Male criminals do not exclusively prey on women.
I too was like this. For many years after getting out of the Marine Corps. But now I feel better prepared.
Look, I wish we lived in a world where nobody ever, ever, needed to use a gun in self defense. But I don’t think we do.
As another point of reference,
I would also not have a problem with extending wait periods significantly for all gun purchases. 30 days I would see as perfectly reasonable.
Perhaps a sliding scale for older/prior gun owners. Alot more 30 somethings cannot buy firearms than 18 year olds.
Someone who has owned a gun/s for many years without issue, probably little harm in them buying another. An 18 year old wanting to come in and buy 10…I would be very suspicious of.
Let’s not have the perfect be the enemy of the good. I’m not anti firearm per say, but don’t feel the need to have one. In fact the opposite, I have a child on the autism spectrum and the obvious way to never have a firearm incident in my household, is to never allow a firearm on my property.
The firearm owing OP has offered up three concrete items that should reduce firearm related deaths in the US. To wit:
● Universal background check for every gun sale or ownership transfer in America.
● Minimum age of 21.
● Limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds.
Awesome proposal, hats off, appreciate the gesture.
I wish the general population would get behind these proposals. Let’s try them in our federation of States, track the statistics and a few years down the road can objectively view the evidence on the effectiveness of these laws and implementation. This is a win-win situation.
Let’s simplify and call it 5 years from now. Have these laws materially improved the situation? if yes, enough so that voters as a whole feel comfortable with the new normal? Or do voters as a whole feel these were a good start, but more is needed based on the evidence. Then it would be time to pass more restrictive laws.
Regardless. The NRA (and Russian influence) has made the slippery slope a single issue for far too many voters. Let’s change this with the 3 proposed bullets and then look at the evidence. That breaks the slippery slope, should be a net positive over the current situation, then a more rationale fact based future can start. (Or we can keep trying the current situation of finding a “perfect” solution that doesn’t exist, and settlling for jack squat).
OP is not some humanitarian hero for “proposing” obvious minimal common sense measures. It’s mindboggling that these measures are not already in place, and it’s the opposition of people who all see themselves as “responsible gun owners” that prevents such basic legislation from passing.
And all of this was heavily loaded with the premise that OP is a “responsible gun owner”. Given the prominence of that premise in the OP, I think I have a right to challenge it without it being called a hijack. OP’s idea of responsible gun ownership is apparently that anyone like him should have the right to carry a gun anywhere they feel like, regardless of whether there is any objective common sense need to be armed.
No. There is rarely a “compelling and genuine need to carry”, and in a civilized society people don’t have the right to carry deadly weapons on a personal whim.
I spend 50 nights a year in the backcountry hiking and camping. I rarely see people armed other than hunters, and I find it quite disturbing when I do see people just randomly carrying deadly weapons for no good reason.
OP has conceded absolutely nothing on his own right to be armed whenever he feels like it. Until he does, I don’t think he’s part of any real solution to the horrific gun violence in this country.
The people who want a country that is not awash with guns are responsible for the fact that the pro-gun lobby won’t give an inch, and the fact that the minimal proposals in the OP are not already in place? That’s some perverse logic.
If I’m being too ungenerous - okay, I respect the fact that OP is not a Boebert or a Massie and has at least conceded the need to do something. I’ll stay out of the rest of the thread if you want to keep it to a narrow discussion of the details of basic gun control measures.
Not so much.
The fact that gun control laws that are very popular with the voters can’t be passed today is the fact that Mitch McConnell won’t allow anything to pass that might make Biden look good.
The other reason is that the GOP has lost the demographics race. They need to kowtow to every fringe group. including the less than 5Million NRA members, and the people who want all abortions banned in all cases, and even to open hate groups.
It doesn’t matter what us Democratic Voter responsible gun owners do or want, if McConnell can block anything and everything he wants, just to spite Biden.
The OP has not made any such claim.
Why would you limit it to 5
Tried to post this back when the thread was originally closed, but it still seems relevant…
And yet, what you call “maximalist puritanism” is literally just how things are done in most of the rest of the world. I live in Canada, which has camping spots even more remote than the ones pictured above, and I personally know people who go camping in such places.
And yet, I’ve never once heard of one of them taking a gun with them camping, just because they “feel unsafe”.
It’s this notion that every American is always mere seconds away from a life-or-death encounter the fuels the vast majority of their gun problems. The US will never solve the gun problem until they deal with the fear problem.
@DrDeth is correct. I never claimed that society would be safer if more people carried concealed. I believe it would be less safe. Not with the current laws and training requirements. @Riemann don’t presume to put words in my mouth.
I admittedly have a double standard about guns. I trust myself with a gun. I don’t trust another with one, at least not until they’ve proven to me that they are safe. But even then, those are very few data points for observation.
I’ve seen some dangerous behavior at the gun range in states offering CCW licenses. Many shooters are safe, sure, but I’ve seen enough that are sketchy or borderline unsafe and yet they’re going to pass the CCW class. Texas. Nevada. Florida. Missouri. I’ve seen enough and I’m no expert nor am I a very frequent shooter. If they are walking the streets, carrying concealed, we should all be scared.
And that’s when those people are at the range under controlled conditions and with bright lighting. Those people aren’t in a life-threatening situation when it’s dark and they’re scared shitless and their heart is jacked and palms are sweaty and with rapid breathing. Are they thinking about the next door neighbor’s house that is beyond the threat and beyond the walls in their own house? Doubtful.
I do not want many random people walking the streets with a concealed firearm. Absolutely not.
ETA — I don’t want society to regress back to the mid- to late-19th century wild west where many had guns.
As a gun owner, can you see my point that I find gun carriers like you to be incredible cowards? You need guns to do things I regularly do without guns. How do you react to my assertion that your irrational fears and cowardice have created the violent nightmare scenario of life in America? Has it occurred to you to examine the source of your fear?
Great start, what are your thoughts on licences and registration?
There’s no restriction on buying a car, but you need to have a licence to prove you can handle it and it’s registered so it can be tracked to it’s owner. Same principle for guns?
Are you aware that it’s not illegal for a licensed person to carry a loaded & concealed handgun in most states? (And in 13 states no license is required.) If your goal is to make the carrying of a CCW illegal in most states, then… good luck with that.
The problem has no simple solutions. Mass shootings are largely a mental health issue exacerbated by the lack of efforts to keep firearms out of the hands of those who have those issues. The Universal Background Check system has no access to medical information and mental health issues due to the HIPAA laws concerning privacy. Neither does it have access to the police records of children under eighteen.
A case in point: Nicholas Cruz, the Parkland School Shooter on 012.14.2018
From 2008 to 2017 there were forty five calls to law enforcement, mostly by his family, for violent or threatening behavior. A tip to law enforcement on 02.05.2016 stated that he had threatened to “shoot up the school.” In September of 2016 a school resource officer, who was also a deputy sheriff, stated that he should be committed for mental evaluation. On 09.24.2017 Nicholas Cruz posted a comment on a YouTube video that he wanted to become a “professional school shooter.” On 01.05 2018 the FBI received a detailed tip from someone close to the shooter with information on erratic behavior, gun ownership and a desire to kill people. This was five weeks before this incident and the FBI did not follow up on the tip.
IN February 2018, Nicholas Cruz "legally purchased an AR 15. The Universal Background Check did not pick up any of the above information. It was not included in accessible records due to the fact that all of it occurred when the shooter was legally a minor and as such the record of all of this were either sealed because he was a minor or because of the medical privacy laws. Once he had the weapon, the FBI failed to follow up on the tip that would have stopped the shootings.
He pleaded guilty. His penalty trial is going on right now.
The current gun control laws are not working, and need to be revamped.
Raising the min age helps. Many shooters were teens.
ETA this was a reply to @stui_magpie . Oops I meant @longhair75 .
I didn’t suggest he’s a humanitarian hero. My comments were focused on you attacking him with maximalist nonsense after he showed more flexibility than 99% of gun owners.
You do realize we’re never getting to the utopia where everyone must humbly submit a petition to the Riemann desk to seek your wisdom as to whether they “need” to carry a pistol on a camping trip, right? The smart play here is to accept and encourage concessions when the opposition offers them, and then build momentum from that.
It will get you exactly nowhere to say “I spit on your trifling compromise; I want it all and I want it now.” You don’t have the votes for that kind of imperious condescension. We all hoped that kind of momentum might follow Columbine or Sandy Hook or Marjorie Stoneman. But it didn’t. It will not follow Uvalde either, or the next elementary school shootout after that. This time is not different. You aren’t getting any restrictions that aren’t some sort of compromise position.
I want to hear from gun owners, and hear what they will support.
I’m a gun owner, I support licencing and registration as per my earlier question to you.
Yes I agree but I don’t think that is a reasonably achievable law. Do you? UBCs will register the guns but I don’t think an operator’s license is achievable.
I’m Australian, so it’s difficult for me to comment on US laws.
If you advocate for a universal background check, that’s the foundation for a licence. You pass the background checks, you get a licence which permits you to buy and own guns.
The registration is just administration, but allows guns to be tracked.
Allowing for my opening statement, I doubt Congress could enforce it, but states could if enough people agree with it. All it would take is some to break the ice and others might follow.
In California we’re required to pass the FSC, firearm safety certification. It’s trivial and does not require any demonstration of safe handling (a written test only), but it’s a start.