Your position on gun control

[RaphaelDLG]

It is the gun owners who are "emotional" - clinging to the insane idea that a world where everyone has a gun on their hip at all times is safer than a world where the supply of guns is tightly controlled.

[Knives]

Australia.

Yes, it ed over some farmers, but I've never seen a gun in my life except outside Parliament house.

Our crime rate dropped more than Australia since their buyback when our gun control became more lax.

Not about crime - look at homicide rates.

0.93 per 100 000 vs 10.54 per 100 000

[RaphaelDLG]

Australia.

Yes, it ed over some farmers, but I've never seen a gun in my life except outside Parliament house.

Our crime rate dropped more than Australia since their buyback when our gun control became more lax.

Not about crime - look at homicide rates.

0.93 per 100 000 vs 10.54 per 100 000

Great point!

Crime in the United States is merely average compared to rich countries - we don't have an "immoral culture" or something like that.  However, the crime in the United States is MUCH more likely to end in someone's death.

[SATW]

You people are all thinking emotionally. America is at a 40 year low in violent crime. States with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime to boot, and gun deaths overall are dropping too. Vermont has some of the laxest gun control in the country and only has 0.2 gun deaths per 100,000, as opposed to Maryland, with 5.2 I think per 100,000, lower % ownership, and more regulations for good people, as criminals will get guns if they want one.

I understand the emotional knee-jerk reactions, but really all of these proposals are counterproductive and would cause more death because more people would be disarmed.

Thank you. All of your comments in this thread have been on point.

[dax00]

I support the ability for persons to own guns at their leisure per the Second Amendment.

However, I think persons should not be able to purchase ammunition except in designated areas where shooting would be allowed, such as shooting ranges and hunting areas. You could check in, buy your ammo, shoot for the day, return with all your spare casings and sell back any extra bullets you didn't use. There would, of course, have to be a penalty for owning ammo outside these hypothetical designated areas.

[Horus]

Leave things about where they are.

[Blair]

, as criminals will get guns if they want one.

Really? It's not that easy to get firearms on the black market you know

[pho]

The problem is the absence of security in public places. We need more cops, or least fewer of them scarfing donuts in their squad cars whilst waiting to bust people for illegal lane changes and the such.

[SWE]

You people are all thinking emotionally.

Is there another way to think rationally?

[Sir Mohamed]

Actually very simple:

- ban assault weapons
- ban also half-automatic weapons
- universal back ground checks
- a license of each gun owner. Like a driver’s license. With a psychological test. License has to be renewed every ten years
- tough sentencing laws for people who give guns to people without a license or who store guns unsave.

[°Leprechaun]

You people are all thinking emotionally. America is at a 40 year low in violent crime. States with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime to boot, and gun deaths overall are dropping too. Vermont has some of the laxest gun control in the country and only has 0.2 gun deaths per 100,000, as opposed to Maryland, with 5.2 I think per 100,000, lower % ownership, and more regulations for good people, as criminals will get guns if they want one.

I understand the emotional knee-jerk reactions, but really all of these proposals are counterproductive and would cause more death because more people would be disarmed.

Fear is an emotion. Is fear rational? People buy guns because of fear. I don't see any logic in owning a gun when there are other ways to protect oneself. One certainly doesn't need to own an assault weapon. We got along without guns and nuclear weapons for oh, I don't know about 14 billion years. What I don't get is how people can be against guns and at the same time support war.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think I have the most 'rational' thoughts about the issue. I just want anything that could be proven to work without being hamstrung by glorification of a bygone era or inane fantasies of toppling the government or dull invented "rights" to weaponry.

[NeverAgain]

I think I have the most 'rational' thoughts about the issue. I just want anything that could be proven to work without being hamstrung by glorification of a bygone era or inane fantasies of toppling the government or dull invented "rights" to weaponry.

Agreed. To play devil's advocate, we, as Americans, are promised this in our Bill of Rights. Which are supposed to be unalienable rights that are deserved to all men and women. On the other hand, our constitution MUST change with the times which was its main intent to do.

[Lothal1]

In Maryland, we have absolutely ridiculous gun control measures, and during the Assault Weapons Ban era, it was practically made illegal to buy any guns. Despite being probably #1 in gun control, Baltimore is still considered one of the most dangerous cities im America. The simple solution is to regulate handguns, not AKs.

[Santander]

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/06/12/orlando-terrorist-gun-control-compliant-shooter-history/

[This account no longer in use.]

> Breitbart

[Santander]

> Breitbart

It's actually a decent news site, as long as you stay out of the comments section. I still maintain my subscription to the FT (which I read basically religiously) and read/watch plenty of "serious" news sources, but I really enjoy the tabloid-y style of Breitbart. Sometimes, I think I learn more from reading Breitbart than I do from reading the FT. They say things that the liberal media will not admit.

[LLR]

> Breitbart

It's actually a decent news site, as long as you stay out of the comments section. I still maintain my subscription to the FT (which I read basically religiously) and read/watch plenty of "serious" news sources, but I really enjoy the tabloid-y style of Breitbart. Sometimes, I think I learn more from reading Breitbart than I do from reading the FT. They say things that the liberal media will not admit.

I took you seriously until then

Also, that's blatant anti-Semitism. Breitbart is one of the few sites we Jews don't control, and when someone says the "liberal media" they mean the "Illuminati Jewish media"

[Santander]

> Breitbart

It's actually a decent news site, as long as you stay out of the comments section. I still maintain my subscription to the FT (which I read basically religiously) and read/watch plenty of "serious" news sources, but I really enjoy the tabloid-y style of Breitbart. Sometimes, I think I learn more from reading Breitbart than I do from reading the FT. They say things that the liberal media will not admit.

I took you seriously until then

Also, that's blatant anti-Semitism. Breitbart is one of the few sites we Jews don't control, and when someone says the "liberal media" they mean the "Illuminati Jewish media"

Are you serious? Andrew Breitbart was Jewish. And yes, "liberal media" is sometimes used as an anti-Semitic dog whistle, but that is not the case here. I've lived in Israel. I'm not anti-Semitic in any way.

[LLR]

> Breitbart

It's actually a decent news site, as long as you stay out of the comments section. I still maintain my subscription to the FT (which I read basically religiously) and read/watch plenty of "serious" news sources, but I really enjoy the tabloid-y style of Breitbart. Sometimes, I think I learn more from reading Breitbart than I do from reading the FT. They say things that the liberal media will not admit.

I took you seriously until then

Also, that's blatant anti-Semitism. Breitbart is one of the few sites we Jews don't control, and when someone says the "liberal media" they mean the "Illuminati Jewish media"

Are you serious? Andrew Breitbart was Jewish. And yes, "liberal media" is sometimes used as an anti-Semitic dog whistle, but that is not the case here. I've lived in Israel. I'm not anti-Semitic in any way.

Oh, it wasn't clear that I was joking? Lol, sorry, thought the illuminati made it obvious. I know that you aren't anti-Semitic, you're a great guy.

[Santander]

Just figured I'd clear things up just in case... half of this forum thinks that I'm a white nationalist or worse.

[This account no longer in use.]

Not to worry. I, as a sane human being, know that you are in no way a white nationalist.

[Illiniwek]

Actually very simple:

- ban assault weapons
- ban also half-automatic weapons (maybe)
- universal back ground checks
- a license of each gun owner. Like a driver’s license. With a psychological test. License has to be renewed every ten years
- tough sentencing laws for people who give guns to people without a license or who store guns unsave.

This, plus smaller magazines (10 rounds or less).

[libertpaulian]

The "gun show loophole" is largely a myth.

Anyways, the only way I'd support a ban on suspected terrorists buying guns is if there were due process protections in place.