what gun control do you support?

What forms do you support? If you check other, please explain

 

Not a single one of those.

 

Really? None? Not even measures not listed?

 

Other: Prosecute the myriad of gun laws now on the books instead of punishing law abiding citizens with more laws that only affect them.

 

bump.

Come on people. For all the gun control advocates here, no one can spell out what kind of kind control we should have?

 

Use current laws and stiffen penalties. I see no other logical recourse.

 

I checked 'Other'. The only type of gun control I'll support, for right now, is universal background checks. If the case is to be made for that, I say that we should also open up the NICS system to private individuals as well. If I want to sell my weapons to someone I know, I should be able to run a background check on them, determine if the NICS system approves them or not, and sell them the weapon. I shouldn't need to go to an FFL and pay a ton of fees to have it done. The whole point is to make money, not spend it.

I also don't support any type of ban on anything. Where our limit on guns are at is sufficient enough. Folks can't get machine guns, RPGs, rocket launchers, grenade launchers, tanks, drones, nukes, chemical weapons, and any other military-only weapon, I think it's good enough. If we want to get into other aspects of how we can curb gun violence (IE: End war on drugs, fix our broken healthcare system), I think that can be in another thread. For now, when it comes directly to guns, let's start with having a complete NICS database. As it stands right now, who knows what type of information is in there because some of the states don't even report all of the necessary information so it can be included in the database.

 

I support a three-day waiting period, banning automatic weapons, gun registration, and other.....

On other, I mean laws that make it a class A felony to sell or buy a gun on the black market (I would include a private citizen selling a gun to a felon in this law). I would also like to see gun shows be required to have waiting periods and backgrounds checks.

I also want to see manditory criminal and mental health background checks (including the mental history of a buyer's family, since many mental problems are genetic) on all gun sales.

 

This is the argument I give my wife on any sort of waiting period, do you seriously believe someone, who is going to commit a crime, cares if they have to wait X days before they get a gun? I waited 7 days, MD law, before I could get my sporting rifle. If I wanted to do bodily harm to someone, a week isn't going to stop that.

Banning automatic weapons, semi or fully auto? Fully auto is already banned. Semi, you're basically banning nearly 3/4 of the guns on the market, if not more.

Gun registration, I don't understand this concept. Sexual predators are registered sex offenders because they've committed a crime, what crime have I committed that my information needs to be in a database? If the case is to be made that 'just in case the weapon is used in a murder, it should be in a database', then I say everybody should be in a database as a potential sex offender. Not saying you will be a sexual offender, but just in case you are, we know who you are and can track you.

That's why I say open up the NICS system to private individuals. If I want to sell my weapon, I should be able to. If the case is too many straw-purchases are done because of this, grant me the ability to run a background check on folks before I sell them a gun. I can weed out criminals myself by this. Same goes for gun shows, no waiting period because a gun show isn't but a few days.

Really? So if my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandfather had a mental illness, you would want to prevent me from having a gun? If you are running a background check against me, only run it against me. I don't care if my brother & sister were both locked up in a nut house, it's me who owns the gun, not anyone else. You can't automatically assume because of a mental issue is genetic that it will be instilled in every family member, that's preposterous.

If no signs of mental illness and criminal record shows up on my background check, I should be able to obtain the gun.

 

I support no gun control beyond banning felons from ownership.

Oh, and I would preclude any politician who had ever voted for a gun control measure from owning a gun or hiring other folk on the public dime to carry one for the politician.

 

If a mental health problem runs in your family, you must show proof that you do not have it, from a licensed shrink before you can get a gun permit.




And granting you the ability to run a background check is not the issue. Anyone can run a background check. The problem is that the law states that private sellers do not have to require one. I want it the law that anyone who sales a gun must perform one, out of the pocket of the buyer. Any seller who fails to require a background check would be seen as a black market seller and arrested.

 

Hitting what you aim at.

 

I clicked "other". The only type of gun I wouldn't mind being banned are the types that can shoot grenades and other explosive rounds.

 

The Mayor supports the process of controlling the rear sight to be in line with the front sight, on the target.

No other form of "gun control" is necessary or Constitutional.

You people have a problem with real criminals using guns in real crimes? You clearly can't be stupid enough to believe that a government ban will eliminate guns from the equation. How about punishing criminals for their crimes, instead?

What's really going on with all this "gun control" blather, and the silly dupes going along with it, is the goal of disarming the populace. Not, as the simple-minded easily led dupes believe, for public safety, but for public control. History shows this. It's not necessary to cite all the dictatorships throughout history that disarmed the masses to gain greater power....and today's DemocRATs, the maggot leaders like Reid, Pelosi, Biden, and, of course, King Obama, Fascist and Traitor, want greater power and they greatly resent the need to actually explain themselves to the people who aren't stupid enough to vote for them.

Of course they want to disarm the people, that's been a goal of the Left since the 1930's.

So stop being saps, because if history shows anything, it shows that the useful idiots that help the totalitarian take over suffer as much as the victims the useful idiots are helping to enslave.

 

Many people aren't going to care that the 'gun' thing is literally out of control in this nation, until many more of certain human beings die.

At some point, we'll hit a key combination of specific quantities and personalities who die in a certain period of time; then this nation will finally change.

For now, some people have managed to accept the status quo; but my view is that the carnage will increase in the manner I shared above. What is acceptable 'now'... will not be for ALL time.

 

The military is full of dumbasses and ex-felons.

If they are allowed access, all Americans should be.

They only ever use these weapons for state-sponsored terrorist activities anyways..

 

The more government (lib or con) is allowed to oppress the citizenry the more you will see of violence and psychotic outbreaks. You are correct there.
Americans are of a different breed than the rest of the world that has become accustomed to serfdom although I believe the younger generation is willing to lie down.
You also may be correct that many will take the emotional side of the argument over the rational. If they see the errors of their ways it will be too late.
That leaves the rest of America that understands what is happening and the root cause. Good luck running us over with your utopian government of masters and whips.

corny but appropriate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00xStn_jXKo

 

prosecuting criminals with guns...and the the rare cases where someone prohibited from buying a gun is caught trying to pass a background check. it's usually someone with a similar name.

 

It is so out of control that gun violence is down by 1/2 the last two decades. I think some are victims of the glass teat. The media keeps this on the front page to keep the useful idiots peeing in their pants.

 

I support a total ban on guns except for hunting and sport, and people seeking guns for sport/hunting should have full background checks. There is no need for people to keep guns for self-defense.

 

This is the problem with the current debate. The people that think they know what they are talking about have no idea what they are talking about and are not familiar with current law.

 

Interesting results so far, no one has voted to ban all guns.

 

I don't accept the status quo, I'll be the first one to stand up and say I'm tired of the status quo. The problem is, the laws in which you want to enact, although will change the 'status quo', they're not valid and won't curb gun violence, which is the point of your argument. I'll support anything that makes sense and can make everyone safer. Until you can (Of which, I'm still waiting for any valid argument from you), I will reject anything that doesn't make sense.

However, if the case is to be made of getting rid of the 'status quo', then may I inject some of my thoughts on this? How about we start with having EVERY SINGLE political person (From the President, going all the way down to local politicians) must pass an economics, a Constitution, and a law test. I feel as though these three things are vital in making any policies that have an effect on the economy, infringe on rights of our Constitution, and any law that has been passed or is looking to be passed that will infringe on my rights, EVERY one of them should understand it. If ANY of them fail any of the tests, they are not allowed to serve as a public servant. At minimum, they should pass with at least an 80 - 90%, I'm not willing to go the traditional 60% route, as they've lowered the passing grade in school.

Moving from there, if the President wishes to build his 'cabinet', I'd say let's have an open forum discussion with them and Congress. This information will be provided to the American public and we will decide if they are right to aid in helping the President out. This will allow us to ensure that the folks who are going to aid the President will have everyone's best interest in play. If they don't, then we don't vote them into their position. If they are a public servant, we should have a right to state whether or not they can serve in their position. They are only there because of the President, since we're the ones who 'technically' put them there, I say we should be allowed to vote for whoever serves in his cabinet (Especially considering their on our tax dollar, I want to have a say in the matter, especially considering they make over six figures, more than majority of Americans: http://hobnobblog.com/congress-by-the-numbers/pay-and-perquisites-of-members-of-congress-including-a-history-of-house-and-senate-salaries/).

That will begin to end our status quo. If you're really into supporting change in status quo, I've just provided a change that I think most of us can agree on. Again, that's why I can't/won't be a politician, I won't accept the same bs that's been going on now and they probably won't let me change their structure.

 

Ayuh,... The "Other" I'd prefer is to roll back the current laws to what was in place in 1967....

All of the antigun laws passed since then have done Nothing to stop criminals, but only infringe on the Rights of lawful Citizens...

 

If it's to be required by state law (or federal), I think that the state (or feds) should have to pick up the tab. Those checks aren't free.