Gun Control

[carlfense]

My thoughts:

 

No legal possession of firearms unless the owner has a complete, accurate, and up to date background check.

No legal possession allowed for anyone with a conviction for any crime of violence, felony, or a history of certain mental illnesses.

Background checks required for all sales/transfers of guns whether a private sale or a dealer.

Make the criminal possession of firearms in violation of the above proposals a SERIOUS offense. Class III Felony or higher.

 

 

Any legislation similar to the assault weapons ban in the 90s is (IMO) basically worthless. A pistol grip stock doesn't make a gun any more deadly than a gun with a thumbhole stock. Grandfathering in the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of high capacity magazines already in circulation makes a ban on new manufacturing virtually worthless. "Assault weapons" are too slippery of a target for legislation.

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

Yep, any hunter worth his ammo costs doesn't need a semi-automatic.

used to go hunting with my grandpa and he'd take 3 shells with him. We always say "grandpa, is that all the shells your taking is 3?"

Grand then asked us what the daily possession limit was. We'd say 3. He said " then 3 is all I'm gonna need!" And most days he was right!

[BigRedBuster]

Yep, any hunter worth his ammo costs doesn't need a semi-automatic.

used to go hunting with my grandpa and he'd take 3 shells with him. We always say "grandpa, is that all the shells your taking is 3?"

Grand then asked us what the daily possession limit was. We'd say 3. He said " then 3 is all I'm gonna need!" And most days he was right!

 

It depends on how you are hunting. Are you going to ban semi automatic shotguns also?

[Undone]

No, but restaurants selling meals with 1,500 calories that are loaded up with saturated fat / sodium is not helping the obesity epidemic.

 

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

So what's the end game with statements like this? Are you in favor of legislation that restricts what food McDonald's can sell? Because we already have the 16 oz. soda ban in NYC. It seems that our society is generally starting to lean towards a political environment where we're ok with removing our right to do as we please.

 

Obviously, I see the distinction between a firearm and a cheeseburger. But the basic concepts fit under one umbrella. To quote the venerable Ron Swanson, "The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds and die of a heart attack at 43, you can! You are free to do so. To me, that’s beautiful."

[BigRedBuster]

There are one hell of a lot more people who die from eating crap like McDonalds than are killed in mass school shootings. AND, the cost of eating like that on society is enormous.

[Undone]

And your point is?

[Count 'Bility]

this is ridiculous guys. An elementary school shooting is being compared to my love of a 20 pc order of mcnuggets, 1 Big Mac, 1 large strawberry shake, large fries and a dollar menu chicken sandwich.

[teachercd]

There are one hell of a lot more people who die from eating crap like McDonalds than are killed in mass school shootings. AND, the cost of eating like that on society is enormous.

 

True but lets face it, one is not super violent, gross, horrific and terrifying OH yeah plus, one generally happens over a very long time period with the chance to "start over" with proper diet and working out. The other is the school shooting.

 

Its not like that douchebag broke into the school with 10,000 nuggets and BBQ sauce and started to force those innocent kids to eat them.

[Junior]

There are one hell of a lot more people who die from eating crap like McDonalds than are killed in mass school shootings. AND, the cost of eating like that on society is enormous.

 

Wait... so you are equating people choosing to eat crappy food that they could decide to not eat... with a mass murderer walking into an elementary classroom and opening fire?

[beanman]

Looks like they're going to move quickly on legislation. As long as they don't rush into something stupid I don't have a problem with it. Most articles I've read, including this one also indicate that the government isn't going to neglect mental health.

 

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/19/16020864-obama-demands-concrete-proposals-on-gun-violence-by-january

[BigRedBuster]

Simply replying to the conversation already started. There is a huge difference between the two. One causes instant sorrow and is a devastating disaster emotionally and the victims have no choice. The other causes sorrow and heart ache over time and is a long term disaster and the victims don't even think about their choice.

[rawhide]

My thoughts:

 

No legal possession of firearms unless the owner has a complete, accurate, and up to date background check.

No legal possession allowed for anyone with a conviction for any crime of violence, felony, or a history of certain mental illnesses.

Background checks required for all sales/transfers of guns whether a private sale or a dealer.

Make the criminal possession of firearms in violation of the above proposals a SERIOUS offense. Class III Felony or higher.

 

 

Any legislation similar to the assault weapons ban in the 90s is (IMO) basically worthless. A pistol grip stock doesn't make a gun any more deadly than a gun with a thumbhole stock. Grandfathering in the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of high capacity magazines already in circulation makes a ban on new manufacturing virtually worthless. "Assault weapons" are too slippery of a target for legislation.

Those are all required in the Republic of Kali; cept for the Cl. III felony, different classification out here

I agree, there are so many 30 rd mags in circulation not including the 30M+ AR/AK rifles that without mandatory surrender??? And the court battles would go on for years

 

I'm partial to Lt. Col David Grossman's strategy regarding school safety but which could be applied to shopping malls and other public places. You can google him. I'm biased though, I've read his books and watched a seminar given by him. $.02

[krill]

No, but restaurants selling meals with 1,500 calories that are loaded up with saturated fat / sodium is not helping the obesity epidemic.

 

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

So what's the end game with statements like this? Are you in favor of legislation that restricts what food McDonald's can sell? Because we already have the 16 oz. soda ban in NYC. It seems that our society is generally starting to lean towards a political environment where we're ok with removing our right to do as we please.

 

Obviously, I see the distinction between a firearm and a cheeseburger. But the basic concepts fit under one umbrella. To quote the venerable Ron Swanson, "The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds and die of a heart attack at 43, you can! You are free to do so. To me, that’s beautiful."

 

No, I am not in favor of legislation that restricts what type of food restaurants can sell, or somehow trying to force adults to eat healthy. What I am saying is that fast food restaurants have played a role in how our attitudes and expectations with food have evolved over the years...that is plainly obvious.

 

I don't know what the answer is. Today 30+ people will probably be killed by morons texting behind the wheel, yet there are people who will vigorously defend their right to do so. I have a problem with any life that is ended by stupidity, incompetence, or random undeserved violence. Maybe this is strictly a mental health issue, but I promise you that sweeping legislation to rectify the problem in that manor alone will be far more invasive, and intrude on you rights far more than not being able to buy a 30 round mag by mail.

[teachercd]

No, but restaurants selling meals with 1,500 calories that are loaded up with saturated fat / sodium is not helping the obesity epidemic.

 

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

So what's the end game with statements like this? Are you in favor of legislation that restricts what food McDonald's can sell? Because we already have the 16 oz. soda ban in NYC. It seems that our society is generally starting to lean towards a political environment where we're ok with removing our right to do as we please.

 

Obviously, I see the distinction between a firearm and a cheeseburger. But the basic concepts fit under one umbrella. To quote the venerable Ron Swanson, "The whole point of this country is if you want to eat garbage, balloon up to 600 pounds and die of a heart attack at 43, you can! You are free to do so. To me, that’s beautiful."

 

No, I am not in favor of legislation that restricts what type of food restaurants can sell, or somehow trying to force adults to eat healthy. What I am saying is that fast food restaurants have played a role in how our attitudes and expectations with food have evolved over the years...that is plainly obvious.

 

I don't know what the answer is. Today 30+ people will probably be killed by morons texting behind the wheel, yet there are people who will vigorously defend their right to do so. I have a problem with any life that is ended by stupidity, incompetence, or random undeserved violence. Maybe this is strictly a mental health issue, but I promise you that sweeping legislation to rectify the problem in that manor alone will be far more invasive, and intrude on you rights far more than not being able to buy a 30 round mag by mail.

 

 

I think the big difference is that you are really talking about "accidents" compared to a violent act. So yea, people will text and hurt others but not on purpose, still terrible? Of course, but a really big different act.

[carlfense]

This point is never a good one. If a knife had been the tool of choice, one or two people would have died, max.