Anti gun legislation

[Mr. Leary]

If you believe in the concept of arming and training the populace to increase safety, then you would also believe that making it easier for people to obtain firearms and training would go along with that.

How about a tax break for those that carry a firearm to use against criminals?

And also a tax break for those attending firearms training?

If gun control looked something like that I wouldn't be worried about the second amendment.

Thats a fantastic idea. Tax breaks for firearms training would ease the complaints about the additional financial burden.

Not so sure there are any improvements that need to be made to increase ease of obtaining firearms. Its already too easy IMO.

 

[Mr. Leary]

Here are the ideas that I believe would be reasonable and possible to implement from this thread:

1) Required training for firearm ownership.

2) Peer review for firearm ownership... "Belt System"

3) Safety training in schools.

Some of my ideas that I came into the beginning of this thread with have been scrutinized and some have been changed.

Thank you all for your ideas and your discussion. This is a difficult topic to discuss, and I applaud y'all for keeping it civil and respectful.

 

[Dave Bennett]

Not so sure there are any improvements that need to be made to increase ease of obtaining firearms. Its already too easy IMO.

Depends who you ask and where they live.

For example, here in CA I cant buy an AK or an AR... in Texas you can. We live under the same 2A right?

The rules here in CA that are strangling gun owners are un-Constitutional to say the least. I forget the exact wording, but there was recent legislation regulating how much AMMO we can buy here in CA per month and that made internet ammo purchases illegal IIRC (somebody help me out with that one if you know).

Bogus rules are keeping ME, an active duty military man, from buying guns that you and I both enjoy (evil black rifles) and making me a criminal if I choose to pursue my 2A rights by owning/operating them here in CA. The anti-gun bias here is complete bullcrap.

Now imagine when these same "simple measures to increase safety" i.e. "anti-gun legislation" are passed in Texas and across the nation...

CARB started in CA and spread like a choking weed across the nation... try getting a decent fuel can nowadays legally. You can't, they've all been made illegal.

Death by a thousand cuts.

 

[Mr. Leary]

Depends who you ask and where they live.

For example, here in CA I cant buy an AK or an AR... in Texas you can. We live under the same 2A right?

The rules here in CA that are strangling gun owners are un-Constitutional to say the least. I forget the exact wording, but there was recent legislation regulating how much AMMO we can buy here in CA per month and that made internet ammo purchases illegal IIRC (somebody help me out with that one if you know).

Bogus rules are keeping ME, and active duty military man, from buying guns that you and I both enjoy (evil black rifles) and making me a criminal if I choose to pursue my 2A rights by owning/operating them here in CA. The anti-gun bias here is complete bullcrap.

Now imagine when these same "simple measures to increase safety" i.e. "anti-gun legislation" are passed in Texas...

CARB started in CA and spread like a choking weed across the nation... try getting a decent fuel can nowadays legally. You can't, they've all been made illegal.

Death by a thousand cuts.

I feel for you, Dave, but the answer is probably somewhere in the middle between CA and TX for both.

BTW, EPA just suspended Texas ability to permit the burning of toxic waste and hazardous materials (actually an injunction was overturned). Most people here have never even heard of recycling. It was a change to say the least after living in Europe.

 

[Dave Bennett]

And now, two more shot at a CA HS...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/18/students-shot-california-high-school/


And, a Vermont teen found dead in bathroom from self inflicted GS
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/18/vermont-teen-dead-school-bathroom/

 

[BorregoWrangler]

And now, two more shot at a CA HS...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/18/students-shot-california-high-school/

No, that can't be right. That's a gun-free-school zone! These laws are supposed to prevent these kind of things! [sarcasm off]

Poor kids. I hope they pull through okay.

 

[C-Fish]

I would prefer that energy go towards music and phys-ed courses many districts have dropped. Heck, I'd like for kids to spend more time in geography classes!

I also think I'd prefer young adults decide for themselves if they have an interest in guns then be given access to proper training resources. I think the issues of personal rights cuts both ways. I have the right to not participate in gun usage or ownership and I'd like my kids, if I had any, to have that same choice.

It's also odd to discuss mandated gun training for kiddos when states like Arizona don't require ANY training for even concealed carry.

You would prefer music and phys-ed, I would prefer firearm training. :ylsmoke:
I played Trumpet from 5th grade through my senior year of High School. I would never rely on my trumpet to save my life or the live of a loved one...

Vermont and Alaska don't require training as well. You can carry open or concealed in both states without a permit.:victory:

 

[kmacafee]

Lol

Nuff said.

 

[zags]

Amen.

Reminds me of this:

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." - Adolf Hitler, 1935



It's all been done before...

