Gun controllers- please share what laws/wordings you would like to see for effective legislation

HomerThompson said:
In order to keep well regulated militias, because they're necessary for the security of a free state.

Not so people can personally have 30 guns and banana clips.
Click to expand...

The way it is worded the right of the people. Who are the people? Citizens being the people. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Why shouldnt the right be infringed? Because a well regulated malitia is necessary for a free state. Who is the militia? The people. At least that's how I read it.

This argument has been made before so I don't really expect to change your mind on it.
 
Stoic1 said:
Can we try just enforcing our currently existing gun laws instead?

Or perhaps focus on the criminals?
Click to expand...

We have a show on our state run broadcasting channel called Planet America. Want to take a guess at what an Australian programs analysis of the gun stats and the conclusion they drew at the end of it is?

Pretty much what you said. Enforce the laws you have. In particular makes sure the ones relating to guys with a history of violence, stalking or harassment of women not getting guns. For all the talk about mental illness the stats say guys with a history of violence against women are much, much more likely to commit a mass shooting.
 
No MSG said:
All these gun threads make me want to go out and buy another gun.

I really want this one.

Click to expand...

I have one of those. Its not my favorite rifle but if I could only have one gun, that might be it.
 
Fawlty said:
I don't think anything I proposed violates the 2nd.
Click to expand...

What weapons do you think should be considered for a well regulated malitia? Does a well regulated malitia need weapons that can fight an invading army?
 
Lowmanproblems said:
What weapons do you think should be considered for a well regulated malitia? Does a well regulated malitia need weapons that can fight an invading army?
Click to expand...
For now the law of the land is that we have an individual right, so that question isn't relevant. I also don't see that changing in the next generation, so I probably won't have anything to say about that, except that I don't agree that it should be part of the constitution at all.

According to a literal early 19th century interpretation, the militia is supposed to include regular people, so they should have fully automatic weapons, so that's clearly not the way to go. Interpreting it as us fulfilling the militia by having a standing army and its guard and reserve, the weapons belong at the armory. So that whole part of the question just doesn't matter, because we do that part the way we should.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
What would?
Click to expand...
Something like confiscation without cause, or arbitrary limits on certain guns and/or manufacturers. Or taking people's rights away for traffic tickets. That sort of bad government behavior.
 
Fawlty said:
For now the law of the land is that we have an individual right, so that question isn't relevant. I also don't see that changing in the next generation, so I probably won't have anything to say about that, except that I don't agree that it should be part of the constitution at all.

According to a literal early 19th century interpretation, the militia is supposed to include regular people, so they should have fully automatic weapons, so that's clearly not the way to go. Interpreting it as us fulfilling the militia by having a standing army and its guard and reserve, the weapons belong at the armory. So that whole part of the question just doesn't matter, because we do that part the way we should.
Click to expand...

Yea it's more of a hypothetical question anyways, I do agree that automatic weapons aren't needed by the general public.
 
Roaming East said:
Sure AR-15's have fire rate adjusting drop in kits. Binary triggers specifically do just that, allowing for 2 shots per trigger pull (technically, a shot is fired when the trigger is pulled, and another fired as the trigger resets. its legal by way of torturing the language and definition of what constitutes a 'trigger pull')
Click to expand...

How does the binary trigger fit the definition of a machine-gun? Seems like it's legal by not falling under the purview of the NFA.


Lowmanproblems said:
The way it is worded the right of the people. Who are the people? Citizens being the people. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Why shouldnt the right be infringed? Because a well regulated malitia is necessary for a free state. Who is the militia? The people. At least that's how I read it.

This argument has been made before so I don't really expect to change your mind on it.
Click to expand...

As much as I hate some rulings, I have the integrity to acknowledge them and tailor my positions accordingly. If he can't work from the position that SCOTUS has ruled the right belongs to the people then what can you expect?
 
Every gun is registered, if a gun registered to you is found on a murder scene you are going to be liable unless.

a) Was stolen and reported in a reasonable time.

b) You sold it to a guy who was eligible and reported it.

c) Selling guns to non-eligible people knowingly is punished harshly.
 
Rod1 said:
Every gun is registered, if a gun registered to you is found on a murder scene you are going to be liable unless.

a) Was stolen and reported in a reasonable time.

b) You sold it to a guy who was eligible and reported it.

c) Selling guns to non-eligible people knowingly is punished harshly.
Click to expand...
Another reason to fight registration.
 
jlagman said:
Another reason to fight registration.
Click to expand...

Yup, the Constitutional right to sell guns to criminals and only get a slap in the wrist when you do so.

A society where selling weed lands you hard time in prison but selling guns to a criminal barely gets you anything.
 
Rod1 said:
Yup, the Constitutional right to sell guns to criminals and only get a slap in the wrist when you do so.

A society where selling weed lands you hard time in prison but selling guns to a criminal barely gets you anything.
Click to expand...

The US government has been caught pushing guns into Mexico to support the drug war that is causing so much mayhem. Something like 2000 guns went to the cartels only 700 of which were recovered.

The point being how little the US government cares about stopping real gun violence. Fast and Furious
Was a massive failure.
 
Last edited:
Rod1 said:
Yup, the Constitutional right to sell guns to criminals and only get a slap in the wrist when you do so.

A society where selling weed lands you hard time in prison but selling guns to a criminal barely gets you anything.
Click to expand...
Due process; citizens shouldn't have to willingly subject themselves to criminalization and pertetual liability because investigators to too lazy to, you know...investigate.
 
jlagman said:
Due process; citizens shouldn't have to willingly subject themselves to criminalization and pertetual liability because investigators to too lazy to, you know...investigate.
Click to expand...

If your car is used in a crime your certainly are going to have a lot of questions asked my friend, i dont see why a gun has to be held to lower standard than a tool like a car.

What gun nuts want is not the right to own guns, but the right to sell guns.
 
Rod1 said:
If your car is used in a crime your certainly are going to have a lot of questions asked my friend, i dont see why a gun has to be held to lower standard than a tool like a car.

What gun nuts want is not the right to own guns, but the right to sell guns.
Click to expand...
Vehicle registries aren't used to reclassify and confiscate cars while abritrarily criminalizing their owners.

The right to sell is inherent in property rights. If you have to ask permission from the government to sell something, was it ever really your property to begin with?

What antis want is total civilian disarmament, it's just that being honest about it would result in extreme backlash, so they have to pussyfoot around the subject and ask for Trojan horses like government watch lists and perpetual liability instead.
 
Copy Australia.

HockeyBjj said:
The answer to this is that America has a fuckton existing guns more than the aussies did, and that would create a black market with a MASSIVE supply that would create a drastic arms imbalance between the gangs/criminals and potential victims. Think America's drug problem that the so called "war on drugs" enhanced, but with guns

Doing what the Australians did in America is simply not realistic in the slightest, and that's without the fact that doing what Australian did is full on unconstitutional in America
Click to expand...

Lots of people said the same back then.

Results speak for themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,140
Messages
55,469,621
Members
174,787
Latest member
Biden's Diaper

Share this page

Back
Top