- Dec 1, 2011
- 22,349
- 18,308
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It puts forward zero good ideas.What part of that post do you ave an issue with?
No, I am saying that if it is a ten day waiting period at that time will be up.Do you think a FFL dealer is going to sell a gun to someone without waiting 10 days if there is a federal law that requires it?
If there was a law that required you to secure all guns in your home from minors and those not allowed to possess a gun, with the penalty for breaking such a law being a felony charge, forfeiture of all of your guns, the inability to purchase a gun in the future, and the possibility of an active prison sentence, would you choose not to follow it?
Hence why nothing is going to change.But if Americans are not willing to embrace change in their need to be an armed population nothing with change.
There are already some laws to that affact; except that they are not held with the same charge.Yes, I would.
But the law would be if anyone, anywhere under the age limit anywhere got access to your not fully legally secured firearm, then doing something bad with it, you'd be held just as much equally accountable/responsible for whatever happened with it, etc.
Guess we should have not bothered with eradicating smallpox.What good would 30 years from now do NOW though people are always complaining about NOW not 30 years from now.
He asked what would be good about registertion?It puts forward zero good ideas.
If they were, then some people might think twice about it.Except that they are not held with the same charge.
I was replying to your post not theirs.He asked what would be good about registertion?
Just like how car seat laws have been totally ignored and had zero effect on child fatalities in car wrecks.why that assumes that people OBAY those laws. which in the vast majority of cases the person either does not care or the time would be up
Remember, too we would be paying for that .If they were, then some people might think twice about it.
I think it's the difference between being a responsible mature gun owner, and not being one, etc.If they were, then some people might think twice about it.
Funny you should mention that because seat belts also take lives fewer than they save ys, but take lives nonethelessJust like how car seat laws have been totally ignored and had zero effect on child fatalities in car wrecks.
I would agree with this provided that if the person who owned the gun had it securely locked in a safe, if that safe was forcibly opened then he should not be charged for the incident. But I do agree that people who own guns and don’t secure them should be held responsible if someone gets it and commits a crime with it.With youths it's pretty easy. Just simply raise the legal age limit, and then threaten to put whomever's firearm it was that the youths got a hold of to do something like this, when something like this happens, hold those individuals that they got the unsecured firearm from just as much equally accountable as if they were the shooter themselves when something like this happens, etc. Very long prison sentences for them potentially if necessary, etc. And fully enforce and fully follow through with that when something like this happens with very little to no excuses/exceptions regarding this no matter what, etc.
Either keep your firearms very, very much securely secured from all of the people under the age limit, or face the same kinds of consequences as if you were the shooter themselves if they get ahold of yours and do something like this with it. It's either that, or let the government completely take away all of your firearms completely if you can't do that, or if it's juat too inconvenient for you to do that, or you just don't want to be bothered with it, etc.
I personally own no guns as my eyesight and motor skills would make that unsafe.I think it's the difference between being a responsible, mature gun owner, and not being one, etc.
And if your not one, then maybe you shouldn't be allowed to have any guns either, etc.
God Bless.
What happened to laws being useless because some will ignore them?Funny you should mention that because seat belts also take lives fewer than they save ys, but take lives nonetheless
citation of what?Citation needed.
That law is enforced secondaryly for the most part.What happened to laws being useless because some will ignore them?
I misread your post and deleted when I noticed.citation of what?
thank you people should NOT be held liable if they took reasonable stepsI would agree with this provided that if the person who owned the gun had it securely locked in a safe, if that safe was forcibly opened then he should not be charged for the incident. But I do agree that people who own guns and don’t secure them should be held responsible if someone gets it and commits a crime with it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?