The Politics Test: #10

[ElectionsGuy]

1. Strongly Agree. 71/29, 54/16/15/15
2. Agree. 52/48, 43/10/26/21
3. Disagree. 21/79, 4/17/38/42
4. Strongly Agree. 70/30, 55/14/14/16
5. Strongly Agree. 87/13, 58/28/5/8
6. Strongly Agree. 87/13, 60/27/7/7
7. Agree. 71/29, 37/33/20/10

Keep voting on proposition 8
Keep voting on proposition 9

Gun control is up to your interpretation. Strongly Disagree, as I know when people mean 'gun control' they really mean limiting the freedom to own guns.

[Goldwater]

Disagree.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Strongly agree.

Gun ownership should be a privilege, not a right. Furthermore, a buyer should have to demonstrate a reasonable need to own a gun.

[Maxwell]

It's not as effective as it's name implies. Disagree, but only slightly.

[RINO Tom]

Disagree.  I am fine with background checks and don't have a strong opinion on an assault rifle ban.  However, I find liberals' views (like above) that someone should not be able to own a weapon to defend him or herself ridiculous, paternalistic and counterproductive.

I am highly doubtful that any gun control legislation short of a total gun ban - which gets into the kind of totalitarianism that I'm not comfortable with at all - would have ANY positive effect on reducing shootings or gun crimes.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I don't care about gun rights, I care about what is effective.

[RINO Tom]

I don't care about gun rights, I care about what is effective.

I don't think the question said anything about gun rights.  If you're referencing my post above, I summed it up by saying no, I don't think gun control is effective at all.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I don't care about gun rights, I care about what is effective.

I don't think the question said anything about gun rights.  If you're referencing my post above, I summed it up by saying no, I don't think gun control is effective at all.

Yes, it's just that I think the issue is buried under two separate issues: the effectiveness of gun control and, entirely distinct, the status of "gun rights".

[DemPGH]

I think basic regulations are necessary - and agree on that, but. . .

It's not as effective as it's name implies. Disagree, but only slightly.

That comes pretty close to how I feel about it. I favor much more gun regulations than your average con/libertarian, but I am not with the reactionary left that wants comprehensive bans (magazine bans, insurance packages, etc.) and/or even a repeal of the 2nd.

[RFayette]

I put "disagree" though I admit there are arguments for and against this proposition.

I am a big, big believer in the 2nd amendment, though, so I cannot disagree strongly enough with folks like Nagas and Crabcake, who want to take away our rights.  People have a right to protect themselves - period!  Buying a gun shouldn't require a 7-month waiting period or long waits for a background check, and restrictions should be as minimal as possible.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Sums up my thoughts exactly.

[RFayette]

Sums up my thoughts exactly.

This too. 

[YaBoyNY]

Strongly agree.

Gun ownership should be a privilege, not a right. Furthermore, a buyer should have to demonstrate a reasonable need to own a gun.

Agree for these very same reasons here.

There is no reason gun ownership should be a right.

[DavidB.]

It's a stupid question, because even if you agree with it you're not necessarily for gun control ("useful tool" =/= "morally right tool"), whereas one's result will undoubtedly be interpreted as "pro-gun control".

As for my answer, I think people have a right to defend themselves. No gun control. Period. Voted "strongly disagree".

So, this:

Sums up my thoughts exactly.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I support instituting universal background checks, but beyond that I'm not sure. Voted "Agree"

[Intell]

Agree, you don't have the right to own guns, you have the privilege to own guns, after you've proven you're responsible with a gun.

[Bigby]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

[Intell]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

Please tell me what the tyranny is.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Disagree.  I am fine with background checks and don't have a strong opinion on an assault rifle ban.  However, I find liberals' views (like above) that someone should not be able to own a weapon to defend him or herself ridiculous, paternalistic and counterproductive.

I am highly doubtful that any gun control legislation short of a total gun ban - which gets into the kind of totalitarianism that I'm not comfortable with at all - would have ANY positive effect on reducing shootings or gun crimes.

[Classic Conservative]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

Please tell me what the tyranny is.

Infringement of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. A totalitarian state.

[Bigby]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

Please tell me what the tyranny is.

Infringement of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. A totalitarian state.

This. The Founders established the amendment in response to life under the Intolerable Acts. It also protects against potential tyranny.

[RINO Tom]

Strongly agree.

Gun ownership should be a privilege, not a right. Furthermore, a buyer should have to demonstrate a reasonable need to own a gun.

Agree for these very same reasons here.

There is no reason gun ownership should be a right.

We wouldn't have a country if a bunch of dumb yokels didn't have guns.  Just saying.

But that's different.

Common sense gun control is more popular than politics makes it seems, but this country has natural gun ownership as one of its founding rights.  Self defense and individual liberty are considered somewhat sacred to most Americans, even most Democrats, and I'd tend to agree with that sentiment.

[/]

sa

[Intell]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

Please tell me what the tyranny is.

Infringement of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. A totalitarian state.

Your life is being infringed by gun control, it' s other people life, their livelihood, their safety your endangered with you not supporting gun control. Yea, I'm sure Australia is a totalitarian state with it making gun purchases controlled and hard, same with UK, Japan and other countries that have gun control. If you spout of freedom, the government can restrict your freedom, same way as it restricts your freedom to drink drive, to own nuclear guns, the government can restrict your individual rights to freely, without control own a gun.

[Intell]

Strongly Disagree. The Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves against tyranny.

Please tell me what the tyranny is.

Infringement of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. A totalitarian state.

This. The Founders established the amendment in response to life under the Intolerable Acts. It also protects against potential tyranny.

What f*king potential tyranny, are you going to spend your life in a conspiracy bubble, and what right, is being infringed, with strict gun control. Owning guns a privilege not a right.