Poll: Lets pretend the government passes a law stating that you can't have a gun anymore...

[CM156_v1legacy]

"That would be prohibitively expensive for over 80 million gun owners" so your justification is there are too many to properly enforce monitoring. WHICH IS EXACTLY MY POINT, this is not a toy. This is a tool designed to Kill or seriously injure. It should be vigorously monitored and there should be numerous checks and that's if you choose to allow them at all.

Any other constitutional rights you think should be "vigorously monitored"?

I actually don't oppose a better NICS system, but what I do oppose are people who don't understand guns or mental health throwing out emotional pleas

Oh, and just going to put this out there: Chicago has super strict gun control. They banned handguns till the USSC threw out that nonsense in 2010. They're one of the most dangerous cities in America

""Please explain to me how peoples "right" against unreasonable search and seizure justifies the criminals who get free because they can get off on a technicality?"" I don't understand you here what are you trying to say?

Amendments that deal with civil rights often protect criminals. I've seen numerous cases where criminals can get away with things because of the fourth amendment, yet I don't hear people demanding a repeal on that.

I think you have purposefully skirted round the issue as you have no answer to it.

Our problems come from failures of the mental health system and poverty that leads to gang violence.

I'm really done debating gun control tonight. You may have the last word

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

I actually don't oppose a better NICS system, but what I do oppose are people who don't understand guns or mental health throwing out emotional pleas

I don't know much about how mental health is dealt with in terms of treatment in the US. But due to a tragedy in my own family I do unfortunately know more than I wish I knew about it. So thanks for the sweeping generalization.

Guns are simple - They kill people, in any civilized and well policed country you do not need them other than agricultural use. And perhaps well controlled club use for range shooting etc.

Mental health is a very very complex issue. But in some people it is like a hidden cancer and very hard to see the signs. Identification is a big issue that needs allot more funding but that's a whole other issue. Mental health issues are like an illness like any other health issue, unfortunately it can manifest in ways that could lead to the harm of themselves and others, that is why it is so totally unacceptable to allow access to guns to people without checks, to people who may not even be aware they are ill.

 

[Scorpid]

It would have to be constitutional amendment like the eighteenth amendment (which is the only amendment to ever restrict rights). If it was a simple law passed by the house then it would overturned in the courts as unconstitutional within the year. So it HAS to be an amendment. Which is always a massive feat no matter what the amendment is. Once an amendment is passed then the very bonestructure of the US has shifted as the framers intended it, and any person that killed a government official trying to take his guns would be fighting directly against the framers and the government and couldn't rightly call himself a patriot (then again though in the civil war both sides called themselves patriots and believing that Washington and the founders would of been on their side).

 

[hideomgskojima]

Too many serial killers and slavers running around.

It's okay, the rest of us would keep you safe.

Now if you'll just hop into this protective cage while we take you to our auction ... sorry, that was a mistype, I meant safe house, yes, safe house. We will find someone who will "look after" you.

On Topic....

We did have that law passed. In the UK it is illegal to own firearms.

Class 1 Firearms license... Allows Rifles, bolt action and straight pull, .22lr and rimfire semi auto rifles and submachine guns as longas they are non concealable, shotguns as well.
Also a shotgun license that allows shotguns for sporting, hunting and pest control on farms, etc.

No pistols, no sawn off shotguns. Plus all applicants have to have a CRB, Police check of their home and storage facilities, ie, police come and look that you have an appropriate gun safe for ammunition and the guns you propose you are buying. Also you have to specify what gun/s and how much ammunition you will be purchasing and cannot go over the amount you say and notify them of any new purchases and expansion of your ammo stockpile.

 

[omicron1]

Revolution. With my longsword [http://www.sword-buyers-guide.com/images/Damascus1.jpg] (Note: Not me in picture) in hand. They may take our lives, but they'll never take OUR CARBINES!

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

Class 1 Firearms license... Allows Rifles, bolt action and straight pull, .22lr and rimfire semi auto rifles and submachine guns as longas they are non concealable, shotguns as well.
Also a shotgun license that allows shotguns for sporting, hunting and pest control on farms, etc.

I'm sure you can't own a sub machine gun of any kind? I'm sure any fully automatic weapon is banned

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

If it happened to America, I would sit back and watch the fireworks with a grin on my face.

 

[Vegosiux]

A complete ban on all firearms is just...well, a complete opposite of a stupid extreme, and therefore a stupid extreme itself.

Why? why on earth in a 1st world country does anybody truly NEED a gun if nobody else who's not a member of the armed forces or police has a gun. While you have a police force that's capable and armed forces protecting the borders and there for emergencies NOBODY NEEDS guns.

There's a time and a place for firearms. Naturally "in the hands of everyone, all the time" is not the time and the place for them. But a complete firearm ban? Some people like target shooting. Let them - as long as they keep the weapon locked up at the range. Some people live in more rural areas where the wildlife gets obnoxious or even dangerous. But I do agree that if you want to claim self-defense you need to kind of show what kind of danger (specific danger, not the boogeyman-around-the-corner danger) you're fearing.

 

[Apollo45]

I read the whole thing and the TLR. I'm nice that way.

Not being American, most American discourse I witness is between journalists and politicians, so yeah, I meant socialist being used pretty exclusively in those circles. I rather imagine American teenagers are just as likely to call each other much worse names than Socialists.
There are too many tragic events in the US. It's unnecessary. If we were talking about cars, a comparison often drawn, then I would be on the other side of the fence. Right now people in this country are somewhat divided. I live in a dying industrial town. The people here despise the royal family. These people are miners' families and former potters in a city where both industries no longer exist, and the sight of wealthy inbreds doing nothing all day really just angers them. I quite like the royal family. The escapades of Prince Harry amuse me. I also drink tea a lot, but if tea mutated and started causing the population to spread a virulent strain of the T-Virus, I would (hah I just noticed 'tea virus') be among the first to call for its banning.

I understand America's unique history. I understand the gun's place in culture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darra_Adam_Khel

I saw this town on an episode of Michael Palin's Himalaya, and it was mentioned how startlingly rare gun crime actually is in this town. The culture is apparently retribution-based, and people are raised with a deep-seated respect for their weaponry - which is why the guns are ALL handcrafted and all treated as masterwork.

Now I think that's how it should be. If guns were more...personal...and you couldn't just sign some papers, wait a few days, and have a factory-manufactured handgun. Guns demand respect, and I just don't think the American society quite understands that.

There are certainly people here that are on both sides of the fence with the gun issue as well, much like the Queen business at least. I wasn't by any means saying that tea or the Royal Family would up and kill people, I was merely referencing them as cultural influences, which I believe you understood but I wanted to clarify anyway.

At any rate, I would love to agree with you on the personal guns thing (and thanks for that link by the way. Hadn't heard of it before and I find that really interesting), and if it were possible I would say that would be ideal, but with a nation of 300 million people, about half of which own guns, it's not really. Manufacturing them all by hand would be an impossibility unless we were a true warrior society, which probably wouldn't work out well for anyone. That said, I completely agree that guns demand respect, and the majority of gun owners in the States do in fact understand that. I go hunting for Elk and Deer, Goose, Pheasant, Dove, Quail, I've been Turkey hunting and Boar hunting. I go to shooting ranges quite a bit. Rarely do I encounter anyone in those areas treating guns without respect, and whenever someone does they get chewed out by someone, whether that's a hunting buddy, a range instructor, or one of us who happens to be nearby.

I started shooting BB guns when I was about six. The very first thing I was taught was safety. Make sure the gun is unloaded, never point the gun at anything other than what you're shooting at. Never point a gun at anyone else, loaded or unloaded. Always treat a gun like it's loaded. So on and so forth. Every time I messed up, even slightly - as a kid I would make mistakes, although never anything serious because the serious stuff was constantly drilled into my head - I was torn a new one for it (verbally). My experience with all of the people I hunt and go shooting with is the same. While I'll admit that there is a group of people out there who don't treat guns with respect, from my experience they're the "vocal minority" in that they're the ones who we see news reports about, and that's because they're the ones who get injured. It's the same way with people who drink and drive, or text and drive, or people who decide that stopping a chainsaw with their testicles is a good idea. You don't hear about the ones who do things right because they don't get on the news for it. Now, a solution to that is to increase firearm restrictions, sure, but that seems unnecessary. I'd much rather see owners become more educated about the subject to reach that level because it makes more sense. How one goes about doing that is up in the air though, because I'd frankly still be opposed to requiring a license to obtain a firearm. Still, it's an option that I would be more in favor of than actually outlawing firearms, should it come down to that.

 

[Dangit2019]

I would laugh and say "Oh you guys!" because how the hell are they going to enforce that when they can't even stop teenagers from stealing Skrillex albums online?

 

[UnderCoverGuest]

I'd somewhat* seriously consider moving to a country that let me own firearms, or would at least secure my firearms in temporary custody of a Gun Club or hunting education facility until it was determined whether or not I could keep them, or whether I should move elsewhere.


*"seriously", pffft.

 

[Jedi-Hunter4]

A complete ban on all firearms is just...well, a complete opposite of a stupid extreme, and therefore a stupid extreme itself.

Why? why on earth in a 1st world country does anybody truly NEED a gun if nobody else who's not a member of the armed forces or police has a gun. While you have a police force that's capable and armed forces protecting the borders and there for emergencies NOBODY NEEDS guns.

There's a time and a place for firearms. Naturally "in the hands of everyone, all the time" is not the time and the place for them. But a complete firearm ban? Some people like target shooting. Let them - as long as they keep the weapon locked up at the range. Some people live in more rural areas where the wildlife gets obnoxious or even dangerous. But I do agree that if you want to claim self-defense you need to kind of show what kind of danger (specific danger, not the boogeyman-around-the-corner danger) you're fearing.

Yer probably not obvious in that post but yer I'm not against using firearms as a tool for agricultural work.

An I myself have enjoyed pistol shooting (abroad) as well as .22 rifle shooting when I was in the cadets. I'm not against that either.

Was just trying to make the point that no private individual truly needs a gun, has to have one to survive. but the near unregulated private ownership of guns with the only real requirement of no criminal record just seems crazy to me. I think things are fairly well regulated the way they are in the UK. But there are other country's where things are a little more relaxed and they still work. ie in Sweden you can own a pistol but you have to be a member of a club and go range shooting etc. But they do still have a slightly elevated level of gun crime.

 

[likalaruku]

I have no guns. But I guess if they banned knives & tried to take those away from me, I'd stab them & learn to cut meat with bullets.

 

[the clockmaker]

"To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens"
~Adolf Hitler

With that, and the second amendment of the constitution of the United States of America...I'm keeping my guns.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/disarm.asp
Snopes says no.

ON top of that, I seriously do not understand why yanks fetishise the constitution and the nation's founders.

I mean what would you think if I were to post something like this

'Thus inwardly armed with confidence in God and the unshakable stupidity of the voting citizenry, the politicians can begin the fight for the 'remaking' of the Reich as they call it. '
~Adolf Hitler

With that, and the Commonwealth Franchise act of 1902... I'm not letting aboriginals vote"

Because, see, I can quote Hitler in an irrelevant context and quote out of date laws to back up my nonsense points too.

 

[tangoprime]

I would continue living my gun-free life.

This actually already happened here in Australia. We had one of those massacres go down in a place called Port Arthur, not far from where I live. About 35 people dead if memory serves. Within a couple of week they passed a law banning private ownership of automatic and semi-automatic weapons and tightened controls. There were large scale buy-back schemes and voluntary hand-ins.

Gun crime went way down and we haven't had another massacre since.

Funny, that.

Mind you, how many massacres have we ever had even before Port Arthur?
And I'm fairly sure crimes went up, not firearm related crimes, but home invasions and other violent crimes :/

You would be correct. http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847
Violent crime up 42.2% including a 49.2% increase in assault and 29.9% increase in sexual assault.
No thanks.

 

[Nieroshai]

Were this to happen, I'm guessing it would cause another civil war, as pathetic as that sounds.

If someone came to take my guns away, I'd shoot them.

What better way to show that I'm a responsible individual by shooting people?

'Oh, you want my gun?'

*Bang!*

Yep, give it over to them, one bullet at a time.

Pathetic? One of the main reasons for a civilian in a democracy to have a gun is to prevent it from becoming a dictatorship.

 

[Nieroshai]

A complete ban on all firearms is just...well, a complete opposite of a stupid extreme, and therefore a stupid extreme itself.

Why? why on earth in a 1st world country does anybody truly NEED a gun if nobody else who's not a member of the armed forces or police has a gun. While you have a police force that's capable and armed forces protecting the borders and there for emergencies NOBODY NEEDS guns.

There's a time and a place for firearms. Naturally "in the hands of everyone, all the time" is not the time and the place for them. But a complete firearm ban? Some people like target shooting. Let them - as long as they keep the weapon locked up at the range. Some people live in more rural areas where the wildlife gets obnoxious or even dangerous. But I do agree that if you want to claim self-defense you need to kind of show what kind of danger (specific danger, not the boogeyman-around-the-corner danger) you're fearing.

Yer probably not obvious in that post but yer I'm not against using firearms as a tool for agricultural work.

An I myself have enjoyed pistol shooting (abroad) as well as .22 rifle shooting when I was in the cadets. I'm not against that either.

Was just trying to make the point that no private individual truly needs a gun, has to have one to survive. but the near unregulated private ownership of guns with the only real requirement of no criminal record just seems crazy to me. I think things are fairly well regulated the way they are in the UK. But there are other country's where things are a little more relaxed and they still work. ie in Sweden you can own a pistol but you have to be a member of a club and go range shooting etc. But they do still have a slightly elevated level of gun crime.

To protect civil liberties. You may think I'm joking or stupid. No, the point is that no tyrant stands when millions of guns are leveled his way. Martial law would be too costly in lives to be worth it.

 

[tangoprime]

I actually don't oppose a better NICS system, but what I do oppose are people who don't understand guns or mental health throwing out emotional pleas

Guns are simple - They kill people, in any civilized and well policed country you do not need them other than agricultural use. And perhaps well controlled club use for range shooting etc.

Live in inner-city Chicago, a city with the epitome of US gun control advocates' ideals for a couple of years, then, THEN you can come on here and tell people who've experienced it that they don't need firearms.

There are >200,000,000 million firearms in the US, and have been ~250k firearm thefts per year since 1993 (per ATF and US Justice Dept.). It is unfeasible to outright ban, and even if it happened, there are millions of criminals who will remain the only ones armed. I don't want every urban area in the nation to turn into Chicago/Detroit/Baltimore, I quite like being able to stroll around my city at night without looking over my shoulder as I used to have to when I lived in east Baltimore.