Guns

[armyman_83]

PLEASE MARK ALL THAT APPLY




I was just wondering what people's thoughts are on Firearms.

I enjoy shooting and I am a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment and self-defense. Just wondering what everyone elses views on the subject(s) were.




"A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a subject."

 

[TheUnwanted]

There are inadequate checks and balances in place for all citizens to own firearms currently. Address the safety issues, and I'm all for universal firearms ownership. Demanding universal right to own firearms BEFORE the safety issues are addressed is the textbook example of "cart before the horse".

P.S. an infantryman who calls them "guns"... how... unusual.

 

[armyman_83]

P.S. an infantryman who calls them "guns"... how... unusual.

ha ha ha, at least you said something. I figured that I would make it more "civilian" friendly. I would be doing push-ups if my NCO ever heard me call my weapon a "gun". So I took the middle ground on the poll and phrased them correctly. They are firearms.

 

[Blank123]

depends on what you mean. In some countries it is a consitutional right to own guns, in others its not. Its not an inherent right someone has because they're born. But personally, so long as they're responsible with their guns, I don't care who has one. I just doubt I'd ever own one.

 

[broken_one]

My question is whether "gun ownership is a right" includes mandatory safety quizzes and safe handling courses, proper registration, and background checks?

Because if so, then yes. Emphatically.

 

[crishmael]

Haven't shot a gun, believe that people have the right to own them in America, and believe in the government's right to regulate ownership.

 

[armyman_83]

I am personally against Registration. As it invariably leads to the confiscation of arms. I am for background checks within the current system we have (i.e. personal sales are still an option).

Safety courses being mandatory....I think its a personal option. I do think they should be offered. Lots of this stuff varies from State to State. Alabama is pretty lax about their weapon laws. No registration(except where needed under federal law--i.e. Class III weapons(machine guns, supressors, short barreld rifels, short barreled shotguns etc.), no safty courses.

 

[TheUnwanted]

My question is whether "gun ownership is a right" includes mandatory safety quizzes and safe handling courses, proper registration, and background checks?

Because if so, then yes. Emphatically.

Quite so. The idea that a legal ability to own and use firearms should be any easier than, say, the legal ability to own and use a motor vehicle strikes me as ludicrous. Anyone who really wants to be a responsible firearms owner should have no problem completing an appropriate safety course and fulfilling basic licencing and registration requirements.

I'll also go out on a limb here and say that while I believe there is a place for legal civilian firearms ownership, I DON'T think that blowing away trespassers as a first response is implicit in either the idea of firearms ownership, the second ammendment, or any talk of "rights".

 

[Inkachu]

Never shot a gun, don't own a gun, definitely pro gun rights. I hate guns, I think they're violent and destructive, but I firmly believe in peoples' right to own guns.

 

[ceh85]

"A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a subject."

Change 'gun' to 'vote' and I agree with you

 

[broken_one]

Quite so. The idea that a legal ability to own and use firearms should be any easier than, say, the legal ability to own and use a motor vehicle strikes me as ludicrous. Anyone who really wants to be a responsible firearms owner should have no problem completing an appropriate safety course and fulfilling basic licencing and registration requirements.

I'll also go out on a limb here and say that while I believe there is a place for legal civilian firearms ownership, I DON'T think that blowing away trespassers as a first response is implicit in either the idea of firearms ownership, the second ammendment, or any talk of "rights".

To be fair, "Castle Doctrine" is mainly in the South, and the South...well, that's why there needs to be proper education classes. What is done isn't necessarily what is prudent and/or right.

And I think guns are quite similar to owning a car....you need to register it, you need to spend actually somewhat extensive time learning about it (aka driving school/driver's ed), and to get a licence you can't be a felon or be illegally living here or something.

I think it's good to have these things though, in the end. You're literally being given a machine designed to kill, and killing people or animals....there is a responsibility and moral cognition needed to handle that, be it consciously accepted or not. So a bit of restrictions is a good thing, methinks.

 

[armyman_83]

Quite so. The idea that a legal ability to own and use firearms should be any easier than, say, the legal ability to own and use a motor vehicle strikes me as ludicrous. Anyone who really wants to be a responsible firearms owner should have no problem completing an appropriate safety course and fulfilling basic licencing and registration requirements.

I'll also go out on a limb here and say that while I believe there is a place for legal civilian firearms ownership, I DON'T think that blowing away trespassers as a first response is implicit in either the idea of firearms ownership, the second ammendment, or any talk of "rights".

Should people register if they want to have kids? Reproduction is a right no one would question, but why not the right to self defense? It is registration I find the real problem with.


I firmly believe in the Castle Doctrine. In no state, as far as I am aware can you waste someone for just trespassing (unless they enter your home/car then it becomes something more--burglary).

No one should have a duty to retreat where they have the legal right to be. A law abiding person should never have to "retreat" from an unlawful agressor.

 

[cuvkid]

I am pro gun rights not only because of the second amendment, but also because a gun is just something that we control, the reason people get shot isn't because of the gun it's because of sinful nature, if we didn't have guns a lot more people would be gettin stabbed, not sayin it's good but it is a fact, just like the love of money is the root of all evil, but money is not the root of all evil, not to spam just emphasizing my point

 

[TheUnwanted]

To be fair, "Castle Doctrine" is mainly in the South, and the South...well, that's why there needs to be proper education classes. What is done isn't necessarily what is prudent and/or right.

And I think guns are quite similar to owning a car....you need to register it, you need to spend actually somewhat extensive time learning about it (aka driving school/driver's ed), and to get a licence you can't be a felon or be illegally living here or something.

I think it's good to have these things though, in the end. You're literally being given a machine designed to kill, and killing people or animals....there is a responsibility and moral cognition needed to handle that, be it consciously accepted or not. So a bit of restrictions is a good thing, methinks.

Strongly agree.

 

[armyman_83]

To be fair, "Castle Doctrine" is mainly in the South, and the South...well, that's why there needs to be proper education classes. What is done isn't necessarily what is prudent and/or right.

And I think guns are quite similar to owning a car....you need to register it, you need to spend actually somewhat extensive time learning about it (aka driving school/driver's ed), and to get a licence you can't be a felon or be illegally living here or something.

I think it's good to have these things though, in the end. You're literally being given a machine designed to kill, and killing people or animals....there is a responsibility and moral cognition needed to handle that, be it consciously accepted or not. So a bit of restrictions is a good thing, methinks.

Learning firearm safty is one thing, but why make someone register their firearms? Why does the government need to know that I have one pistol or a few dozen rifles and pistols? If I had a background check, then I am "clean". I am not a threat, why should the government have such information?

 

[TheUnwanted]

Should people register if they want to have kids? Reproduction is a right no one would question, but why not the right to self defense? It is registration I find the real problem with.

No one is questioning a right to self defence. We're questioning a right for all and sundry to own weapons designed to kill with little or no appropriate oversight.

I firmly believe in the Castle Doctrine. In no state, as far as I am aware can you waste someone for just trespassing (unless they enter your home/car then it becomes something more--burglary).

Burglary then. Killing an intruder as a first response isn't my idea of a "right", nor is it "self defence".

No one should have a duty to retreat where they have the legal right to be. A law abiding person should never have to "retreat" from an unlawful agressor.

Maintaining your macho self image is worth someone else's life?

 

[TheUnwanted]

Learning firearm safty is one thing, but why make someone register their firearms? Why does the government need to know that I have one pistol or a few dozen rifles and pistols? If I had a background check, then I am "clean". I am not a threat, why should the government have such information?

Precisely the same reason they ask you to register your car and dog.

 

[TheUnwanted]

I am pro gun rights not only because of the second amendment, but also because a gun is just something that we control, the reason people get shot isn't because of the gun it's because of sinful nature, if we didn't have guns a lot more people would be gettin stabbed, not sayin it's good but it is a fact, just like the love of money is the root of all evil, but money is not the root of all evil, not to spam just emphasizing my point

If we have a choice between people being stabbed, and people being shot... you don't think we should go for the one where people are getting stabbed?

 

[broken_one]

Learning firearm safty is one thing, but why make someone register their firearms? Why does the government need to know that I have one pistol or a few dozen rifles and pistols? If I had a background check, then I am "clean". I am not a threat, why should the government have such information?

Illegal firearm importation is a major issue. These guns (like the ones used in the UK) are mainly used for crimes. By having a system of registration, the police can quickly figure out if the gun used during the crime was stolen or figure out if these guns were illegal to begin with. This can eventually end trafficking by following these possessions to their source.

Or to continue to "cars" metaphor, I could hop in a Ferrari and then drive it home. How can it be stolen if nobody legally said it was theirs in the first place?

This sounds like the "government is controlling our lives", but it is in place for a reason.

 

[armyman_83]

No one is questioning a right to self defence. We're questioning a right for all and sundry to own weapons designed to kill with little or no appropriate oversight.

I agree, mentally unstable people should not be able to own firearms. As is the case in all states (as far as I am aware).

Burglary then. Killing an intruder as a first response isn't my idea of a "right", nor is it "self defence".

Because merely wounding someone who breaks into your home with possible intent to do your family harm is the better option?

Maintaining your macho self image is worth someone else's life?

I didn't say picking fights then, pulling out a pistol was right or lawful. I said that no one should have to leave a place they have the legal right to be. How is that macho? Thats down right human respect. Sorry, but telling someone to back down and "retreat" from an unlawful agressor so the agressor's life is made safe is perverse.