Gun control you could support?

[CowboyEngineer]

I think we have enough gun control laws on the books. I don't support the idea of ANY more. I do think the government could do more to reduce the cultural encouragement of violence by reducing the length of copyright protection on violent movies, tv shows, video games and music.

[xring]

OK I have been away for awhile trying to show AEA Our German Shepherd. I probably phrased the original statement wrong. Instead of restricting our rights I wanted to encourage proposals and ideas of ways to easily determine those free law abiding citizens from the predatory vermin that stole my truck broke into my home, struck my daughter's car without stopping and ran head on into our van the wrong way on the freeway drunk without immigration papers or car insurance. Instead of assuming all laws are onerous I would like right minded representatives to propose options that further protect our rights. You know the libtards are always going to try to corrupt the language we use as freedom loving men IE marital equality, Gay rights, Right to choose or any of the dozens we hear every day. I know as a constitutional conservative my job is to keep the ball where it is and keep them from moving it as much as we can but I'm tired of this. We have let them move the ball so many times a little bit at a time that they are now in control of it. Every time we are under attack we pull the wagons in a circle and try to prevent as much change as possible I want to take the fight to them wright laws that favor the natural law abiding, self supporting citizens our nation was created by not those who misuse the Constitution and current laws to further their own ideas of paradise. If you have interpreted anything I have said as a way to further encumber our God given rights then you are wrong. Doing nothing and hoping for the best has got us where we are.
Thanks for allowing the RANT

OK now look at my avatar isn't that a good looking dog!

[RoyGBiv]

^^^ So as a man that believes in Liberty, what rights have those that also seek Liberty but with social norms that differ from yours?


Do you stand for Liberty only for those who express your sense of morality, or for all?

[stevie_d_64]

I'm already ticked off enough to have to constantly show "papers please". I'm not in favor of any more giant bureaucratic government schemes that will require untold billions more dollars of non-existent taxpayer money to build, implement and enforce. Once upon a time, before I was born I concede, you could buy a firearm by mail order and have it shipped to your house...somehow we still ended up with a prosperous nation. In fact, its only since they started really shoving all this bureaucracy on Americans that it seems things have really gone downhill...imagine that.

Second...

With all respect to the discussion and original posters idea...Its just something I, and many others are not warm and fuzzy about...

[stevie_d_64]

OK I have been away for awhile trying to show AEA Our German Shepherd. I probably phrased the original statement wrong. Instead of restricting our rights I wanted to encourage proposals and ideas of ways to easily determine those free law abiding citizens from the predatory vermin that stole my truck broke into my home, struck my daughter's car without stopping and ran head on into our van the wrong way on the freeway drunk without immigration papers or car insurance. Instead of assuming all laws are onerous I would like right minded representatives to propose options that further protect our rights. You know the libtards are always going to try to corrupt the language we use as freedom loving men IE marital equality, Gay rights, Right to choose or any of the dozens we hear every day. I know as a constitutional conservative my job is to keep the ball where it is and keep them from moving it as much as we can but I'm tired of this. We have let them move the ball so many times a little bit at a time that they are now in control of it. Every time we are under attack we pull the wagons in a circle and try to prevent as much change as possible I want to take the fight to them wright laws that favor the natural law abiding, self supporting citizens our nation was created by not those who misuse the Constitution and current laws to further their own ideas of paradise. If you have interpreted anything I have said as a way to further encumber our God given rights then you are wrong. Doing nothing and hoping for the best has got us where we are.
Thanks for allowing the RANT

OK now look at my avatar isn't that a good looking dog!

Yes, that is a great looking companion!!!

[bdickens]

The only gun control I support is Cooper's four rules.

1 All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
2 Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
3 Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
4 Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.

[MadMonkey]

Shall not be infringed.

[bdickens]

Shall not be infringed.

in·fringe
verb \in-ˈfrinj\
in·fringedin·fring·ing
Definition of INFRINGE
transitive verb
1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>

2 obsolete : defeat, frustrate

intransitive verb
: encroach —used with on or upon <infringe on our rights>

— in·fring·er noun


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infringe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[xring]

I don’t think some of you understand the goal of the exercise. You have already been infringed, many of us for our entire lives. If you have a CHL you have agreed to be infringed upon by the state in exchange for the “right to carry concealed”. I’m looking for ways to unwind the years of incremental infringement that we have been fed year after year. We will not be able to loosen the control unless we take control.
We need to take control of the language, the political dialog, our representatives and the responsibility that the second amendment requires. Bumper stickers, platitudes and vocabulary lessons will no longer cut it. If you’re not a felon a lunatic or a drug addict then I don’t care if you buy a Thompson full auto M4 or a GAU 8. I prefer you have a secure way to store them and that is why I had idea # 2.

[bdickens]

I understand full well the goal of the exercise and forum rules prevent me from rendering an opinion on it.

My idea to prevent the next mass shooting is for us as a society to stop intentionally blinding ourselves to the signs that are right in front of our eyes and be willing to take the appropriate preventative measures. Every single one of these nutcases makes it blindingly obvious to everyone around him that he is going to do something bad, but no one is willing to open his eyes.

If you look at any of these mass shootings, in every case you can trace backwards and see the same patterns develop leading up to the final outburst.

[The Annoyed Man]

OK....I'll answer the questions.......

