General Discussion

Sancho

(9,207 posts)

47. No...I want reasonable laws that would take time to phase in and prevent random violence.

Thu May 29, 2014, 08:31 AM

May 2014

I'm not aiming at criminals...I'm suggesting that easy access to guns and bullets by unstable people, untrained people, children, and those intending violence can changed.

This will not stop all gun violence. I'm not talking about gun owners per se, but anyone who uses a gun, buys a gun, or lives in a house with access to a gun. I think any one who possesses or uses a gun needs a license to do so. Simple. Just like driving, fishing, or any other activity.

If you want to buy or possess a gun or ammo, you show a license. If you go out shooting or hunting, you should have a license. The licensing process should make it difficult for easy access if you are a person with obvious potential to be dangerous.

Simple and lawful. Also, a mechanism to prevent the inappropriate access to guns.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

184 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gun Fanatics Express Their Support For a Mass Murderer�s Second Amendment Rights [View all] doxydad May 2014 OP

So what new gun law would have prevented the Santa Barbara shooting? badtoworse May 2014 #1

A ban on purchasing thousands of dollars of ammunition at once shenmue May 2014 #2

Thousand os dollars of ammo? He had 400 rounds of 9mm, about $125-150 worth, and fired far less Lee-Lee May 2014 #6

How the hell are you going to enforce that? Travis_0004 May 2014 #7

and how do you do that Duckhunter935 May 2014 #9

After reading your post and the one above about the cost of just shooting for the heck of it, Skidmore May 2014 #11

I don't get what a lot of people do for recreation Lee-Lee May 2014 #17

How many people are killed by skiers each year? thucythucy May 2014 #54

Your spending supports the gun lobby and right wing upaloopa May 2014 #64

My electricity bill supports a massive polluter Lee-Lee May 2014 #69

Me either ... oldhippie May 2014 #136

Nobody's been able to buy that much in years. sofa king May 2014 #21

One of the stores around here must have plenty of .22 still. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #29

Maybe they've caught up, now. sofa king May 2014 #41

Before Newtown you could buy 500 round "bricks" ... oldhippie May 2014 #138

he didn't have thousands of rounds. aikoaiko May 2014 #50

Then why don't you take that brave first step? daleanime May 2014 #3

I'd put UBC's and a 10 round mag limit on the table. badtoworse May 2014 #5

California already had those laws Duckhunter935 May 2014 #10

I was thinking on a national level. badtoworse May 2014 #14

Open NICS to private sellers and they will pass UBC easily Lee-Lee May 2014 #18

"I could even live with 20 round magazine limits." 3catwoman3 May 2014 #100

20 round or under is Duckhunter935 May 2014 #148

The belief that... daleanime May 2014 #104

Liability insurance would cover an accidental death or injury caused by me and I have that. badtoworse May 2014 #105

Guns should be banned treestar May 2014 #4

If thats your goal, you need to repeal the second admendment. Travis_0004 May 2014 #8

... leftyohiolib May 2014 #24

It can be done treestar May 2014 #96

If a UBC cannot be passed, Jenoch May 2014 #117

You can still have a musket if you want. savalez May 2014 #158

Okay blueridge3210 May 2014 #159

*crickets* (n/t) derby378 May 2014 #162

Lordy but those are loud crickets... Ballast_Point May 2014 #164

Seems so. blueridge3210 May 2014 #167

Don't let them know that high capacity magazines are older than the bill or rights Travis_0004 May 2014 #172

Bill of rights was ratified in 1791. First 20 round magazines was made in 1779. Travis_0004 May 2014 #171

Guns are not banned in Duckhunter935 May 2014 #13

As far as I know they didn't repeal their gun ban treestar May 2014 #97

And which well regulated militia do you belong to? paleotn May 2014 #12

not a requirement as Duckhunter935 May 2014 #15

The constitution says different, but 5 members of the USSC are bought & paid for by the RW baldguy May 2014 #23

The Democratic Party platform says it is an individual right. nt hack89 May 2014 #30

What part of "phoney shit storm from gun fanatics" do you not understand? baldguy May 2014 #32

Or perhaps gun controllers have less influence then they like to believe? hack89 May 2014 #37

Are all the dead children worth it for you? baldguy May 2014 #38

Now you are being stupid hack89 May 2014 #42

Post removed Post removed May 2014 #46

And you don't care to actually solve the problem hack89 May 2014 #48

He's got lot's of company around here. badtoworse May 2014 #58

There will be more. We don't have to ban guns. Society upaloopa May 2014 #66

"Just you wait" - the motto of gun control for 20 years and counting. nt hack89 May 2014 #70

Solving the problem begins with gun fanatics casting off their 17th century attitudes about firearms baldguy May 2014 #61

I think not. hack89 May 2014 #72

I'll knock on wood for you. AAO May 2014 #122

The drive to the range is much more dangerous hack89 May 2014 #124

I do, you seem to have none. n/t AAO May 2014 #125

Are you suggesting I stop driving? hack89 May 2014 #127

Yes, they are. The psychological imbedded with evil. AAO May 2014 #130

I do not own guns for self defense - I live in a very safe town hack89 May 2014 #131

I rest my case. Enjoy your firearms while you can. EOM AAO May 2014 #132

My kids will oneday go shooting with my grandkids - of that I have no doubts hack89 May 2014 #135

Nice chatting! AAO May 2014 #137

See you around. nt hack89 May 2014 #140

"21st century weapons technology"? badtoworse May 2014 #86

You are in deep denial. I feel sorry for you and those you supposedly love. n/t AAO May 2014 #123

hack89 Niceguy1 May 2014 #85

Oooh! Oooh! A purity test! derby378 May 2014 #99

If you support magazine limits, that's a backdoor AWB (n/t) derby378 May 2014 #102

My AR-15s all came with 15 round mags hack89 May 2014 #103

YES, but the 2nd Amendment has been greatly distorted by those who make billions drynberg May 2014 #36

+1000 baldguy May 2014 #39

so Duckhunter935 May 2014 #40

What does NICS stand for? nt tblue37 May 2014 #63

National Instant Check System Lee-Lee May 2014 #73

Thanks. nt tblue37 May 2014 #75

Unfortunately for you, the other four members agree with them friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #108

the gun fanatic heaven05 May 2014 #19

that's funny cause it's the gun-fetishists that have been doing all the taking leftyohiolib May 2014 #22

This message was self-deleted by its author Sancho May 2014 #25

This is the way to prevent such shootings.... Sancho May 2014 #26

You want "responsible gun owners" to act responsibly? baldguy May 2014 #34

99% already do Duckhunter935 May 2014 #43

And yet innocent children keep dying. baldguy May 2014 #45

a sad fact, but yes Duckhunter935 May 2014 #49

No they don't, or gun sales would be declining and gun owners Hoyt May 2014 #151

No...I want reasonable laws that would take time to phase in and prevent random violence. Sancho May 2014 #47

Still trying to float this turd? It's gotten old. badtoworse May 2014 #53

I've been around a long time and seen things change...so "old" doesn't mean much to me. Sancho May 2014 #106

I read your post before and it's disingenuous at best badtoworse May 2014 #109

Not disingenuous at all.... Sancho May 2014 #110

None of the things you mentioned are enumerated rights. That makes a big difference badtoworse May 2014 #114

You still don't have a way to keep unstable people away from guns. Sancho May 2014 #116

Let's deal with fundamentals first. badtoworse May 2014 #150

I'm talking about fundamentals... Sancho May 2014 #154

"I'm a gun owner with decades of experience. I know exactly what I'm saying." friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #156

If any gun owner has decades of experience, then they know what I'm talking about... Sancho May 2014 #168

Prior restraint on an enumerated civil right won't fly friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #170

You are wrong about my license suggestion. Sancho May 2014 #173

It's still prior restraint, therefore un-Constitutional without due process of law friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #174

Haha...I spend lots of time in Miami.... Sancho May 2014 #175

Dunning-Kruger detected. A fisking is in order friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #176

We've seen all the same arguments before...you are not answering the question! Sancho May 2014 #177

Start prosecuting straw buyers. Improve the mental health reporting system... friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #178

Those are steps in the right direction... Sancho May 2014 #180

You misunderstand me. I meant "Mandatory *for gun buyers and sellers*" friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #181

Haha.. Sancho May 2014 #182

Straw buyers can be tracked by finding the last registered owner friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #183

You can continue arguing if you want, but you are creating a monster. Sancho May 2014 #184

Regulate guns like cars. doxydad May 2014 #28

So I do not Duckhunter935 May 2014 #44

Typical gun nut smarmy answer that answers nothing groundloop May 2014 #52

The false consensus effect is strong amongst you lot friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #111

The NRA would love to have guns regulated like cars. hack89 May 2014 #80

Then why doesn't the NRA stepup and agree to ANY positive change? doxydad May 2014 #139

And right on schedule blueridge3210 May 2014 #141

I think Dems have to take certain things off the table first hack89 May 2014 #142

Willing to work with gun owners what a crock! upaloopa May 2014 #59

You're a great example of why nothing happens badtoworse May 2014 #67

How about background checks polmaven May 2014 #65

There are pros and cons with that approach. badtoworse May 2014 #76

Put a Ten dollar tax on EACH round purchased. Katashi_itto May 2014 #74

Such a tax would be ruled unconstitutional as it would effective prevent blueridge3210 May 2014 #78

Not if the FDA rule bullets were a health hazard like cigarettes Katashi_itto May 2014 #79

Where is the constitutional right to smoke cigarettes? blueridge3210 May 2014 #83

"keep and bear arms" Nothing about bullets. Katashi_itto May 2014 #90

No doubt said with a straight face. badtoworse May 2014 #91

Yep. Katashi_itto May 2014 #92

Freedom of the Press. blueridge3210 May 2014 #94

Look up poll tax and get back to us. badtoworse May 2014 #89

Apples to Oranges. I think I struck a nerve with the Ammosexuals. Katashi_itto May 2014 #93

I would guess that you are not a constitutional lawyer. badtoworse May 2014 #95

Or not Lurks Often May 2014 #101

*snort*...*giggle*...*guffaw*.... blueridge3210 May 2014 #107

maybe noiretextatique May 2014 #119

The article is not an invitation to debate the second amendment maindawg May 2014 #16

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #20

IN a well regulated militia.... mikeysnot May 2014 #31

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #33

bought and paid for by the military mikeysnot May 2014 #87

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #112

Typical... mikeysnot May 2014 #115

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #118

Wow, it didn't last long??? mikeysnot May 2014 #155

A murderes right to kill trumps a parents right to protect their children. Kablooie May 2014 #27

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #35

You may want to edit your post, it looks like you mis-typed ... ? etherealtruth May 2014 #51

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #55

Oh, you actually meant to defend the statements of "joe the plumber" (and his ilk) etherealtruth May 2014 #60

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #81

Again I have to assume you mis-typed .... ????? etherealtruth May 2014 #84

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #98

Seriously? I guess you don't spend much time reading gun threads on DU. badtoworse May 2014 #56

Actually, I do spend "some" time etherealtruth May 2014 #62

Joe's statement was crass and lacked empathy, but factually, he's correct. badtoworse May 2014 #77

'Joe's" staements are only correct if one views our enumerated "rights" as absolute etherealtruth May 2014 #82

Rights are subject to subject to limits and restrictions, that is different than taking them away. badtoworse May 2014 #88

OK let's give you a little challenge intaglio May 2014 #153

It isn't an insult. It is reality you just can't see the truth upaloopa May 2014 #68

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2014 #71

You lot aren't very good at slacktivism, much less real-world politics friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #113

They only sound like insults to you. AAO May 2014 #126

Disingenuous article title. aikoaiko May 2014 #57

your dead kids don't trump my second amendment rights noiretextatique May 2014 #120

Post removed Post removed May 2014 #128

Guns don't kill people - people with guns kill people! AAO May 2014 #121

Of course they do -- just as their pathetic, blood-soaked apologetics were instantly available villager May 2014 #129

+100 billh58 May 2014 #133

But so absolutely, routinely, predicatable. villager May 2014 #134

If the RKBA folks had even a miniscule shred of integrity, they would wholeheartedly support efforts Maedhros May 2014 #143

What efforts would those be? blueridge3210 May 2014 #144

Effective ones, arrived after extensive study and discussion by knowlegeable participants. Maedhros May 2014 #146

So, if I understand your position blueridge3210 May 2014 #147

I'm just saying that the responsible thing to do is to recognize the need for changes Maedhros May 2014 #149

Perhaps because when they do recommend things Lee-Lee May 2014 #157

What makes anybody think crazy people without guns won't kill anybody? EX500rider May 2014 #145

A 10 or 20% reduction would be worth it. Jeeez. Hoyt May 2014 #152

"Without guns a lot of mass shootings would not occur." EX500rider May 2014 #160

OH, so we'll let em shoot people so we don't have a Boston bombing. Hoyt May 2014 #161

I see you skipping right over the whole cars as weapons part? EX500rider May 2014 #163

You just want/need to keep access to guns. The rest doesn't matter. Hoyt May 2014 #165

Such a mind reader!! Must be cool to have magic powers! EX500rider May 2014 #166

Less dead people. But it is obvious guns are easier to use or you'd see more Hoyt May 2014 #169

. geomon666 May 2014 #179