what kind of gun nut RU? (2nd try)

Since I left 2nd Amendment shit off my “RUA nut?” query, I’m making up a special poll for it here. Change wording if you like, but LMK what you’re changing. This is only for people with rightwing positions so it may not be much fun for those of you with subtle positions to the left, which all pretty much get bunched under “1.”

Poll to follow but for now here’s my spectrum:

  1. we should try immediately to curtail gun ownership by any means possible
  2. we should try to register guns so the mentally ill and convicted felons have a hard time getting them
  3. the status quo is fine
  4. I support the unrestricted ownership of guns by American citizens
  5. You can have my guns when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers

Pick the one that comes closest, or make up your own wording for anything you disagree with the phrasing of, but make sure to state where on the 1-5 spectrum your rewording would go. Any wording you don’t change will be assumed to remain as mine is.

I picked 1 as closest, but there’s a big grey area before 1 and 2. Taken literally, #1 could mean anything from rounding gun owners up into death camps, to killing off the entire population of the US under the theory that if no one is alive, no one can own a gun. That would be going just the tiniest bit too far.

Yes, and taken literally, #5 is expressing a wish to die and to have one’s guns taken away at that point. Use your brain a little bit, would you?

I support unrestricted ownership of guns. I also support biblical punishments for people who abuse them, or allow them to be abused.

3.5: The status quo is largely fine in many areas, but Illinois needs to get on the ball with concealed carry and Chicago needs to change a lot of things… I’m sure there are other cities and states with gun laws that could use some tweaking, as well. I don’t want to go so far as to say “unrestricted”, though.

If I thought for a second that 2 could work, I’d be down for 2, by the way. But I don’t, so I’m not.

I am. Which means that I realized that if I didn’t explicitly disavow death camps and self-nuking, some pro-gun person would almost inevitably show up and accuse me of supporting those things.

Cold dead fingers.

I think the gun laws in the US should be changed to be the same as Canada’s. They seem to be working okay for us here.


I clicked on 4 too quickly, probably between 3 and 4 as well.

I said 2. I have no problem with gun ownership. I also have no problem with registration and back ground checks. I do believe that gun ownership laws should be uniform across the country.

I said #2. I’m a gun enthusiast in the making but I don’t bother getting worked up about it like some people.

Those are some strange choices. There’s a ton of space between #1 and #2.

As I’ve said in many threads, I’d be fine with repealing the 2nd amendment, if it were politically possible. I’d favor stricter gun laws, more enforcement, and harsher punishments (much harsher) for criminal use of guns. But I’m not sure those would change things all that much, except maybe that last item. The US has for over a century had more gun violence than comparable European countries, going back long before gun control was topical. There might be something about American Exceptionalism on this issue.

I voted status quo. The laws in place already restrict gun ownership to law abiding citizens with no history of mental illness. The problem is that those people don’t give a shit about the law. If everyone carried, maybe the criminals would reconsider their actions.

I took 4, because the status quo in California sucks. I am a 3 on the Federal level (the National Background Check System could use some updates, and it should be usable by people making individual sales as well). I am a 4 in California, back to a 3 in my second home in Montana.

My guns are not a problem, nor are any of the guns in my family. When I had a mentally unbalanced person living with me, I ensured that my guns were locked up. I carry a rider on my homeowners policy for my guns.

I chose 4, actual position more like 3.75. My ideal would be:
[li]Carry permit requirements ok, Shall Issue the national standard for permits.[/li][li]Laws setting standards for storage of guns at home ok[/li][li]You can own anything that doesn’t shoot an explosive warhead- heavy machine guns and antitank rifles ok.[/li][li]Basic gun information classes in high school; marksmanship as extracurricular activity.[/li][li]Merciless, draconian punishments for using a gun in a felony.[/li][/ul]

Put me down for the first choice, “We should try immediately to curtail gun ownership by any means possible,” but I don’t vote in public polls.

For those who say we can have your guns when we pry them from your cold, dead fingers, I find your terms acceptable.

EDIT: Ah, fuck it. I went ahead and voted. But just this once!

We wouldn’t accuse you of such things. You’ve always been pretty consistently in the ‘humanity is a blight on the world’ camp. :wink:

You have nothing close to my view - I don’t care about registering, but I support a 14 day wait while a check is done for criminal records and mental records [not sure if we can do that because of HIPPA?]

My contention is that I am neither mentally unsound nor a felon so I should be able to purchase whatever the hell I want, and I am not in favor of registration because I should be able to have whatever I want in my gun locker. Registration always smacks of ‘We want to know what you have so we can easily take it away when we want to.’ I have no objection to waiting while the store runs the usual criminal record check as I have nothing going on there to worry about.

I went with option 2 but am not optimistic that the events in Connecticut will have any real impact on the discussions.