There is no historic evidence of Hitler ever saying that. German gun registration became law in 1928. Hitler was not in power until 1933.

 

[Wyowanderer]

No, that can't be right. That's a gun-free-school zone! These laws are supposed to prevent these kind of things! [sarcasm off]

Poor kids. I hope they pull through okay.

Yup, another example of a law that affects only the law abiding.

 

[Wyowanderer]

There is no historic evidence of Hitler ever saying that. German gun registration became law in 1928. Hitler was not in power until 1933.

The following is authentic:

Der größte Unsinn, den man in den besetzen Ostgebieten machen könnte, sei der, den unterworfenen Völkern Waffen zu geben. Die Geschichte lehre, daß alle Herrenvölker untergegangen seien, nachdem sie den von ihnen unterworfenen Volkern Waffen bewilligt hatten.
[The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.]
-- Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitlers Tischegesprache Im Fuhrerhauptquartier 1941-1942. [Hitler's Table-Talk at the Fuhrer's Headquarters 1941-1942], Dr. Henry Picker, ed. (Athenaum-Verlag, Bonn, 1951)

For more see:http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf

 

[xtatik]

Actually he wasn't a law abiding citizen, he was just a "lucky citizen" and never got caught/prosecuted.

Yes, by definition you're right. But, how many of these "lucky citizens" exist? We could all speculate on the number, but what is certain is that their luck leaves them able to buy guns?

 

[zags]

The following is authentic:

Der größte Unsinn, den man in den besetzen Ostgebieten machen könnte, sei der, den unterworfenen Völkern Waffen zu geben. Die Geschichte lehre, daß alle Herrenvölker untergegangen seien, nachdem sie den von ihnen unterworfenen Volkern Waffen bewilligt hatten.
[The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.]
-- Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitlers Tischegesprache Im Fuhrerhauptquartier 1941-1942. [Hitler's Table-Talk at the Fuhrer's Headquarters 1941-1942], Dr. Henry Picker, ed. (Athenaum-Verlag, Bonn, 1951)

For more see:http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf

Now if you are going to post a quote, ^^^ this is how you do it.^^^

I am just tired of people coming up with a cheesy line that fits their agenda, attaching a famous name to it, then having idiots spread it thinking it is gospel. If I get one more e-mail saying Thomas Jefferson said this, or Ben Frankilin said that............

 

[cnynrat]

Depends who you ask and where they live.

For example, here in CA I cant buy an AK or an AR... in Texas you can. We live under the same 2A right?

Well, you can buy a sort of AR/AK here in CA. Start with an off-list lower receiver, and either configure it without any of the six so-called evil features (folding or collapsable stock, pistol grip, thumbhole stock, flash suppressor, forward pistol grip, grenade/flare launcher), or if you want one or more of these features configure your rifle with a bullet button or other device that requires the use of a tool to release the magazine. This flowchart helps navigate the somewhat complex requirements surrounding ownership of semi-automatic rifles in CA.

The rules here in CA that are strangling gun owners are un-Constitutional to say the least. I forget the exact wording, but there was recent legislation regulating how much AMMO we can buy here in CA per month and that made internet ammo purchases illegal IIRC (somebody help me out with that one if you know).

Happy to announce that the ammo law you refer to, AB962, was declared unconstitutionally vague today by Judge Jeffery Hamilton. Wouldn't be surprised to see them try to enact a revised version, but they did fail to do that in the last legislative session.

Carry on.

 

[Hill Bill E.]

A very interesting read, however not an unbiased review. The first thing I noticed was the claim that Countries with the strictest gun control laws have the highest homicide rates. I have not found trhe evidence in the document to support this other then the use of Scotland, which is clearly a statistical outlier. More later, it takes a while to go through 98 pages.

EDIT: I am noticing more and more as I read. Sorry, but this is not facts. The studies are clearly biased and ignore pertinent information. Not saying the conclusions are wrong nor can they be proved fallacious, but that the research is definitely tainted. I have seen "studies" like this by the gun abolitionists as well... also tainted.

Some of the stuff might be completely true, but there is enough tainted "research" in the first 10 pages to discredit the document as a reliable source of information.



I could definitely get on board with this.

Actually, you will never find what anyone considers an 'unbiased' report.

When it comes to this discussion, a report will be considered 'biased' one way or the other by the person reading it.

I do believe however, that the facts that are posted, do check out.

You just won't see many of them on the media in the US.

Here's what I don't want to see happen here: (yes, this is considered bias, as it was posted by the NRA, watch at your own pleasure/displeasure)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I"]YouTube - NRA: To See Where Gun Licensing Leads, Look To Great Britain[/ame]