Still waiting on you to return to this thread and expand on your whole “one bad day” thesis.
You’re right. I withdraw the comment.
I misread RT firefly’s original post. Gun rights advocates these days do not propose any restrictions. Its really not in their interests to do so.
You’re right. I withdraw the comment.
I misread RT firefly’s original post. Gun rights advocates these days do not propose any restrictions. The sensible gun laws they propose tend to expand gun rights but that is probably not what Firefly had in mind.
If given free rein, which restrictions currently in place would you leave in place?
Well, the anti-gun folks on this thread seemed to think it was plenty sensible at the time just like they thought the AWB was sensible.
I don’t hate Feinstein. I voted for her. Twice. Guns are not the only issue on the ballot for me. I think she’s good for the country in other ways and the anti-gun folks have ZERO chance of repealing the second amendment.
And they didn’t have a strong majority unless you are saying that 54::46 is a "strong majority.
And frankly it might have passed if they didn’t have someone so ignorant about guns spearhead their effort.
It was pretty clear that you were asked to come up with a regulation passed by a pro-gun group that you thought was sensible.
I think the constitutional carry legislation in Kansas was sensible, as is the other 5 states that this is the law of the land. Shall issue CCW in 40 states is sensible.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! It’s even funnier the 4th time!!!
After the assassination of RFK, LBJ tried to pass a bill that would have created a national gun registry and banned the retail sale of guns across state borders. A Democrat from Connecticut wanted to ban handguns and held up the national registry bill (which had a real chance of passing at the time). They held it up for so long that the moment passed and we got a watered down version called the Gun Control Act of 1968.
The problem is that the anti-gun folks don’t WANT reasonable sensible regulation. They want to get rid of guns and any time they have an opportunity to advance the ball they overestimate their advantage and try to ban guns.
What were the laws like in Kansas before constitutional carry was enacted? I ask because I would like to know if this was an added restriction(which is what is being asked about), or was it actually a loosening of already existing restrictions?
In today’s climate, where one party does not dare oppose the NRA, yes, that’s a strong majority. It is, in any case, a majority, and the failure is due only to the NRA Party’s employment of a desperate obstructionist tactic.
As you know.
It’s about time you dropped that lie, isn’t it? :dubious:
You’re wrong. This is not what is being asked about - not all regulations are restrictions. What was asked was about regulations. If you’re interested in finding out about the historical laws in Kansas - google is great!
(my bold)
Are you saying that LBJ’s proposal was a sensible gun control measure?
Zing! Oh man, this guy! You fuckers are too stupid to know that deregulation and regulation are actually the same thing!!! Boom!!!
Huckabee: Better To Have A Gun You Don’t Know How To Use Than No Gun At All
He neglected to say how to tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy.
In point of fact, regulation and restriction are not the same thing.
Yes. Personally, I think a national registry combined with gun licenses (it can be a little note on your driver’s license saying you can possess guns) are a very sensible solution to our gun problem.
I think that the gun problem is not suicide, its murder. Our suicide rate is dead fucking average for industrialized nations. But our murder rate is significantly higher and many of those murders are committed with guns and they are largely committed by people who are not allowed to possess a gun (e.g. criminals, wifebeaters and minors).
If we had a gun registry, I believe we would significantly reduce the leakage of legally purchased guns into illegal hands. If we had gun licenses it would make it really easy to identify people who are legally permitted to possess a gun. I would eliminate or significantly relax all other gun laws (which are mostly maginot lines that are pretty effective in keeping guns out of the hands lawful citizens but don’t do a damn thing about keeping guns out of the hands of people who are most likely to use guns in crime). For example, I would get rid of the regulation of suppressors and short barreled anything and I would get rid of all state and local regulation of guns.
Heck you can’t even tell by the uniforms these days.
BTW, if you don’t know how to use a gun, then what good is it?
For example, if you do not know how to load, charge and disengage the safety on an AR-15 then what good is it other than for bluffing or bludgeoning?
Under this plan, who would that be?