So the solution to take away guns from criminals is to NOT have a discussion on how we can do that. For the life of me, I can't understand how somebody can equate gun control == removing my rights to bear arms. The idea of gun control is to allow law abiding citizens to have them and hopefully, minimize (not eliminate) the ease in which criminals attain them.
I think you have a mistaken view of what liberals are like. You're an example of what never mingling with the 'other side' leads to. Not all liberals desire to ban citizens from owning firearms or to collectivize your private property; not all conservatives desire babies to hold a gun before they walk or to overthrow the Federal Govt and arrest Obama for treason. Funny that you mention black people. Without government intervention, which the far-right hates, you would have said "some of my best friends are slaves". Quit acting like you're an island whose existence has no affect on other people and vice versa. We're all on this tiny ball of rock hurtling through space at just under 70k miles per hour. Compromising here and there is good for everyone.
"These types?" I have no idea what you are talking about. Members of my family have been gun owners for generations, and most of them have been progressive Democrats. So what? I don't know if you expect liberal gun owners to apologize for owning guns, or if you are attempting to place them on some level "lower' than conservatives who own guns. Whatever it is you are trying to say, you are failing to make sense. Failing completely. And what do unions have to do with anything? If a union member goes duck or dove hunting every year, somehow they are fundamentally different than a conservative gun owner who does the same thing? What an idiotic idea, with all due respect. They are both American gun owners who enjoy owning and using guns as Americans have been using them since time out of mind.
You: many Liberal Americans own and enjoy owning firearms. Me: I am very aware of them (Then I go on to describe the ones I have encountered) What exactly is confusing.
The world needs to rid itself of weapons with bullets/missiles, etc. Then everyone will be forced to learn kung fu.
What is confusing? You. It confuses me that you have led such a sheltered life where this subject is concerned.
In what way am I sheltered? The opposite seems to be true because you believed I had no idea of a certain population of liberal gun owners. I know many. I think you have confused yourself.
With all due respect, you are wasting my time. "I'm ultra pro gun rights and run into these types all the time. Mostly they just ignore gun laws currently in place and don't GAF about new laws they don't plan to follow. They are commonly known as "fudds" as in Elmer Fudd. Have guns to hunt, are in a union, and carry a 20 year old illegal pistol (most of their guns are 10+ years old) in their truck regularly but vote for more background checks." You went out of your way to insult gun owners who don't hold the political beliefs that you apparently do. So "we" are "types." "Fudds," as in Elmer Fudds. Union members. Folks that ignore gun laws, that have "a 20 year old illegal pistol (most of their guns are 10+ years old) in their truck regularly but vote for more background checks." One absurd insult and/or assumption after another. All you are doing is putting your ignorance on display for all to see, with all due respect. In other words, you've led a sheltered life where gun ownership is concerned. And background checks? What about them? Do you think that someone who committed a felony while using a gun should be allowed to own one? Should someone with a serious mental illness be allowed to own one? Of course not. I find it hard to believe that anyone with intelligence would disagree, so I assume that you support those background checks. Of course, perhaps I don't understand you at all on this topic. If not, please enlighten me.
One thing I don't quite understand about the stance on gun rights is that people constantly bring up the argument that criminals will always be able to get their hands on guns. If so, shouldn't that be one of the main focus on gun control, not for law abiding citizens obviously, but to more strictly regulate gun circulation so that it's less likely to fall into criminals' hands? Why so defeatist about your nation's ability to prevent guns from going to criminals?
they already have them, thats the point. As i showed earlier, the vast majority of gun murders are gang related. Those gangs will always have those guns whether they're legal or illegal. There are 250 million guns in america, you really think the govt is gonna be able to stop the circulation of those?
First of all. Do you pro-gun people agree that Australia has improved its gun violence record after a strict ban on guns?
Never really felt the need for one until a few days ago. A person knocked on my studio door saying "I work for the Dynamo and am a fellow musician and we're offering 90% off". I have a peep hole and could see this person was very close to the door and holding something in his hand. Needless to say I called my best bud and he let me borrow his 10 gage with a few clips filled with hollow points. From now on I will defend my home court like it was a blood sport.
"10 gauge with a few clips filled with hollow points"? You sure you got that right? Slugs? Not saying you're wrong, but I've never heard of a clip fed 10 gauge with hollow point shells. 10mm with a magazine and hollow point bullets?
I don't think people answered this poll honestly. Considering the national numbers are something like 25% (with it in the high 30s before Obama was elected) think guns should be outlawed, I find it hard to believe that this forum, which is much more liberal than the general population, is really at just under 25% wanting guns to be outlawed.
I dont want them to be illegal, but I'd like to see them become more difficult to legally obtain. With HARSH penalties for illegally obtaining or processing one.