I have two Ideas to help prevent the next mass shooting at schools or other places.
Prebackground checks. Your state issues you a Driver’s license or ID card bio-metrically encoded with your information. This card could have simple codes corresponding to your eligibility for certain rights. For instance maybe a V spot voting a F spot for firearms E for employment W for welfare all prescreened and vetted to reflect that you have the full rights as a citizen or the limited rights of a legal resident. If you had a change in status the Judge could simply punch a hole in your card to remove this right, for instance a felon can no longer vote or own a firearm so the V & F would be punched out. This card could have a coded number that could be entered in a public database to determine if the cardholder’s status has changed and the card holder is holding a “lost card”. If you find someone trying to apply for a job without an E, Vote without a V, or buy a firearm without an F you simply report this to the authorities and collect half of the substantial fine that the offender has to pay for the offense. I don’t think this is over reaching since we already show ID when purchasing firearms and I for one want to see ID when selling unless I know you very well. This would be just a criminal background check, not the higher level of background used for CCL. This may need some fine tuning and fleshing out but as long as there are no recordings that you purchased and what it was unless you were in immediate violation I don’t think most of us would have an issue, I would even feel better if I had a better way to make sure I was selling to a qualified person.

I've actually already answered this in my previous post. I understand what you mean by taking control of the debate, but the above suggestions add another layer of control on top of people who neither need nor want it. To me, "Taking Control" means taking control of the debate by asserting that we are not going to operate in reverse gear any longer. Now it is their turn to back up. I realize that we've lost the right incrementally, and if you look at my posting history here, you will see that I have advised any number of times that we will have to regain it incrementally. But adding another layer of control/oversight/restriction is not an incremental gain, it is another incremental loss. I'm not backing up any longer. MY back is already to the wall. It is now time to push back. If it gets ugly, it gets ugly. Sometimes ugly is what it takes to restore liberty. Accepting another layer of control is not a restoration of liberty. It is, in fact, a further negation of liberty. In fact, by agreeing to the idea that government will give you an ID card which theoretically eases your purchase/ownership habits (it won't, it WILL be used to further restrict you, because that is what bureaucrats DO), you are also agreeing that government can take that card away from you.....for reasons which you may rightfully protest, but your protests will likely be denied.....just like healthy people taking anxiety meds in New York state. They have to have a state issued license to buy a gun. When their doctor prescribes them a medication to get them through a temporary period of depression, the storm troopers come to their doors and confiscate their guns. THAT is what you are asking to have happen, even though that is not your intent. Never ever EVER give liberals a reason to regulate your activities. Once you do that, they are no longer under your control.

Number 2 is much better. Most criminal and accidental gun injuries and deaths are the result of unauthorized use. The answer is a limited number of times in your life you may take a tax credit for a quality gun safe and handgun lock box or upgrade. If the woman whose Son was the shooter in the Sandy Hook elem. Shooting had her AR in a safe her mentally disturbed son would not have had access to it.
That’s all we need as responsible adults and citizens 1 the ability to determine who we are selling to and 2 some encouragement to secure our fire arms. I’m sure it’s not perfect let’s hear what you think.

1. Adam Lanza's mother had the money to buy a safe. She didn't need a tax credit to do it. And even if she had, my guess is that she was the kind of person who would have granted him access to the safe anyway.
2. Furthermore, a tax credit benefits those who make enough money to buy a safe and is useless to someone who doesn't. Thus, even though safes are a good idea and guns should be kept locked up when there are kids in the house, a poor person who perhaps desperately needs a gun because they live in a bad neighborhood is effectively penalized by the IRS for not having that money.
3. And if you tried to offset the burden on the poor by giving them a tax refund in the amount of the purchase price of a safe in order to offset the fact that they don't qualify for the credit, now you have a reverse burden put on the wealthy, whose higher taxes are subsidizing the purchases of safes by the poor........and there is no guarantee that the poor person won't use that money to buy a flat screen TV instead of a gun safe.
4. Lastly, we need to move AWAY from complicating the tax code any further, and I am generally opposed to using the tax codes to socially engineer people into buying or not buying specific products...........like Obamacare health insurance, for instance. Whenever you involve the IRS in these decisions, Lady Liberty's robe becomes a little more tattered, Blind Justice also becomes deaf and dumb, and (in a positively world-record attempt to butcher metaphors) the Eye of Providence grows dim.

Here is what I am in favor of: the 2nd Amendment, exactly as worded, nor more and no less.

[anygunanywhere]

We will not be able to loosen the control unless we take control.

Exactly.

The Declaration of Independence with the Second Amendment identifies when and how we take control.

When this happens is entirely up to the administration, congress, and supreme court. Entirely. Thay have the power to make it happen or to make it go away.

Anygunanywhere

[xring]

Thanks for all those who posted. I had hoped that a group of people with the same goals could come up with a few good ideas to replace the thousands of ineffective and stifling gun laws we now live under. I assumed there may be some heated rhetoric and there was a little but i thank you for the polite albeit sometimes brief reply's. Maybe this shows in a small way that the general gun control debate will never be resolved. What I envisioned was a two part law one part The second amendment . A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed Finding a way that shows that you are one of the People that should not be infringed upon seems to be a tough nut to crack. Again thanks for the interest in the post.

xring

Next post will be Why Sigs are better than Glocks

[Dave2]

Next post will be Why Sigs are better than Glocks

It's because they don't have that funny grip angle...