms safety,.... and yes,.... its possible in one day,... with the right instructor.
         
         as to the sherrifs waiver,.... thats politics pure and simple. its a carrott you have to throw in the package to placate the country boys and girls,.... and i dont have a problem with it. i know my sherrriff and he knows me,.... in a county of 9000 people thats possible.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            UnknownAuthor72posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I like the way you speak the truth. If you wouldn't mind me asking? Do you believe it is better to use automatic weapons for hunting what kind of prey? The get to know your sheriff day is a wonderful thing for added protection. Sometimes they will look the other way and allow someone to be themselves. Thank you for your response.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               no one uses "automatic" weapons to hunt any kind of sport prey in this country,.... "fully automatic" weapons are very restricted, needing very expesnive and difficult permits to own (see previous posts in this thread),.... so the first answer to your question is none, unless your hunting a human enemy in a combat situation,... period.
               
               i assume that you were refering to a semi-automatic weapon, meaning it discharges one round for every time the opperator pulls the trigger..... YES ....there are instances while hunting various types of game animals that a semi-auto is invaluable. that said, i believe a bolt action is a more acurate rifle for a number of reasons we dont have the time to explain here,... and a single shot is not only the most accurate but makes the shooter a better shot.
               
               as to getting to know your sherrif,... i live in an extremly small community,... it aint mayberry,... but its close.

               replyreport
2. 59

   GuitarGearposted 10 years ago

   Jack,
   I'm with your proposal all the way. I think it makes sense. I did not know(According to Wilderness) that fully automatic weapons were legal.  I always thought they were illegal but who knows maybe he's right.  With the right "$jing$" anything's possible.. Anyway, let me first say that I am a liberal and I guess you might call me a bleeding heart liberal at that but I am also a person that grew up with guns and hunting.  When I was a kid I had a wall mounted double gun rack, you know the kind they sold at Western Auto, hanging in my room with a .22 and a shotgun proudly displayed as did most of my friends.  We hunted and trapped after school.  We didn't have video games back then. I think the problem with the so called "Gun Haters" is that they never were exposed to this type of culture or lifestyle.  They don't know what it's like to shoot trap & skeet or to go hunting with your Dad on Thanksgiving morning or go "plinking".  Here in NE Ohio and Western Pa. we'd rather see a deer in the back of a pickup or hanging in somebody's garage than in mid-air at 65 mph. coming through our windshields. I think the root of most of our social problems particularly with the gun issue in regard to the recent school murders lies in the lack of parental responsibility and vigilance.  What person in their right mind would think that teaching an antisocial kid with a personality disorder and Asperger syndrome how to operate a Bushmaster .223 rifle was a good idea and then not even have the good sense to lock the damned things up. Evidently Nancy Lanza did and it cost her her life along with 26-innocent victims. The new wave "time-out" parenting concepts of today have yielded disappointing results.  I guess you might be able to chalk up some of the irresponsible parenting to the economy and single parent households where people are so taxed by their overbearing job responsibilities that they don't the time or energy to successfully parent their children.  I think a short term solution would be to keep your guns locked the hell up.  Your kid might be OK but who knows if he has a deranged buddy that might break into your house and take your gun for the purposes of evil.  Above all I think the best solution is to be a responsible and vigilant parent.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      you hit the nail on the head my friend!..... it all boils down to responsability

      replyreport
   2. 79

      stclairjackposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      and yes,... wilderness is right on,..... fully automatic weapoare legal,.... but the permiting proscess is very VERY cost prohibitive.

      replyreport
3. 80

   WillStarrposted 10 years ago

   Licencing is permission from government, and accepting a licence replaces a right with a government permitted privilege.
   
   The Second Amendment protects a right, not a privilege, so if the American people no longer support the Second Amendment and the right it protects, let them do it the right way and amend the Constitution.

   replyreport
4. 80

   WillStarrposted 10 years ago

   "Interesting - so you don't think it needs updating when it was written so many years before cars were invented? Shouldn't cars be a right also?"
   
   Driving is a privilege only because government owns all the roads and streets, and we need their permission to use them. Here in Arizona (and other large states), big ranches sometimes 'retire' older trucks and use them only on their private ranch roads, where driving them is a right, and they don't need a license, insurance, plates, etc.
   
   And of course, you don't need a license to BUY a car, do you?
   
   Comparing guns to cars is a false analogy, but it's a big favorite with the anti-gun crowd.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Mark Knowlesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I wasn't comparing guns to cars. I was asking whether new technology should become a right or not. You sure need a license to drive a car though - don't you?

      replyreport
5. 58

   taburkettposted 10 years ago

   as usual, we want to hinder the innocent and open the door for the criminal.
   no law will ever keep the weapons from the criminal. 
   the criminal never follows the laws.
   isn't it obvious that we have already created enough gun-free zones that have created the problems?

   replyreport