Reply With Quote
Nukes... He thinks people can get nukes. That's who you're speaking with which is a disingenuous person.
What actual suggestions have you made?
Nukes... He thinks people can get nukes. That's who you're speaking with which is a disingenuous person.
- heavily incentivized buyback programs, state or national level. cash for clunkers as something of a model for it. biggest issue is the amount of guns in circulation. cut back at that. government preferably scraps them
- buying them back is great, but keeping the number in circulation low is good too. manufacturing/import limits.
- make it harder to buy them. require licensing for them which include regular (annual, every two years, i dno) psychological screening and/or needing to renew said license. license would require training for that type of weapon. handgun, rifle, etc. just like we have classes of drivers licenses for different vehicles
- ban private sales altogether with the exception of antique/legacy weapons. if you want to sell a gun, it goes to a state/federal buyback. like i said, buybacks should be heavily incentivized, possibly even at or above market value. probably have a check for people gaming the system by limiting amount of guns a person can purchase in a given period of time
- more comprehensive background checks. mandatory waiting periods.
- capacity limits on all sorts of weapons
- assault weapons ban from the 90s was generally effective as well
a few of the top of my head that i've mentioned on this site at one time or another. people more knowledgeable than me would do a better job putting it into actual legislative language
How about pussies like you just move the to weak ass Canada already and that'll solve all our problems.
quiet, honey. adults are talking
You're def not an adult if you think citizens can procure nukes. If anything you're in arrested development and by the way you play make believe it stands to be correct.
Btw what male calls another male "honey"? ing weirdo.
do you believe there should be any upper limit on the grade of weaponry that any individual should be able to own?
1. Do you consider a Daniels Defense AR-15 to be a clunker? This is the gun that was used.
2. There are 400 million guns in circulation. Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_program for history of these programs across the US.
3. Most people doing these shootings have no criminal history. A private citizen cannot get access to the ATF or FBI database, only a FFL can do a background check and even then it's yes or no. You'd have to do the private sale restriction 1st.
4. Bans only work when you can track what you're banning. Cocaine is banned.. for example. So how can you restrict private sales if a gun isn't registered to an owner? What evidence could exist that can be used to prosecute offenders?
5. As for the ban...
Gun bans and gun crime
Evidence is mixed about the effectiveness of previous gun bans. Federal restrictions enacted in 1934 on the ownership of fully automatic weapons (machine guns) appear to have been quite successful based on the rarity with which such guns are used in crime.
Washington, D.C.’s restrictive handgun licensing system, which went into effect in 1976, produced a drop in gun fatalities that lasted for several years after its enactment. Yet, State and local bans on handguns have been found to be ineffective in other research. The inconsistency of previous findings may reflect, in part, the interplay of several effects that a ban may have on gun markets. To reduce criminal use of guns and the tragic consequences of such use, a ban must make the existing stockpile of guns less accessible to criminals by, for example, raising their purchase prices. However, the anticipation of higher prices may encourage gun manufacturers to boost production just before the ban takes effect in the hope of generating large profits from the soon-to be collectors’ items. Immediately after the ban, criminals may find it difficult to purchase banned weapons if they remain in dealers’ and speculators’ storage facilities. Over the long term, however, the stockpiled weapons might begin flowing into criminals’ hands, through straw purchases, thefts, or “off-the-books” sales that dealers or speculators falsely report to insurance companies and government officials as thefts.
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/173405.pdf
Saying something was effective isn't a suggestion. Saying it without supporting evidence is just talking to be talking. Perhaps you're relying on Biden's comments to be factual.
Making a lot of assumptions there
The gun isn’t a clunker. I’m just looking at clash for clinkers as a model for a buyback program. Yea there are way too many guns in circulation. Make buybacks much more incentivized.
Im not banning the sale of an illegal item. Somebody bought a gun legally. It’s registered to them. That person cannot make a private sale of that legally owned gun anymore based on what i propose. If that guy wants to get rid of his gun, it goes to a state/federal buyback. Otherwise he has to keep renewing his licensing for it.
i specifically went beyond criminal background checks. I said you need licensing which would also require regular psychological screening
Shall.Not.Be.Infringed.
It's infringed all the time.
What well regulated militia do you belong to
Snake has a timer set to post that once every 24 hours in a shooting death thread
It’s telling that eventually they all lose any semblance of a reasonable argument, and just resort to stealing Thread’s schtick. Every last one of them.
Guns aren't registered to anyone in most states. That's the point.
You cannot regulate who owns a firearm if you don't have a registry. You can only confiscate as you catch people with guns. This type of approach would take 30 years to see even a dent in the total guns in circulation, and would really do not much to keep guns out of the hands of people who haven't committed the crime yet.
I know you want to do something, but that something needs to be feasible and matter. Otherwise it's placebo legislation, and the outcome of proposing it would be to have even more guns sold in the interim. If it passes, it doesn't change much. If it fails, well.
2A doesn't make a militia a requirement. It only states the right that already exists shall not be infringed upon. The militia red herring gets brought up a lot.
Make a registry.
Mind blown
Compel registration.
All the good guy with guns, being that they are good, will follow the law and register them. I’ve been told a vast majority of gun owners are law abiding good guys so that will already get a vast majority accounted for. Good starting point
anybody who doesn’t get registered within some safe harbor period of time will be a criminal aka a bad guy with guns
“Shall not be infringed” gets brought up a lot but literally everybody outside of koriwhat admits that some level of infringement is allowed
Whatever you say twink.
I am banning index fingers. More effective than your rules and just as likely to happen. I think I'm going to phase it in. Adults will be grandfathered to keep their index fingers, teens to age 21 will just have the tip removed at the first knuckle, under 12 lose half, only newborns will have their entire index fingers removed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions