# Gun-rights advocates, how do you feel about... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 27, 2008, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422 "2008-06-27T11:53:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/1 "2008-06-27T11:53:25Z")
I mean the following as a poll, not really as a thought exercise. I’d put it in IMHO, if the subject weren’t so touchy. My assumption going in is that no one is so much of an absolutist on the subject that they’d permit the carrying of guns by all of the people mentioned in question 1, in all of the locations mentioned in question 2. But maybe I’m wrong about that! So here goes. Question 1: Assuming you would describe yourself as a gun-rights advocate, how do you feel about gun carrying and/or ownership by the following kinds of people: 1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). 2. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). 3. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). 4. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). 5. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? 1. Preschool or elementary school. 2. Audience with the president. 3. Airplane. 4. Major league sporting event. 5. Church. And just to clarify: I’m not asking about the _legality_ of any of the restrictions above, I’m asking about your view of the _legitimacy_ of those restrictions. And by “guns” let’s keep this to handguns and various rifles, automatic or otherwise, and leave out RPGs, bazookas, and thermonuclear weapons. ---
**Author:** ![Amp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Amp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amp)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/2 "2008-06-27T12:24:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Question 1: Assuming you would describe yourself as a gun-rights advocate, how do you feel about gun carrying and/or ownership by the following kinds of people: > > 1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). I would say it depends, some kids can, some kids can’t. I trust my twelve year old son with handling a gun more than I do the majority of the adults I know. But if I were pressed to make an absolute then no, no gun ownership until 18. > [@](#): > > 1. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). People convicted of violent felonies? No. > [@](#): > > 1. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). This one I am not quite so sure on. I don’t know nor have I observed mentally defective people so I can not comment. > [@](#): > > 1. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). As long as they are legally able to purchase handguns; i.e. not be a convicted felon of a violent crime; then yes. > [@](#): > > 1. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). If they have been deemed mentally unfit by a court, then no. > [@](#): > > Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? > > 1. Preschool or elementary school. > I beleive people who are able > > 2. Audience with the president. > > 3. Airplane. > > 4. Major league sporting event. > > 5. Church. I do not see a problem with a person who is legally entitled to carry a handgun to carry in any of those situations. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/3 "2008-06-27T12:28:05Z")
Opposed to all in question 1; see no problem with any in question 2. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/4 "2008-06-27T12:28:06Z")
Question 1 - 1, 2, 3 and 5 - should not be allowed to carry. 4 - should be allowed, providing they don’t fit into any of the other categories. Question 2 - 2 and 3 is permissible to ban. 1, 4, and 5 is not. If you want discussion along with the poll, this is based on the idea that adult citizens of the US have a right to keep and bear arms. They cannot be prevented from exercising this right without due process of law - that is, it having been demonstrated in some way that they cannot be trusted with full adult rights. Further, a citizen may exercise his or her RtKaBA where ever this does not present a special threat to public safety. It is unsafe to fire off a weapon on a plane, and the President is at special risk of assassination. Did you want to include in the discussion whether or not it is permissible to forbid carrying on private property? That is a good deal more contentious. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/5 "2008-06-27T12:33:49Z")
I assumed that the people in 1.4 had issued calls for violent overthrow. If that is not the case, then I would take **Shodan** ’s position. (I’m surprised, though, at his response to airplanes. That seems like a critical situation in which a person would be most helpless without the ability of self-defense.) ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/6 "2008-06-27T12:37:48Z")
No concealed carry permits for underage insane jihadists. I mean, they’ve gotta be at least 18. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/7 "2008-06-27T13:12:34Z")
[QUOTE=Sal Ammoniac] Question 1: Assuming you would describe yourself as a gun-rights advocate, how do you feel about gun carrying and/or ownership by the following kinds of people: 1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). [/quote] No. > [@](#): > > 1. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). No. > [@](#): > > 1. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). It depends upon how you feel about disenfranchising these people in general. Should they not vote, get drivers’ licenses, etc. > [@](#): > > 1. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). One of the fascinating aspects of crime is that thought is not among them, so I have no opposition to this. Besides, a better case can be made on speech grounds. > [@](#): > > 1. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). If you can definitively point these people out, I would oppose their ownership. But you can’t, so see my answer to Question 4. > [@](#): > > Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? > > 1. Preschool or elementary school. That’s a tougher one for me than you might think. I don’t object, but others do, so I’ll bow to their opinion. > [@](#): > > 1. Audience with the president. No issues. > [@](#): > > 1. Airplane. Not permissible. > [@](#): > > 1. Major league sporting event. No issues. > [@](#): > > 1. Church. No issues. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/8 "2008-06-27T13:39:18Z")
I feel that 1.1 should be broken down into several categories. Say, 0-8, 10-14, 14-16, 16-17. There are legitimately different answers for each of those age categories. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/9 "2008-06-27T14:25:49Z")
I agree. And I should note that the majority of the shooting I did before I was 18 was done miles away from my parents - I was generally with my grandfather or a camp counselor. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/10 "2008-06-27T14:31:32Z")
[QUOTE=Sal Ammoniac] 1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). [/QUOTE] I remember, at the age of 14, riding my bike 8 miles to my cousin’s house with my cased .22 rifle across the handle bars. Then we biked out to a place I knew in the country and shot. Along the way, we stopped at a convenience store. Back in those days (1976), this was not a big deal. The cops drove by at least once and just waved. But I’d been hunting before, been through safety classes, and was trusted with the gun that I’d owned for two years, having had a BB gun since I was 8. > [@](#): > > 1. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). > > 2. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). Conviction of a Felony or qualification as Insane disqualifies one from owning a firearm. I absolutely believe in this. > [@](#): > > 1. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). Unfortunately, there are a large number of people who appear to be productive members of society who fit this bill. See my pit thread. You can’t have someone arbitrarily deciding that people are too stupid to own guns, because that can be horribly mis-used by those in authority. > [@](#): > > 1. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). Again, until they’ve committed a felony, you cannot arbitrarily rule that they are not allowed to own guns for philosophical or political reasons. Advocating the violent overthrow of the US Government is illegal and can be prosecuted, but until that happens, you or I have nothing to say about their right to do anything. > [@](#): > > Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? > > 1. Preschool or elementary school. > 2. Audience with the president. > 3. Airplane. No problem with forbiding them in any of those places. > [@](#): > > 1. Major league sporting event. > 2. Church. The owner of a specific property has the power to decide this. Just as we all have a right to limit free speech on our own property and in our own houses. (Ie, you can eject a friend for spouting shit you don’t like. It’s your property and they have no legal recourse, no claim to first amendment freedoms within YOUR house.) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/11 "2008-06-27T14:38:00Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] Question 2 - 2 and 3 is permissible to ban. 1, 4, and 5 is not. [/QUOTE] With regard to question 2-1 are we saying it is permissible for a student and/or faculty and/or a visitor to carry a gun (assuming they have a CC permit)? As noted by Chimera for 2-4 & 5 it seems to me it is up to those who run the place to say if guns are ok there. I could see some rural area churches not caring and allowing it whereas an inner city church might not like it so much. Since it is their church should be their decision. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/12 "2008-06-27T15:00:44Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] Further, a citizen may exercise his or her RtKaBA where ever this does not present a special threat to public safety. It is unsafe to fire off a weapon on a plane, and the President is at special risk of assassination. [/QUOTE] Arguably, _a gun_ presents a special threat to public safety. What’s the key distinction that you’re seeing that I don’t see between a school and an airplane? * * * Actually, couldn’t the pro-gun arguments be used for both the school and plane situation? e.g. “Hijacking a plane would be very difficult if passengers routinely carried firearms”. “School massacres would probably be rarer and would have less loss of life if the teachers and perhaps students were armed”. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/13 "2008-06-27T15:19:54Z")
[QUOTE=Mijin] Arguably, _a gun_ presents a special threat to public safety. What’s the key distinction that you’re seeing that I don’t see between a school and an airplane? [/QUOTE] Probably because, as How Stuff Works points out: [http://science.howstuffworks.com/gun-on-plane.htm](http://science.howstuffworks.com/gun-on-plane.htm) a stray bullet could endanger not just the person who’s being shot at, but the entire plane and everyone on it. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/14 "2008-06-27T15:27:37Z")
1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). I know 10 yo children I would have no problem trusting with a weapon. I know 30yo adults I wouldn’t trust with an Etch-a-Sketch. I agree with E-Sabbath that this group needs to be broken down further, but if you must have a decision that covers this group as submitted, then no. 1. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). Violent felony convictions, no. 1. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). Too stupid to own a gun? Slippery slope. Resubmit this with a measureable level of developemental disorder, then also no. 1. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). Until and unless they fall into one of the other catecories, yes. 1. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). Again a slippery slope. But with a legal diagnosis of a relevent disorder, no. Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? 1. Preschool or elementary school. 2. Audience with the president. 3. Airplane. 4. Major league sporting event. 5. Church. I would think it only permissable to forbid a loaded firearm on a plane where an accidental discharge would endanger the entire flight. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/15 "2008-06-27T15:31:11Z")
[QUOTE=Mijin] Arguably, _a gun_ presents a special threat to public safety. What’s the key distinction that you’re seeing that I don’t see between a school and an airplane? [/QUOTE] Primarily that schools don’t crash if you shoot a hole in their wall. (Assuming that a plane would - I am subject to correction on this, since it is just what I have heard\*). But by definition a gun does not present a special threat to public safety. A “special” threat is defined as one sufficient to overcome the presumption that citizens are entitled to keep and bear arms. It is sort of like the “freedom of speech does not include the freedom to shout ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater”. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > With regard to question 2-1 are we saying it is permissible for a student and/or faculty and/or a visitor to carry a gun (assuming they have a CC permit)? Minors are a different issue, but teachers and visitors and so forth, yes. But your mention of concealed carry raises a point - I haven’t thought thru if requiring arms to be visible is an infringement or not. It would be sort of analogous to different restrictions on anonymous speech than for speech where the speaker is identified. If you prevented concealed carry as the default, you would lose part of the deterrent effect of criminals being less aware if they were in an environment where the law-abiding were armed or not. Not sure. Like I say, I haven’t thought thru it. Regards, Shodan \*On preview, I see **Captain Amazing** has covered this - thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/16 "2008-06-27T15:54:23Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] a stray bullet could endanger not just the person who’s being shot at, but the entire plane and everyone on it. [/QUOTE] > [@Shodan](#): > > Primarily that schools don’t crash if you shoot a hole in their wall. I know about all that, but still don’t see the distinction. The fact is, it’s easy to do mass murder with a gun on a plane (or snakes on a plane) and easy to do mass murder with a gun in a school. Terrorists have done both (although not the latter in the US to my knowledge). Reading between the lines, I suppose that perhaps what you’re getting at, is that on a plane a lawful person may unintentionally kill hundreds of people merely by trying to defend themselves. Which is not true of the school situation obviously. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/17 "2008-06-27T16:01:33Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] If you prevented concealed carry as the default, you would lose part of the deterrent effect of criminals being less aware if they were in an environment where the law-abiding were armed or not. [/QUOTE] You also scare police a lot more. Most interviews I have heard with police said it is a hugely stressful time when the approach a (say) car in the dark not knowing what the person inside might be up to. Granted people with a CC permit are probably less likely to start a shoot-out with a cop but I cannot see how police would feel more secure wondering who has a gun on them and who doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/18 "2008-06-27T16:11:38Z")
[QUOTE=Sal] So here goes. Question 1: Assuming you would describe yourself as a gun-rights advocate, how do you feel about gun carrying and/or ownership by the following kinds of people: [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > 1. Parentally unsupervised kids (i.e., 0-17). Never. > [@](#): > > 1. People with a prior conviction for a violent crime (let’s assume rape, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, attempted homicide, homicide in any degree). Never. > [@](#): > > 1. Mental defectives, as they used to be charmingly called (people with an IQ below 85, let’s say). Never. > [@](#): > > 1. People committed to violent overthrow of the U.S. (jihadists, Montana freemen, other extremists as may from time to time appear). Touchy, this one. They can already get the guns they want/need anyway by remaining silent about their intent (as can most non-convitcted criminals) so while I think no, being fair, I’d say yes. > [@](#): > > 1. The insane (the kind of people who if they committed a crime would escape conviction on the grounds of insanity). Not a chance in hell. [QUOTE=Sal] Question 2: in which of these situations do you think it’s permissible to forbid the carrying of guns by individual citizens? [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > 1. Preschool or elementary school. For momentary visits (i.e. to pick up a child, yes, for long periods of time, no) > [@](#): > > 1. Audience with the president. As far as rights go, the closer you get to the president the fewer you have (assuming you mean POTUS). I would not have a problem with a trained, registered and identified gun owner being armed near the package, the SS on the other hand will have a different opinion altogether. > [@](#): > > 1. Airplane. No problem with that at all. > [@](#): > > 1. Major league sporting event. If said gun owner didn’t have even a drippy drop of alcohol, then sure. I think driving drunk and carrying a weapon drunk are pretty much the same thing. As such, I think the punishments should be similar. > [@](#): > > 1. Church. No problem with it at all. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/19 "2008-06-27T16:13:41Z")
[QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole] You also scare police a lot more. Most interviews I have heard with police said it is a hugely stressful time when the approach a (say) car in the dark not knowing what the person inside might be up to. Granted people with a CC permit are probably less likely to start a shoot-out with a cop but I cannot see how police would feel more secure wondering who has a gun on them and who doesn’t. [/QUOTE] You’re off base here. You need to approach EVERY car as if the owner is armed. Doing that will save your life as a cop. You NEVER know who’s in a car or what they might be up to, that’s part of the job. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2008, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422/20 "2008-06-27T16:36:39Z")
Count me as accepting all people in question 1 as potential gun owners. The underage/insane/retarded should probably be supervised with guns, but no more so than in all the other aspects of their life. Felons should be kept from owning guns during their punishment, including prison and parole; but once their entire debt to society is paid, they get all the rights of normal citizens as far as I’m concerned. If it isn’t already against the law to advocate violent rebellion then it shouldn’t be against the law to advocate violent rebellion while carrying a gun. As far as places? Those are all okay, too, I guess. I once had an audience with the vice president while carrying an M-16, so I don’t see why it should have been any different with the president himself. I do think that private businesses (or homeowners for that matter) should be able to reasonably restrict people from carrying guns on their property, so that affects various private schools/churches/sporting events, etc. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-rights-advocates-how-do-you-feel-about/454422.md?page=2)