Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
I'd have to agree, but would add that this forum is tame when compared to sites like ar15. If they had their way there would be no government and everyone would be Rambo.
Last edited:
Anti gun legislation
- Thread starter Mr. Leary
- Start date
I'd have to agree, but would add that this forum is tame when compared to sites like ar15. If they had their way there would be no government and everyone would be Rambo.
Ok. So to respond the the consistent argument that "criminals will get the guns whether or not there are laws against it."
I have two things to say. First, is that not a problem that can and should be fixed by empowering law enforcement officers to shut down gun smuggler operations? Seems an awful lot like complaining about fuel economy when you drive a land cruiser. If you want a fuel sipper, then you are changing the goals that you are trying to acheive with your vehicle. Second, if the weapons are a titled entity, law enforcement could instantly track down who the firearm is registered to. A stolen firearm that is not reported would require a pretty good explanation from the owner, and the information would already be contained in the document, so the description would at least be close, and numbers could be checked if they have not been filed off. Any firearm without serial would be an automatic bo-bo requiring a very very good explanation or a get out of jail free card (like being a secret government agent on an important mission or something)
So with easier avenues for law enforcement to do their jobs and more emphasis on bringing gun offenders to justice, how would criminals continue to get all these firearms we are talking about?
The same could be applied to psych evaluations. Why not? Who is hurt by giving up some if their time so that at least some of these crazies will be unable to obtain a gun (they are a lot easier to seriously hurt someone with then a hammer).
I agree, give law enforcement every tool it needs to fight gun smugglers and to prosecute gun crimes. NONE of which requires the removal of rights from the rest of the American citizens.
the issue is that this wouldn't make guns any harder to get for criminals, only for law abiding citizens. You should not have to pay a government fee to exercise your rights, I thought that was settled with the issue of poll taxes.
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
Everyone keeps saying this. Please show me irrefutable eviudence that is not a demonstration of the lack of proper law enforcement.
I have had this drilled into my head as lifetime member of the NRA, but lately I am starting to think they are full of it and have turned to fear and hatemongering rather then common sense and hard facts.
LandCruiserPhil
Expedition Leader
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
Yep... and properly train a register everyone. When done right, it works.
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
Everyone keeps saying this. Please show me irrefutable eviudence that is not a demonstration of the lack of proper law enforcement.
Chicago is a pretty good example. You have to pay for permits, you have to be registered, some weapons where basically forbid......and you still had some of the highest firearm related crime rates....
Chicago is a pretty good example. You have to pay for permits, you have to be registered, some weapons where basically forbid......and you still had some of the highest firearm related crime rates....
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
Chicago has an illustrious history of organized crime and a chronically underfunded police force. I'll argue that this has much more to do with the high gun crime rate then the gun laws, however dumb they are (I completely agree with you that Chicago is a great example of how NOT to implement gun laws).
Last edited:
greenmeanie
Adventurer
I showed this statement to my coworkers here in Switzerland. They just shook their heads, laughed and said Americans just don't understand the Swiss.
Incidently there will be a referendum this year to decide whether military arms shall be stored in military armouries rather than in the home. You can't use it for any other purpose than to practice in a controlled environment or as directed by government business. It must be unloaded to port it to or from the range or for training when travelling in public. Violating the rules has dire consequences.
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
... but it was a major contributing factor to the Nazis decision to forgo an invasion attempt during WWII. With impassable terrain and trained armed citizens, the casualties would have been horrific for little ground gained.
EDIT: But there is something even more important here. Violations of gun laws have DIRE consequences. Unfortunatelty that is all too often NOT the case here in the states.
Last edited:
What about Washington DC.? It has the largest concentration of law
enforcement in the country, and is one of the top crime areas in the Nation.
It also has some of the most restrictive firearm laws.
Last edited:
Christophe Noel
Expedition Leader
This is where all of the country and city comparisons get complicated. Eventually someone will bring up crime rates in Detroit or Kennesaw, GA. Someone will chime in with the ever cleaver, "an armed society is a polite society," and selectively omit Mogadishu and Tokyo from that theory.
There's usually too many cultural, socio-economical, and other variables involved to isolate the influence of safety and guns as a paired dynamic.
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
Thank you. Thats what I have been trying to say, but I'm not the best with words.
Scott Brady
Founder
I think it is perfectly reasonable for a person to dislike guns and even want to live in a society with limitations on gun ownership. However, that is not America. The right to bear arms is a component of our freedoms as citizens. It is just a fact. When I travel to the UK, I do not judge the English for the severity of their gun laws. Those laws were put into effect by a majority action of the citizenry. It was the will of the majority of people in the UK and it was voted into action. In the US, our government has the responsibility to uphold and protect the constitution in its entirety. It is our job as citizens to hold our government accountable to those ideals.
If you look at the number of conservatives who own firearms it is perfectly understandable why liberals would want to control or reduce that number. There is a distinct division of ideals in America today, yet one side is armed to the teeth. There is no great mystery here. . .
If you look at the number of conservatives who own firearms it is perfectly understandable why liberals would want to control or reduce that number. There is a distinct division of ideals in America today, yet one side is armed to the teeth. There is no great mystery here. . .
Mr. Leary
Glamping Excursionaire
:wavey: What if we think both sides are wrong and we keep getting caught between?
Although I seriously doubt the OPFOR scenario you described is foremost on the liberals' minds...
God Bless America! Where we have the right to debate this openly, point fingers, and bicker, but then band together when it really matters. Lets not forget that both liberals and conservatives have died for that.
Last edited: