Is it possible for any Country to have “Reasonable” Gun Laws? What would they be?

by pistolpete 70 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere

    I will argue that Australian laws are not all reasonable. Confiscating. 22 pump rifles? Now lever actions are in the sights? The linits on hunting gun capacity have to do with conservation and " fair " sport.

    Since I am US, the revolution was not against a private army owned by George, but against overbearing laws from the government. Are there any plans for draconian laws now?

  • millie210
    millie210

    The people who should have guns?

    The people the forefathers were thinking in the same vein as?

    The people you want to have guns if there happens to be total anarchy in your area?

    Those people?

    They are way ahead of this.

    Let the reader use discernment.

    On a similar but different note. When has prohibition ever worked? Check out the alcohol prohibition of the 20s if you want to see how the legal "plan on paper" shakes out in the real world.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    It's one thing to ask for 'reasonable' gun laws, it's another to get the American public onside.

    Let's just think this situation through …

    Biden will likely be US president soon, the Democrats having grifted their way to victory, funded by BLM.

    BLM want to defund the police.

    There has been a depressing decline in Democrat cities such as Chicago, San Francisco, Baltimore, etc.

    Why on earth would ordinary Yanks want to give up their guns? The current situation will likely mean that they'll cling on to their guns more, if anything. I believe I read somewhere that gun sales are going through the roof. I don't know if this correct but I wouldn't be surprised if it is, TBH.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete
    Many gun proponents no longer even frame their arguments around hunting or sport shooting.
    The Second Amendment was not about hunting or sport shooting.

    I understand that, but it was acknowledged that the spirit of the Amendment was that there needed to be legitimate use. It was recognized by everyone that the Amendment's specific purpose of militias was no longer relevant however the freedom to own guns for legitimate use was enshrined in the amendment. Legitimate use and competence were the issues that shaped gun law for many years. Overwhelming majority of Americans agree that we have moved away from that rational discussion it used to be, to one driven by political fear and conspiracy.

    I should add that I own a 20 gauge used by my uncle for deer hunting. I've shot 2 rabid racoons and chased coyotes away with it. I'm not against legitimate use.

  • TD
    TD

    For years and years the left maintained the fiction that the right to keep and bear arms existed only under the auspices of s militia. (Which is ridiculous when you think about it, as guaranteeing the right of a military body to bear arms is a tautology.)

    A great deal of past discussion, including the notion of legitimate use (Which is not necessarily the same thing as lawful use ) occurred under that rubric

  • mann377
    mann377

    The reason the police carry a gun.......not for your protection but for theirs!

    Many politicians and actors, singers etc have people with guns for their protection. Why is their life more important than yours?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete
    I fully empathize with the cops. My wife works in a police dept. They are terrified every time they pull someone over or approach someone loitering it will get them shot. Proliferation of guns, even high capacity guns has produced a cop culture of pulling out the gun first. They have become seen as part of the problem as a result. It's a viscous cycle, more guns on the street means more people feel the need to have more guns, even more guns on the street means more cops overreacting with guns which leads to more contempt for their efforts to keep us safe. Its just not helpful to just focus on one aspect of the problem.
  • MeanMrMustard
    MeanMrMustard

    Ohhhh I see. You just want “legitimate use” and “common sense” laws. Phew, for a moment there I thought you were advocating something purely subjective with shifting definitions. Silly me.

  • MeanMrMustard
    MeanMrMustard

    No. More guns equals more safety.

    You take guns away, crime rises. Crime rises, businesses leave. Businesses leave, people in the area experience poverty. Then people realize they actually need guns.

    Police come after crimes occur. People generally want to intervene before that.

    Are we really at this place again? We just watched record gun purchases in areas like California and Portland. Did they buy shirt loads of guns and ammo because those areas were flooded with guns and people were feeling extra insecure? Or was it because there was no possible way the police were going to do anything about the leftist mobs burning through the streets?

    I saw it first hand. I was there as these mobs threatened to move into the residential neighborhoods around the nearby city. The only thing that stopped them were home owners brandishing their weapons and promising that if they entered the neighborhood, a good number of them wouldn’t leave.

  • pistolpete
    pistolpete

    The only thing that stopped them were home owners brandishing their weapons and promising that if they entered the neighborhood, a good number of them wouldn’t leave.

    That's what you call an equalizer!

    You can be a 5ft -98 lbs girl and take on a 6ft 8" man wanting to rape you-- if you have a gun.

    https://youtu.be/VcKm2g6zP3A

    Without a gun, you are at the mercy of tons of perverts.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmG3-lPk3w

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit