I want it to be illegal for an American citizen to own a gun.

[NCTraveler]

Not going to apologize for it.

The only exception would be to those who are registered to hunt within their state. That registration must stay current. Extensive vetting and a six month waiting period. Only hunting rifles can be purchased. Feds would control the vetting and monitoring of hunting licenses. States would issue the hunting license.

Next up. "That's not even close to reality gun grabber. You are so far out there." Hey gun humper, neither was gay marriage fifty years ago. We will win this fight. It will take decades. The Florida National Guard is a well regulated militia. My drunk neighbor doesn't regulate anything well.

[GulfCoast66]

1. I want to be a race car driver! nt

[NCTraveler]

6. Start with a go-cart at the local track. nt.

[Canoe52]

228. Lol, great response...and totally agree with you on gun laws.

I am so sick and tired hearing of so many gun deaths, week after week, month after month, year after year. Every time I think, that could have been my kids, that could have been my mom, that could have been my wife, that could have been me. What a stupid waste of life over something put in the constitution almost 250 years ago. The constitution was meant to be flexible, to be changeable, to be amended, so that as the country changed, as society changed, and as our values changed, the constitution could change so that it would still be viable and relevant to guide our good country.

The cure put forward by the humpers is always more guns, which just leads to more gun deaths.

If someone could explain the logic in that rationale, please do.

This does not happen in ANY OTHER COUNTRY, except ours. It’s time to follow the rest of world in a solution to this.

[greeny2323]

2. I agree with you

Other than highly regulated exceptions, guns should not be legal for citizens to own.

[hack89]

3. Gay marriage was a defeat for those that wanted to restrict rights

Restricting civil rights rights of any kind right now is swimming against the tide of history.

[NCTraveler]

9. We must fight for our rights life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

All being diminished by gun humpers daily.

[hack89]

14. Gun ownership is a civil right

That carries a lot of weight.

[NCTraveler]

18. Clearly it carries a lot of weight.

Using averages, probably just over three thousand pounds of dead weight at a church the other day. I do not minimize the weight aspect.

[hack89]

21. ok. nt

[Hortensis]

143. NCTraveler, what does representative government mean

but that no one faction gets to have everything all its way? You can blow off steam fantasizing, and I certainly understand that, but frankly I don't find even just fantasizing that a hundred million people's rights and wishes were completely disregarded and stripped at all appealing. And if I did I'd be ashamed to admit I wanted it even to myself. We can have that only in an absolutist, authoritarian state where NO one's wishes matter but those of those who must be obeyed.

Now me, I want this problem whittled way, way down by a series of sensible national regulations agreed to by most voters that attack it from various direcctions, each of which has significant effect and all of which together make a very big difference. But no fantasies. Other gun-bearing nations have sensible laws, and we can too and at some point will.

[procon]

40. Fine. Black powder, muzzle loading guns are just what the Founding Fathers had in mind. nt

[hack89]

43. Are the founding fathers the gold standard for civil rights?

What do you think they would say about women and POC voting, abortion and marriage equality?

[procon]

50. Yeah, about that, ALL rights stem from the US Constitution.

The legality of civil rights legislation, and all the issues you cite were signed into law, challenged and ruled on by the SCOTUS as Constitutional, just as they ruled in Heller that while no state can take it away Second Amendment rights, they can place limits on it. And they did back in 1994, Congress passed a federal assault-weapons ban that lasted 10 years before they let it lapse. Its long past time to bring it back.

[Bucky]

59. The Constitution doesn't give anybody any rights at all.

If you read the 9th Amendment, you'll see the connection to what the Declaration of Independence says, that rights are inalienable and come from nature, not human documents.

All the Constitution talks about is the rights the government is supposed to guarantee to us

[procon]

62. The 9th Amendment is, itself, a right. Ergo, you're arguing against yourself. nt

[Bucky]

64. No it's not. Look at the words.

The 9th amendment is a document, not a right, and what it says is the the government can't construe the Bill of Rights to mean other rights don't exist. There's a difference between granting a right and protecting a right. That is the core distinction that undergirds the Declaration of Independence and American system of government

[procon]

90. The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments of the Constitution.

Give it a rest, you're not even making any sense now.

[Bucky]

100. I think you're arguing with me just for the sake of arguing.

What I'm stating is pretty much mainstream thinking for American political theory. Civil Rights come from nature, not from government documents. A guy named John Locke explained it pretty thoroughly.

[procon]

102. Now there's a classic debate no-no; Appeal To Authority.

Stick a fork in it.

[X_Digger]

170. Locke, Rousseau- are two enlightenment philosophers.

If you want to understand the theory of rights as laid out in our government's founding documents, it's smart to at least pretend to understand the enlightenment and it's leading lights.

Or you could, you know, continue with a lack of knowledge and make it up as you go along.

[hack89]

67. Of course the 2A allows strict gun control

That isn't the reason gun control is a smoking wreck in America.

[ClarendonDem]

77. Yup

[X_Digger]

167. No. Read the preamble. The bill of rights is a limit on government.

Right exist. The bill of rights protects them.

How about the right to travel? Doesn't appear in any founding document.

This is 10th grade government. Seriously.

[Marengo]

211. No rights exist outside the sanction of the state?

[Bucky]

57. They saw their work as the foundation more protections would be built upon

Reread the 9th Amendment.

Maybe my right to not be shot by some lunatic barging into my church or daycare center is one of the rights we have to be more serious about protecting

[Doc_Technical]

48. Those guns must also be smooth bore,

and no minie ball ammo.

[procon]

51. And all handmade... put a lot of people to work. Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! 😛 nt

[X_Digger]

171. Like the first only protects hand crank printing presses and quill pens?

[friendly_iconoclast]

200. That sort seem either to not to have thought about the implications of the "muskets-only" approach,

or did, and hoped we hadn't.

[NutmegYankee]

214. Smooth bore was military weapons.

Civilians used long barrel rifles with tight fitting balls, often held in bees wax, that were slow to reload, but powerful and accurate for hunting. Military used the musket because it was quick to reload, but the accuracy was poor and required volley fire tactics.

[Hoyt]

144. Come on. With exception of a few here, the only rights most gunners are interested in are guns.

The majority of gunners are white wing racist and bigots. They don't care about "civil" rights. In fact, they go out of their way to violate other people's civil rights.


Guns, are not a "civil" right, BTW

[hack89]

154. So the Bill of Rights are not civil rights?

What are they then?

[mythology]

245. And my right to live is worth less to the NRA

People have long since proven we can't handle guns safely in this country.

[hack89]

246. Ok. nt

[Abouttime]

27. Bullish!t

A well ordered militia has nothing to do with personal gun ownership.
As far as hunting goes, there is no right to kill in our constitution, hunting is a bloodsport worse than cockfighting. If you want to eat deer elk or pheasant buy it in the grocery. If you kill animals for sport you should seek treatment because you are mentally ill.

[hack89]

44. The 2A protects the individual right to keep and bear arms

According to HRC, Bernie, and President Obama. It has been the official position of the Democratic Party for a long time.

[vkkv]

93. Rights ARE LIMITED - as the 2ND AMENDMENT is now. There is no winning the argument that rights

are UNLIMITED.

Freedom of speech IS LIMITED. Employers have the right to fire an employee whose use of their freedom of speech and expression, while legal, might harm their employer in some way. Fired, gone, kaput, c ya... and that is a legal limitation.

You cannot legally own a nuclear weapon, there, done.

The gov't CAN AND WILL EVENTUALLY restrict gun rights to EXCLUDE hi-capacity magazines for (semi) automatic firearms and perhaps semi-autos altogether.

[hack89]

98. The 2A is not the reason gun control is a smoking wreck in America.

I never said the 2A is unlimited. In fact, most gun control measures are perfectly legal.

[vkkv]

110. So what's the argument then? Let's LIMIT automatically chamber-re-loading firearms and high capacity

magazines.. cool with you?

[hack89]

115. Not cool

ok with mag limits - say 15 rounds. I like my rifles - see no reason to change.

[vkkv]

118. Liking YOUR rifles is not part of the national dialogue...

Bolt, pump or lever-action should be all that are legal.

I'd even give up my walnut 10/22s.

[hack89]

124. That's ok. I don't mind talking to myself. nt

[Marengo]

130. Why dont you give them up now?

[vkkv]

135. As soon as I can vote to make them illegal, I will.

I'll keep all of my other bolts, pumps and levers.

[Marengo]

141. No, you can voluntarily surrender them to your local PD so as to set an example. Invite the media...

To cover it. Serve as an inspiration for other likeminded persons to follow suit.

[vkkv]

146. Unlike most gun owners, I'm not a FUCKING idiot.

[Marengo]

148. If you are so opposed to the civilian ownership of semiauto firearms, why do you...

Have any? Why do you need a government order to give them up?

[vkkv]

150. This is probably the most stupid exchange I've had here at DU.. just end it already..

[Marengo]

157. It simply doesnt make any sense for you to oppose civilian ownership of semiauto...

Firearms when owning them yourself and apparently lacking the ideological motivation to rid yourself of said arms without a directive from the state.

[vkkv]

168. No, it makes perfect sense. I can own them now, so I do, but I would VOTE to dis-allow other people

and myself from owning semi-autos, given the opportunity.

I'm not selfish, but I am law-abiding. I would give up my little 22LRs easily if it meant others could not own 308 semi-autos. Over yer head, huh?

Then I would support a law that would jail anyone for 5 years for being in possession of an unregistered firearm. 20 years for using a firearm, unloaded or not, in any crime.

Such laws would cut gun crime in no time at all.

[Marengo]

179. Stunningly illogical. Why would you continue to possess firearms you belive no one, including...

Yourself, should be allowed to possess. That they are legal now is irrelevant as you believe they shouldn’t be. Why do you need a government order to compell to act on your belief? How can this be interpreted as anything other than selfish on your part?

[vkkv]

184. Okay, I'll make it super clear for the morons. If something is fun and legal I'll use it until

it becomes illegal.

I've felt the very same thing with other products.. some of the best 4th of July fireworks become no longer avail., Calif. gas cans.. paints.. chrome bumpers.. bangsite canons.. There are a lot of products that many of us loved that are now illegal, so we don't use them. DUH !!

You have some weird lacking of comprehension on that slice of history, but that's you. not me. Please choose to bother someone else. No more idiocy, I can't take any more.

[Marengo]

185. Ah, your motive IS selfish after all, unlike your claim in post 168. Nothing else can logically...

Explain your bizarre insistence to continue to possess something you regard as a threat to public safety, something you don’t believe anyone should possess, until ordered by the state to relinquish it. Fuck the threat semiautomatic weapons represent to society, they’re FUN. I think it’s abundantly clear who is lacking comprehension, and it’s not I.

[vkkv]

189. Since when are 10/22s a serious threat to public safety? You do not know squat! IMHO.

Clearly, it is UNSELFISH of me, given the opportunity, to vote away my right to own semi-autos that I own.

I wouldn't even use a 10/22 to defend myself in the highly UNLIKELY odds of that happening. Why? because unlike many gun owners, I don't hang out with dirt-bags or to where dirt-bags gravitate, like the military as did Devin Kelly and the multiple former military turned terrorist / assassins.

Anyone who can't handle the private, outside world reside in the military, everyone knows that. Just taking orders that are handed down is SO MUCH easier than having to think one's way through life, ya know?

[Marengo]

192. You are granting yourself an exception which violates your own principle. If you honestly believe...

That no one should should be allowed to possess a semiautomatic firearm then you shouldn’t allow yourself to do so in the absence of a government order. That you to wait for the force of law to compell you to act in accordance with your own belief system is quite frankly bizarre. I think your motive most certainly is selfish, as you great lengths to defend your ownership of 10/22s. The caliber is irrelevant, it is the mode of operation you believe is unsuitable for civilian owner. In that regard, your SEMIAUTOMATIC 10/22s are no better and no less a public threat than an AR-15.

[EX500rider]

224. "Since when are 10/22s a serious threat to public safety?"

Last time I looked into it, .22 rounds were one of the most used rounds in shootings and murders.

[vkkv]

229. WHEN WAS THAT AND ...WHY?

[EX500rider]

231. Hard to say why, you'd have to ask the criminals.

A study done in by the University of Pennsylvania showed that, in
Philadelphia,:

In 1985, of 91 homicides

44% .38 caliber revolver
19% .25 caliber pistol
14% .22 caliber revolver
14% .32 caliber revolver
3% 9 mm pistol
2% .357 caliber revolver

In 1990, of 204 homicides

23% 9 mm pistol
18% .38 caliber revolver
16% .357 caliber revolver
16% .22 caliber revolver
10% .32 caliber revolver

[vkkv]

233. 30 YEARS AGO... GREAT DATA! Is that why most gun-nuts seem so well uninformed?

Figures.

Oh yah and YOU LIED when you wrote"" Last time I looked into it, .22 rounds were one of the most used rounds in shootings and murders."""

15% average is NOT MOST. I cannot even DEFINE that kind of idiocy without getting reported by some weak-ass gun-nut. Not you, though.

[EX500rider]

235. The difference between 22% and 16% is not that much.

You were the one saying .22's weren't a serious threat to public safety.

[EX500rider]

236. If you have more recent data feel free to post it.

[johnsonsnap]

132. Why misrepresent Obama?

I have never heard him support violence.

[hack89]

134. ""I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms,..

"I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today's ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country."

Obama's reaction to Heller.

[Runningdawg]

113. Name of store that sells squirrel?

I choose to eat game and I choose to be the only person directly responsible for that animals death.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

29. Ahhh, so your civil right to kill me with a gun

is more important than my civil right to go on living. I get it.

[hack89]

38. There is no right to murder

There is a right to keep and bear arms.

[procon]

42. But no specific right to keep and bear semi automatic weapons. nt

[hack89]

47. AWBs are perfectly constitutional

Lack of deep and widespread popular support is the issue.

[procon]

52. States have the right to ban any type of gun, proscribe the whole category. nt

[hack89]

65. And some have done exactly that

Most have not.

[ClarendonDem]

79. States cannot ban handguns

But can otherwise enact all sorts of gun control laws

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

75. So which one should take precedence?

What i get from the constant drum beat of "2nd Amendment! 2nd Amendment!" and every other sad excuse that is put forth every time we have another mass murder, or every time a toddler finds a gun and kills his sister, what I get is that the right to own a gun is all important, and the many lives lost each year to guns somehow doesn't matter as much.

Were I in charge I confiscate all guns.

[hack89]

87. Neither

the answer is to find solutions to gun violence that are both constitutional and have broad support from the public. It is possible to balance both rights.

Which is why all your ranting might make you feel better but is meaningless in the long term - it won't change things.

[Baconator]

126. Textbook example of why restrictive gun laws are going nowhere...

[hunter]

56. My right not to be shot by a lunatic with a gun...

... supersedes anyone's right to own a gun just for fun.

And it certainly supersedes anyone's right to own a gun because there are imaginary "bad guys" living in their head.

[hack89]

66. All you have to do is convince the courts

They are the ones that make those judgements.

[hunter]

69. I can be proactive too.

I don't respect the second amendment as it is now interpreted by the courts, nor do I respect gun fetishes.

Whenever I encounter a gun fetishist I regard dangerous, I will do what I can to disarm them, no matter they are family, friend, or complete stranger. (Sadly, a few of them have been fourteen year olds and supposed adults of similar intellectual development...)

No, I do not respect your right to bear arms, even as an adult. So sue me.



If you want to fix a bullet hole in a car, Bondo works pretty well.

[hack89]

74. Ok. nt

[ClarendonDem]

83. Are you saying you physically attack people

Who have a gun? That sounds illegal.

[Hoyt]

182. If you fear for your life. . . . .It's worked for a lot of white wing gun-humpers.

[hunter]

191. Just standing my ground.

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

I don't trust anyone who keeps them for self defense, or as imaginary defenders of some confederate flag waving badge licking gawd and country.

Fuck current interpretations of the second amendment, and all those who normalized the possession of military grade weapons as a some kind of wholesome hobby.

[friendly_iconoclast]

202. Given *that* attitude, the only difference between you and the homophobic 'bathroom bill' types...

...is the particular group of "others" you want to wage culture war on.

[cwydro]

103. Wait, you attack armed people and disarm them?

Fascinating.

[friendly_iconoclast]

208. Culture warriors of all sorts see threats everywhere that society needs 'protection' from

The mindset is *always* the same, the only thing that differs is the nature of the 'threat':

http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/05/02/woman-shows-bathroom-safety-isnt-only-trans-concern

The notion of “bathroom safety” has become a hot-button issue lately thanks to heated legislative battles in several states over restroom access for members of the transgender community. Now, a viral video of a confrontation in a Dallas bathroom between a man and 25-year-old Jessica Rush, a lesbian woman who chooses to wear traditionally masculine clothing, suggests, as Rush put it, that “it’s not just a transgender problem.”

“My heart jumped out of my chest because I thought I was going to be attacked.... I usually tell people, ‘Hey, you're good. I’m not going to hurt you,’ ” Rush told TakePart about her encounter with the man. “But I was so embarrassed.”

The man took it upon himself to make using the bathroom a safety issue when he stormed into a restroom at Baylor Medical Center late last week to stop Rush, whom he thought was a man.

Rush said the man explained he was trying to protect his mother, an elderly woman who was also using the women’s restroom, although the mother did not seem to notice her presence.

[Marengo]

212. Can you legally touch a firearm?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/11516470

[hunter]

216. You keep wanting to go there...

Seriously, tell me, what sort of person do you imagine you'd shoot, and why are you letting this imaginary person live in your head? What does he look like?

I don't imagine anyone I'd care to shoot, therefore I don't need a gun to feel secure in my person. Ever.

The fact is, gun fetishists are a fading demographic, and the only people the gun manufacturers are selling guns to are people who already have guns. And they bump up the deadly attraction like a street corner drug pusher. Heroin not as good as it was? Here, try some Fentanyl... Look at the magazine on this gun!



As I've said multiple times here on DU, gun fetishes are disgusting. The current legal interpretations of the second amendment are also disgusting.

Too many people act like the second amendment was written by God and handed down to Moses on a tablet. We'll fuck everyone who worships at the shrine of the second amendment.

The second amendment is NOT equivalent in any way to ordinary protections of civil rights. It's a fucking ugly anachronism, written back in the days when it was okay to beat your wife and own slaves. Times change. Some of the stuff they got right in the Constitution, the second amendment, like slavery, is not one of those things.

[Marengo]

218. LOL! You expended a great amount of effort not answering my question. No matter, I couldnt care

Less of what you did write. If by “locked up” you meant involuntary commited or held, you best not be snatching anyone’s firearms. Law enforcement may not look very kindly on that.

[hunter]

220. Wanna bet?

I've always been a mostly harmless diversion to law enforcement. Even at my very bloody bare feet worst. A danger to myself maybe, but not others. An affable guy compared to the usual graveyard shift domestic violence and similar sordid calls.

On the other hand, my Wild West grandma, entering the first stages of paranoid possibly mad-cow-or-deer level dementia... everyone rested a little easier when her guns were destroyed. My parents destroyed all the family guns, including a few that may have been collectibles. The only Wild West gun that still lives is a family deer rifle my grandma gave my brother. My brother doesn't hunt. It's an inert object, a decoration. It will be destroyed and discarded by nieces and nephews who have no memories of venison sausage.

You haven't told me about the bad guys living in your head, or why you might ever need a gun to defend yourself from them.

You do have guns, don't you?

[Marengo]

223. Affability is irrelevant, one is either a prohibited person or not. If you are, its in your best...

Interest to stay well clear of anything related to firearms. Start snatching folks guns and you may find yourself locked up again.

[hunter]

239. Fear for your guns...

[AllyCat]

76. How is my right to live not a civil right?

And your right to live? And everyone around us? The 2A people have no stand in reality as long as they don’t live by the whole amendment. When the well-regulated militia gets as much attention as the gun part, I’ll be ready to talk about it

[hack89]

91. Refusing to talk about it simply means nothing changes

is that what you really want? The reality in America is that the 2A protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. Not only is it the law of the land but is the position of both major political parties. Every Democratic presidential candidate plus President Obama disagrees with you.

[AllyCat]

116. Again, how is our right to live, not a civil right?

[hack89]

122. I never said it wasn't

that is the issue - how to balance both rights. Whatever solution is decided on has to pass constitutional muster.

[AllyCat]

138. You did not. You deflected to talk about how wrong I am since

Even PBO supports your right to shoot whatever you want. So what do the gun lovers think will work? Besides more guns

[hack89]

139. Lets start by focusing on violent people

and ensuring they don't have guns - felons get put away for a long time, domestic violence means no guns.

Lets find a way to allow mental health professionals report people that are potentially dangerous to themselves or others so they can be disarmed.

Universal background checks.

Adequate funding so the present background check system is up to date.

Where do you get the notion that I want to shoot anyone? 35 years of gun ownership and I have never harmed a living thing.

[Marengo]

213. What do you mean by live by the whole amendment?

[AllyCat]

221. The well-regulated militia bit that no one wants

To pretend is there.

[Marengo]

238. What does well regulated mean, how does it apply?

[R B Garr]

4. Yeah, and you get one bullet for your hunting trip. If you miss, then go home.

Slaughtering humans en masse deserves these kinds of ruminations in response, absolutely.

[ProfessorGAC]

32. Deer Hunter

Wasn't that their thing in that movie? You had to get your deer with one shot?

[R B Garr]

81. Interesting! Because I was thinking of a movie, but not that one.

In fact, I've never made it past the wedding scene with that movie before I can't stand it anymore and shut if off. But it's such a big name movie, that is no excuse and I'm going to make a point of watching it all the way through.

The movie I was thinking of is pretty new. I just watched a couple nights ago. It's called Beatriz at Dinner with Salma Hayek. Wow, an intense story and movie -- very interesting. I hate to say anything else about it because of spoilers, but there's a part in there about hunting.... That was my own connection from what they said in the movie....about big game hunting. That's all I can say.

That's the way nature is, though. If a hunting animal misses a strike, they have to regroup usually and try again.

[Bucky]

54. Barney Fife hunting :o)

[marylandblue]

5. Before gay marriage were domestic partnerships and civil unions

Baby steps.

[NCTraveler]

8. This.

It's not going to happen overnight.

[Vinca]

7. I agree with you.

[MineralMan]

10. Also, all firearms and ammo have to be stored at a secure armory

at a shooting range or hunting club facility. That's how they handle personal firearms on military bases for people who live on base. It would work just fine for civilians, too. You go, check out your personal firearm for your hunting trip and return it afterwards.

[ClarendonDem]

85. Nope

I’ll pass

[Lurker Deluxe]

152. Not only no, but hell no.

My parents live in the country, about 25 miles north of me on 20+ acres. There is a pond on it, and about 4 acres are kept clear, the rest is woods. My parents are both in their 80's and well certainly still very healthy and active they would most likely not survive a snake bite from the bad boys out there ...

A year ago while I was up for the weekend my mother was telling me a story about how my father bumped into a 4'+ water moccasin when he got off the mower to move a branch. He walked up to the barn, got a shovel, came back and chopped it up. He joked, "that bastard almost got me, it was pissed off".

I went into town and bought him a 410 "snake charmer" and came back and fashioned a holder for it on the mower, and told him to either shoot the snake or "don't fuck with it".

I have heard them tell of other stories about wild dogs that will roam through the property every now and again. They have a dog which is outside when they are outside and certainly a situation could arise from that ... so, they have a gun.

I own guns, and keep all of them, except my pump 12 which lives in a rack in my bedroom for self defense, at my parent's house. If I am up there and decide I would like to pop a squirrel or rabbit, there is simply no reason I should have to go anywhere to get my bolt action 7 round clip 22 from anywhere ... it stands a much higher chance of getting stolen in transport than it does living in a gun safe.

So ... no.

[Calista241]

11. Well, raise a couple hundred billion dollars to pay for all those weapons.

That’s your first step.

[NCTraveler]

19. That doesn't make much sense as a first step. nt.

[LittleBlue]

89. That poster might be referencing Australia's buy back program

They bought back the guns due to Australia's law that the government must give fair market compensation for the property that it seizes. There are over 300 million guns in the country. The latest prices for guns I've seen is between $500 on the low end, and well over a thousand on the high end. You might need $200-$400bn to buy back all those guns. It would devastate the budget.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. How do you vet someone for a hunting license? What goes into the process?

How do you get the guns away from people who aren't licensed? Are they confiscated, turned in, bought back?

How do you define hunting rifle? People hunt with AR-15s.

[NCTraveler]

22. Vetting and waiting period would be for the gun and controlled by the feds.

Sorry, thought that was clear.

Dumb fucks "hunt with AR-15s."

Corrected.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

34. No, I'm asking what the "vetting" looks like.

What questions are asked, what information is requested, what backgrounds are checked, what other information is gathered -- who and from whom and how. Your answer about the AR-15s gives me a pretty good idea, though.

[sharp_stick]

80. If you can't hit what you're aiming at

with a bolt action rifle you either need more practice or you need to let someone who does do the shooting.

[vkkv]

101. Dumb fucks "hunt with AR-15s." Yep, because

if you miss, the noise startles the animals and they dart off. The hunter really has only one shot to get right the first time.

Semi-autos jam, too.
The shorter barrels of AR's generally less accurate at long range shots.
ARs are usually lighter in weight than bolt-actions so movement at the time of firing ( and missing the target) is more likely.

[Marengo]

107. Take it from someone who has hunted with the AR platform, your facts are bullshit

[AllyCat]

117. Hunted what?

[Marengo]

121. Mulies

[AllyCat]

136. Seriously, you need an AR15 to hunt a mule deer?

[Marengo]

140. Since need has nothing to do with it, why not? What do you think my loadout was?

[AllyCat]

142. The need is not there. The desire to have a weapon that is used for killing people

no matter how "increased in popularity" for hunting kids, dogs, squirrels, varmints, deer, or hunting churchgoers is exactly that: desire.

[Marengo]

145. Nonsensical, unless youre arguing that no deer hunting rifle has ever been used to kill a person.

[friendly_iconoclast]

203. Only when your appointment as Secretary of Needs is confirmed by the Senate...

...will your opinion on what others need matter.

[vkkv]

123. Seems I struck a nerve!

There is truth to what I wrote.

It's argued over and over at various gun forums.

[Marengo]

127. LOL! Truth only in your mind.

[redstatebluegirl]

104. The only thing you hunt with an AR-15 is people!

[Marengo]

108. Do you hunt?

[redstatebluegirl]

109. I did as a girl on the farm. My dad had guns to keep predators away from our livestock.

I know a lot of hunters from home, NONE of them use that weapon for hunting.

[redstatebluegirl]

112. I forgot to say with my current eyesight nobody would want me hunting now.

[Marengo]

114. The AR platform has gained popularity for more than just varmints in recent years. I have used...

An AR in .308 and was quite pleaed with it. I see more in the field during big game hunts these days.

[AllyCat]

120. Oh, well if it is gaining popularity, we cant talk about

Gun control on that either. Never know when a gun humper might need to hunt churchgoers, little kids in an elementary school, or people sitting down to enjoy a show.

[Marengo]

128. I never said it cant be discussed, but the reality is that youre wrong about the AR platform...

Used in a legitimate hunting context.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

111. Except for the hunters who don't.

[redstatebluegirl]

119. Makes no sense to me. I support the right of hunters to have long rifles and other

weapons if they are properly cleared by some type of system. You will never convince me that you hunt anything with an AR15.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

129. Almost half of hunters have used an AR-type rifle in the past five years for hunting.

[Hoyt]

205. Only 6% of population hunted in past 12 months. And I bet most of

those went to drink and talk white wing BS. Are we supposed to base gun policy on that small, insignificant group?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

210. The question was whether hunters use an AR-type rifle. Yes, many do.

[Hoyt]

215. Sure some do, they are violent and enjoy shooting up things.

They can be told they'll have to use traditional hunting rifles. Most will quit hunting if they can't play army with an AR15.

Like I said, you don't make policy affecting 100% of the population based upon a few white wing gun-humpers. They created this problem, so screw em.

[Marengo]

219. Are all hunters who use the AR platform for hunting violent, and can you define violent as used

In this context?

[EX500rider]

225. "Only 6% of population hunted in past 12 months."

So around 20 million people then?

[ileus]

151. Unless you hunt something else...

I have two set up for coyote/varmint hunting (one with a regular scope, one with a night scope) and am currently working on building one for deer.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

13. Yea ok

Good luck with that smh

[fescuerescue]

15. I want a boat

But they are expensive and use alot of gas.

The funny thing is, you don't need a license to drive a boat either, but you do have to register it.

[NCTraveler]

23. Depends on the boat.

Not all boats have to be registered and some you have to be licensed to captain. Not sure of the point you are trying to make but the strange analogy you put forward is incorrect on both points made.

[aikoaiko]

16. Reducing or eliminating civil liberties won't work in the long run.

Gay marriage was successful because it expanding civil liberties to people previously denied in America.

[maxsolomon]

17. Nope. Stop proposing Binary solutions.

I'm as anti-mass killing as anyone, but hunting is a legitimate activity for humans (too many deer), and there are millions of firearms already in circulation. You'd need to repeal the 2nd Amendment, and you may have noticed that the field is tilted against us this last half century.

My focus is on Well-Regulating the Militia. The Unorganized Militia must become Organized so more nut jobs with guns can be identified by someone other than gun store owners and gun show vendors.

[NCTraveler]

24. My solution isn't binary as you claim.

The "binary" thing is a poor debate tactic meant to deflect without saying anything of value.

"but hunting is a legitimate activity for humans "

I made no claim to the contrary.

[maxsolomon]

36. OK, so you want hunting exempted.

I'm continually frustrated by the (natural) "melt them all!" reactions we get after these massacres. it's not productive, and it alienates the vaunted "responsible" gun owners.

I just want responsibilities to come with ownership - Militia participation.

[NCTraveler]

37. "OK, so you want hunting exempted."

Not sure how you could come to any other conclusion.

"I'm continually frustrated by the (natural(sane)) "melt them all!" reactions we get(weekly) after these massacres. it's not productive, and it alienates the vaunted "responsible (bwahahahaha)" gun owners."

[maxsolomon]

195. you know, we're on the same side.

my use of "vaunted" and quotation marks around "responsible gun owners" appears to have gone right over your head.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

41. The militia argument is a dead end now

DC vs Heller cut off that route. The decision basically divorced the militia clause from the rest of the amendment. The individual right to own a gun is a right at this point. Regaining a liberal majority on the court may not be enough, as SCOTUS is generally very hesitant to overturn prior SCOTUS rulings, especially if the ruling is recent.

[LexVegas]

20. You'll get lots of reasons why this is a bad idea by people that love guns more than people. nt

[ClarendonDem]

25. I personally think it is a bad idea

But aside from my personal belief, gun confiscation/bans are a fantasy. And polls show only about 10% of Americans support banning guns. A long ways to go to get the numbers to repeal the 2d Amendment.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

26. Or people who possibly care about people and

Rights?

I'm all for certain weapons to be made impossible to get and it's horrible people die in senseless shootings. But,

I didn't kill anyone so do not dictate to me that burning down the forest will prevent forest fires.

[Egnever]

227. Neither did any of the other myriad assholes who shot people

Till they did.

I didn't or wont do anything is no justification for gun ownership.

[doc03]

31. I want to be a billionaire. nt

[ellie]

33. Me too

[Stinky The Clown]

35. I'm with you.

[sarisataka]

39. I want it to be illegal

To murder people, as long as we are wishing

I'd rather die of old age

[Jose Garcia]

45. So, then only the government and non-citizens will be allowed to own guns?

[HughBeaumont]

46. PSHYAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

Just look at the reaction; the VENOM you get from a Democratic website when you merely ask why the large arsenal the Vegas fuck accumulated wasn't tracked (which, if acted upon, probably would have saved 500+ people).

We had an ex-officer in Cleveland who killed himself in a police standoff after he broke his ankle bracelet and fled. They found 67 guns in his home. One of our columnists asked why no one tracked his arsenal.

When did this site become Bill O saying "This is the price of freedom."???

If this is how Democrats think, don't think a full-on en masse confiscation's going to happen any decade soon.

[better]

49. Then you don't actually want it to be illegal to own a gun. Otherwise, there would be no exceptions.

What you want are serious, tough regulations on who can own guns, what types of guns they can own, and what they must do to earn and retain that right. I value my right to keep and bear arms as much as the next guy, yet I agree with you on all of that. As do the majority of gun owners, which is worth noting.

Hunting, however, is not the only valid use for a firearm. Target/sport shooters (not to be confused with hunting for sport) come to mind. I love target shooting, but you won't find me hunting anything unless my life depends on it.

I would encourage you to pay close attention to the support we see around here for things like banning bump stocks and high capacity magazines, even from people who support gun rights. There are a lot of gun owners like myself who actually do agree with such sensible measures. Incorrectly stating your position as favoring it being illegal to own a gun at all only serves to alienate people who do in point of fact actually agree with what you actually want.

Supporting the right to keep and bear arms does not define one as your opposition, in and of itself.
Opposing sensible restrictions or qualifications associated with that right, on the other hand, does.

But those are two distinctly different classes of people.

I do maintain that I should have the right to keep and bear arms.
I also maintain that that right needs to be earned and maintained, however, and that part matters.

[Ilsa]

53. That won't fly any time soon.

Getting rid of extended clips and magazines should come first, along with bump stocks, etc.

"Extreme vetting." No one who is so mentally ill that they are supported by SSI should have a gun, IMO.

Then I think we need to require appropriate training and licensing to own weapons, along with insurance, just like cars.

I know farmers, ranchers, etc that need a shotgun and a rifle living where they live. I'm not a fan of handguns, but there may be some jobs where concealed carry is appropriate.

These items won't stop all shootings, but they might help.

[Shrek]

55. You expect me hunt ducks with a rifle?

That would be utterly futile.

[ileus]

155. Ducks are people too!

[Lurker Deluxe]

163. and a little dangerous ...

[beachbum bob]

58. never happen. Its as unreasonable as those who want a AK47 in every house

the answer is not an extreme swing, but a rational one.

[Not Ruth]

61. Seems extreme

[Initech]

63. I agree! It's time as a society that we need to ask ourselves this question.

Do we value life? Or do we value the gun? It's way past time to disarm, IMO. How many more people have to die before something is done?

[Cryptoad]

70. Welcome to DU,,,,,Comrade!

[King_Klonopin]

105. What are the stats for deaths from gun shot in other countries?

They are lower, I believe ?

Why do they have lower "mortality rates" related to guns ?

How come they solved the problem and we haven't ?

How many hand guns per capita are there in Germany, Australia, England or Japan ???

Why are we always changing the subject and avoiding the obvious answer to this problem ?

[EX500rider]

226. 94 countries have a higher homicide rate then the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[King_Klonopin]

241. Did you even LOOK at the "information" in that link ?

The source is Wikipedia !
It is in alphabetical order by region for starters, making it confusing.
It uses stats that are as much as 9 years old !
It warns about the definition of "Intentional Homicides" being inconsistent
(i.e. this is not strictly deaths from guns) and includes deaths related to wars.

The countries of note are mostly in Africa, South America, under-developed
countries that are basically anarchistic, and countries that are involved in
actual wars (either military, civil, or "drug" wars)

Of the wealthier, "developed" nations, this is how countries stack up
compared to the U.S. in homicides per 100,000 (according to your Wiki chart):

US 4.88
Canada 1.68 *
China 0.74 *
N Korea 4.41
Japan 0.31 * (has strictest gun laws)
S. Korea 0.74 *
Taiwan 0.82
Cambodia 1.84
Indonesia 0.50
Vietnam 1.52 (Vietnam for god's sake !)
India 3.21
Iran 4.21
Palestine 0.60
Israel 1.36 *
Lebanon 3.95
Syria 2.23 (outdated 2010 stats, of course !)
Norway 0.56 *
Sweden 1.15
Iceland 0.91
Finland 1.60
U.K. 0.92 *
Ireland 0.64 *
France 1.58 *
Belgium 1.95
Germany 0.85 *
Italy 0.78 *
Netherlands 0.61 *
Switzerland 0.69 *
Australia 0.98 *

* denotes country with strict gun control laws (my annotation)

Referring to this chart in the link below, it ranks FIREARM RELATED DEATHS.
U.S. ranks # 11 at 10.54 per 100,000 NOT 95th, as you claim.

[link:http://|http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-firearm-related-deaths.html]

Countries With The Highest Rates Of Firearm Related Deaths
Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year

1 Honduras 67.18
2 Venezuela 59.13
3 Swaziland 37.16
4 Guatemala 34.1
5 Jamaica 30.72
6 El Salvador 26.77
7 Colombia 25.94
8 Brazil 21.2
9 Panama 15.11
10 Uruguay 11.52
11 United States 10.54

Other references place the U.S. between 3.8 to 10.5 deaths per 100,000. No other developed
nation comes close to the U.S. stats.

The USA is "better than" those top ten countries, and not much else. I feel much better now !!!!

Your post is one of the more intellectually dishonest, intentionally misleading I've seen on DU.

[EX500rider]

242. If the overall US homicide rate is 4.something-

There is no way the firearm rate alone is 2 times higher.

[sl8]

244. I think there's a bit of an apples/oranges thing happening here.

One of you is giving numbers for firearms related deaths and one of you is giving numbers for homicides.

I think that suicides would account for most of the disparity.

[EX500rider]

243. Speaking of "intellectually dishonest, intentionally misleading posts"

All homicides
Number of deaths: 15,872
Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.0
Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 11,008
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.5

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

[Cryptoad]

71. U want reasonable gun Regs,,,,,ban the GOP

[Joe Chi Minh]

72. I think the Republicans' love for the

gun manufacturers would probably prompt them to gush the kind of maudlin sweet-talk that was standard fare, I believe, in the old black and white films : "Don't try and fight it, Darlings ... it's bigger than both of us."

Maybe, that's what The Donald was trying to put across today. Or was it yesterday. Also, maybe: 'It's more than my job's werf, Guvrner! My life if it comes to that.'

[CTyankee]

73. Just wondering: are guns allowed to be discussed in GD?

I appreciate the argument but I thought we had rules for what could and could not be a topic in GD....

[Sancho]

78. To a great extent, I agree with you...

People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

[aeromanKC]

82. But but but we need our guns vs. a potential future tyrannical government

Never mind their Black Helicopters and Nuclear bombs.

[pansypoo53219]

84. they can have a 1700's type musket.

that is it.

[ClarendonDem]

88. And you can circulate your gun control ideas

Via a handwritten document, or printing press. That is it.

[aka-chmeee]

99. And when you are ill,

the doctor can use 1780's remedies.

[LexVegas]

92. Gay marriage is protected by the Constitution. Why would you think otherwise?

[vkkv]

94. Rights ARE LIMITED - as the 2ND AMENDMENT is now. There is no winning the argument that rights

are UNLIMITED.

Freedom of speech IS LIMITED. Employers have the right to fire an employee whose use of their freedom of speech and expression, while legal, might harm their employer in some way. Fired, gone, kaput, c ya... and that is a legal limitation.

You cannot legally own a nuclear weapon, there, done.

The gov't CAN AND WILL EVENTUALLY restrict gun rights to EXCLUDE hi-capacity magazines for (semi) automatic firearms and perhaps semi-autos altogether.

[IronLionZion]

95. Then how are you going to resist tyranny from your own government?

GW Bush dropped a massive ordinance air blast on Florida. You could maybe shoot at it as falls out of the plane.

[vkkv]

96. Anyone who thinks they need firearms to protect themselves from the government

isn't mentally fit to own guns.

[linuxman]

186. Agreed.

At no point in history has a government done anything so callous as attack their own citizens. Definitely not here in the US.

[DownriverDem]

97. Will never happen

As long as folks worship at the altar of guns and the second amendment nothing will change. I use to think that as the gun nuts die off maybe things will change, but those we see prancing around are not old. So a new generation of gun nuts are with us. So sad.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

164. Thank video games for that

I know quite a few people my age and younger who went out and bought some type of AR15 or Ak47 specifically because they played a ton of shooter video games and found out they could own stuff that looked like what they used in game.

[doc03]

106. That is what loses elections for us nt

[Alea]

125. Will you be coming to collect them?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

131. Works for me!

[quartz007]

133. I want to be a space ship traveler

with at least a dozen gorgeous young females astronauts size 36-24-36 aboard for a space voyage lasting 4 years. No other males allowed on spaceship.

I can dream too!

[GoneOffShore]

137. Well said. And there would be a mandatory inspection of gun and ammo storage every year.

Along with a revocation of said license for any arrest or citation except parking tickets.
Mandatory training course with a refresher every 2 years, costs to be born by the person who owns the gun. No refresher course, no license, confiscation of the rifle.
License fee a minimum of $500 per year.

[EX500rider]

169. So guns for rich people only then?

[GoneOffShore]

183. Guns should be amazingly expensive for everyone. Including police and governments.

Yes.
The more expensive we make them the fewer guns there are.

[linuxman]

187. For the proles.

Fuck em'.

[EX500rider]

193. I am sure poor people who rely on hunting for extra food or...

....live in a crime ridden part of town and want a weapon for self defense will be over joyed.

[GoneOffShore]

196. I'm on board with the UK with this.

https://www.gov.uk/shotgun-and-firearm-certificates

You need a firearms certificate issued by the police to possess, buy or acquire a firearm or shotgun. You must also have a certificate to buy ammunition.
How to apply
You can get a firearm or shotgun certificate application form from the firearms licensing unit of your local police force.

You must:

complete an application form
provide 4 passport photographs
have 2 referees for a firearm certificate and 1 referee for shotgun certificate
pay the fee for the certificate you are applying for
You can get the fees from your local police force. The fee amounts can be found from the firearms licensing unit of the police force where you live.

You must also prove to the chief officer of police that you’re allowed to have a firearms certificate and pose no danger to public safety or to the peace.

A shotgun certificate won’t be given or renewed if the chief officer of police has a reason that you shouldn’t be allowed to have a shotgun under the Firearms Act. Or if they don’t think you have a good reason to have, buy or acquire a shotgun.

A certificate usually lasts 5 years from the date it was issued or renewed.

Conditions
Your certificate will include a photograph of you and information about the firearm(s) or shotgun(s) you have in your possession.

You must:

follow any condition attached to the certificate (the chief officer of police can vary these conditions at any time by giving notice in writing)
be able to show your firearm or shotgun certificate if asked by the police
You must have a European Firearms Pass if you want to travel within Europe with your guns. You can apply for this at the same time as your firearms certificate.

[spike jones]

147. Gun owership is

a sign of mental illness. If you have many guns, you are very sick. There are many very sick people in this country.
Guns don't kill people, Gun Owners kill people.

[smirkymonkey]

194. I agree. Anyone who keeps an arsenal of weapons has something very, very wrong

with them. It's amazing how they try to justify and normalize it.

[ileus]

153. I want it to be illegal for an American citizen to vote republican.

Not going to apologize for it.

No exceptions.


After that I want it to be illegal to say dumb things on the internet.

[samnsara]

156. i like my guns and im a good shot.. we used to target practice..

..every Sunday as a family thing. When I got my first gun..a Glock,.. I went to gun safety training. Hubby and I competed a cpl times... I never won a thing. I like the feeling of it my hands and its actually exciting to shoot it. I hate hunting but its better than factory farming so I don't hate hunters as much any more.

We have our guns because we live way up in the mtns and we have predators and the occasional drunk jeeper who needs to use our phone.

The local Dem group wants to start a 2nd amendment group and have shooting competitions with the local R group.

[RKP5637]

161. I've never had a problem with "responsible" gun ownership like you. I used to love target shooting

as a kid with a 22. I was trained by the National Guard at our scout camp. It was fun and just another activity. The problem is what to do about those that are irresponsible and how to control it. I really don't know the answer. I don't think guns can ever be fully eliminated.

[liquid diamond]

158. I want to know how you plan on ENFORCING that proposal.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

160. Oh, the police -- who are so great with guns -- will do just fine, I'm sure.

[Honeycombe8]

159. I disagree. The vulnerable are at a disadvantage without a gun.

Some people are themselves weapons, because of their size and strength, compared to others. A gun is an equalizer and the ONLY thing that can protect some people from a distance.

If someone breaks into my home, am I expected to do hand to hand combat with some street druggie guy? I wouldn't have a chance.

I have a gun for protection, and I'm keeping it.

If I were going to ban any guns, I'd ban hunting guns and rifles. That's whats used to kill people in mass shootings. Semi-automatic rifles and such. And glocks. I also happen to think it's terrible to kill animals for sport. But that's not gonna happen any more than banning all guns except hunting guns.

[RKP5637]

162. I agree with you! n/t

[EX500rider]

172. All guns kill around 10,000+ a year in the US..

.....and of that number about 300 to 400 are killed by all types of rifles...and that's what you think should be banned?

"And Glocks" ? That's just a brand of semi-auto pistol.....ban that and people would just buy another brand.

[Honeycombe8]

176. Glocks & such attract a certain kind of guy. Not just gun collectors.

Semi-automatic rifles are the weapon of choice of mass shooters. Not pistols.

It's not the number who are killed. Some people are justifiably killed in defense. It's terrorist killings that are my concern. The mass killing of innocent people not involved in an altercation or some reason involved in violence with the shooter.

[EX500rider]

178. "Glocks & such attract a certain kind of guy."

Yes Glocks attract "guys" who like a very durable, almost jam proof firearm.

"It's not the number who are killed"
So the 300+- killed with long guns are somehow more important then the 10,000+- killed with pistols??
A lot more innocent people in the 10,000 figure.
I don't think 30+- killed every day in separate locations are somehow less tragic then 1 a day avg killed with long guns, even if they are all killed in the same spot.

[flvegan]

165. Better: only vegans can buy/have hunting rifles.

[Dr. Strange]

177. Since when do vegans use guns for hunting?

I thought they used pit bulls?

[flvegan]

180. Those

are only for small game.

[Awsi Dooger]

166. I have no respect for anyone who owns a gun

Smarter people don't

[EX500rider]

173. If you say...

[Alea]

201. Boom

[ansible]

174. Norway already has laws like that, yet it didn't stop Breivik from killing 69 people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#Planning_terror_attacks

Gun laws like that won't stop the massacres

[X_Digger]

175. These kinds of posts are DU's version of 'hopes and prayers'. n/t

[linuxman]

188. LOL.

[Hoyt]

206. And what do you call gun promoters' and profiteers' posts?

[AncientGeezer]

217. Free speech....speech you don't approve of.

Not everybody that supports ALL of the Bill of Rights....all 10....is a promoter and profiteer. I've never made a dime off the 2ndA....as a matter of fact it's cost me a lot of money. Money I choose to spend by the way.

[X_Digger]

222. I know, gun control scares the former thief..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=45338

As a former robber, I locked the door to keep people out, especially police.

[moriah]

230. Not sure where you're going here.

I have no problems with actual gun control. Background checks on private party sales. Waiting periods. I argue over and over again with 2Aers over why they are needed.

At the same time, I owned a firearm. I purchased it because I lived alone, worked nights so slept during the day, and there was a string of daylight robberies within a few blocks of my apartment. One girl had been home and beaten badly. I never felt a need for one before, but took classes and purchased, and made the investment in going to the range and practicing with it weekly because if I was gonna own it, I needed to be proficient if I ever DID have to use it.

It didn't stop me from getting raped, but after the incident was reported and the IDIOT officers apparently didn't listen to my explanation that he worked nights and wouldn't answer his phone called him from the station's number rather than a private one, and I started getting threatening calls from him, I felt very glad I had it.

He knew where I lived, I didn't have a restraining order yet, he had an alcohol problem, and I *would* have shot him if he showed up and the cops didn't get there before he broke the door down.

The one time I did have to call while he was banging and screaming, I was glad police responded before he broke the door or the window. I told 911 I had the firearm in my hand so the officers responding would be aware. After they got him in the car, the 911 lady told me the officers requested I put the firearm up and then come outside, and to be sure to show my hands as I did. I compiled. No problem.

But I sold it after I moved.

[X_Digger]

232. I'm saying that those folks of Hoyt's former profession have a vested interest in gun control.

The quote in my excerpt was a post of Hoyt's admitting to being a former robber.

[moriah]

234. Oh, sorry.

I was confused and I generally stay out of the Gungeon so I don't know all of you guys who are active there.

[Raine]

181. and I want a unicorn

as long as we're getting into fantasy.

[Inkfreak]

190. No, thanks.

[YoungDemCA]

197. Run for office then. I'm sure this will get you a lot of votes.

[Calculating]

198. And I disagree

My guns haven't even hurt an animal in the 7 years I've owned them. The worst they've done was hurt an old TV set out at the shooting pit.

[Eyeball_Kid]

204. I went by this store front today that had a sign out front: CASH FOR GUNS.

I'm thinking, can't there be a national "Cash for Guns" declaration? Can't the feds start a knock-off of the Australian law that was so successful? Must we wait for a Democratic-controlled Congress to do something that is "transpolitical"?

"Cash for Guns" would not be legislation that threatens any expression of the Second Amendment, and it can put real money in the pockets of people who have multiple weapons never used, or even any weapon that's never used. And it would generate the feeling among the vast majority of US citizens that they CAN do something to lessen the presence of guns in everyday US life, AND get paid for it. The cost of such a program would be vastly more cost effective than the millions, perhaps billions, spent on medical expenses due to injury or death through the use of a firearms each year.

Yes, of course, the nation is in a gun-buying frenzy, the NRA is top-dog in Congress, and Trumpy is all aflutter over his notion that guns are more important than people. But these times may be shortlived, and there's no time like the present to begin the conversation.

[Rincewind]

209. I want it to be illegal

for you to own shoes.

[EX500rider]

237. I bet all criminals wish that also.

[Fluke a Snooker]

240. Complete gun confiscation is the answer.

It will make it much easier to enforce progressive agenda items, particularly with fair property taxation and environmental regulations, that will allow us to destroy the GOP once and for all.