Normally I don't post in this section, and I try to stay out of the political stuff on here. It's one of those I'm guessing I'm in the minority view wise, so why start trouble with people that I respect?

But that being said I'm working on a presentation about Gun Control for my Mass Commutation class at Webster University. While my personal section is "Pro Gun Rights" I am interested in opinions from all sides.

I'm trying to get a sampling of different people, hence why I'm posting this here; (I'm guessing) but I think that the forum will have different results than my Facebook group.

Feel free to respond to this, or if you want to post anonymously just PM what you want to say and I'll post it for you.

The only catch is that this project is due Monday April 25th, so if you post after that I won't be able to use it in the project.

Thank you very much in advance, it is truly appreciated!

-Joe

 

In my opinion gun control does NOTHING besides deprive law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

If you want proof just look at news stories concerning violent gun crime. Tons of those accused are convicted felons, meaning it's illegal for them to have a gun in the first place. Look at many of the mass shootings (seems every time there is one some genius thinks 'gun control' is the answer), how many of them are in "gun-free" zones? All that means to the shooter is that nobody will be able to defend themselves.

Nearly every man in Switzerland owns a gun, so if guns cause violence, why don't the Swiss have a huge violent gun crime issue?

- NCSU

 

The media is part of the problem. If a legally purchased/owned firearm is used in a crime it is reported nationally. Not only that it is reported over and over for days. But the hundreds of crimes everyday involving illegally purchased/owned firearms don't make the national news unless they involve an especially horrific crime.

 

I agree with the others. Gun control will only control the guns owned by people who get them lawfully.

I agree that it's important to keep guns out of the hands of people who aren't stable enough to handle the responsibility. You can have controls on the people who are seeking to obtain guns lawfully, but that does nothing to control the people who obtain them unlawfully.

It seems that often with government regulation, though the intent may be legitimate, the implementation is ill informed and uneffective.

We need to elect more reasoned people to represent us in our governing.

 

Start by going here and downloading the pdf of Gun Facts. A treasure trove of information you can use here. A must read on the subject.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/Gun-Facts-Download

 

So you post Saturday night for a report due Monday morning??

Research Kennesaw, GA and their crime rates where every head of Household is required to own a gun. As NCSU mentioned, the Swiss requires you to take annual firearms training.

IMHO, taking away our guns only serves the government. Research England. They have banned guns and yet people find other ways to commit crimes.

The USA was only able to break away from GB because we owned firearms. Anyone who researches our history knows that. So why would the leaders of this country try to restrict private gun ownership when they only exist because of private gun owners? It's because they know there can be strong opposition to their policies yet the only power we have to enforce our will is our guns.

 

1st4x4, Yeah I was assigned the project on Friday. The project states to use the weekend to ask your friends and family. I figured to spread that out a bit and get a bigger sample. So I posted on Facebook as well as here.

Thank You to everyone who has posted so far, it is truly appreciated!

(Keep 'em coming for a few more hours though! )

 

Figure you have the basics down.

1. Gun control targets the part of the population that follows the law
1.1. Per local gun regulations has registered fire arms, and applicable license for owning guns and ammo.
1.2. A gun reduction law would not target those who use guns for illegal ownership / activities.

2. Gun bans can turn a ( unknown ) percentage of the normal law abiding population in to violators
2.1. This is the thought that gun bans can make some still seek out gun to own, which would put them in the same class as those refereed to in item #1.2 above

3. What is the true reason for reducing legal gun ownership ?
3.1. This is usually the "get drunk and shot your spouse / co worker" line, a crime

of passion. This is what the 3 day wait on purchasing a gun is to be for.
3.2. Reduction of accidental gun incidents ?
3.2.1. The kid taking it to school, or using it to get your mom to cosign for a car ?

4. Why now for a push to reduce legal gun ownership ?
4.1. Is there any reason that now, vs the 1970s to reduce gun ownership ?
4.2. Have the crimes for legal gun ownership gone up that much in the past 3 or 4 decades ? ( this is legal ownership, not gun crimes as a whole ).

Gun control in contrast to cases being made against gun ownership in cities such as Washington DC and Chicago ( to cite the case as valid or unconstitutional ).
- District of Columbia v. Heller
- McDonald v. Chicago

 

Still working on this if anyone else has any thoughts. Thank you very much to all who have posted!

 

In the county where I live if you don't own at least three guns, people will label you homosexual.

I own three guns but, one is broke.
Around here that means I'm not homosexual but, I walk funny.

 

I am all for gun owner's rights. I do think groups like the NRA try to push it too far though.

Common sense needs to be found within the laws. The problem is that both sides are so polarizing.

The gun advocates want it to be legal for people to drive down the road with a turret on top of their vehicle that shoots nuclear weapons.

The anti-gun people want cap guns to be illegal.

It is kind of like arguing religion. In religion there is no compromise as sin is bad and no degree of sin is tolerable.

That said...there is a happy medium out there that would allow people to safely own guns to avoid little Johnny from bringing dad's .45 to school. I think gun owners should have to go through safety training and really know how to maintain and handle their weapon.

Banning guns does no good as it just means the good guy won't have one and the bad guy isn't handing his over.

 

I thought that would make you metro-sexual

 

It's called responsible parenting; something laws cannot compensate for.

 

With the general population overwhelmingly not wanting any gun controls by the Feds, why would it be an issue? Mostly because it brings out the emotions of most folks and gets their undivided attention. Problem here is now a public "servant", who is paid far more than he deserves, can slip legislation thru that most will not ever look at or even be aware of. Deception by our elected "servants" is common place otherwise we wouldn't be headed for the cermaic ride we are just embarking on. The hayday of the USA is over. I hope you folks that like change are ready to ride in the back seat.

 

Amen to that. And there is a wholesale lack of it.