Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Unreal, Canadian being fully prosecuted, for using a home invader's gun against him... [View all]marylandblue
(12,344 posts)39. Huh right back
Regarding guns, if you buy a gun, it is assumed you will shoot it, which is a dangerous activity, even if you only did it in your own home.
Actually, it is very safe when done properly like on a range with proper backstop.
If you took your gun to a range, then you didn't keep it at home. If you have a gun range at home, then you own a lot more land than the average person. If you shoot at home on your own land, then the law should require that you build a proper range. I would consider that a form of gun control.
People have shot themselves or others by mistake or on purpose in their homes. People have shot through walls and killed their neighbors. People have shot visitors to their home. Visitors have shot their hosts. Children have played with guns and shot themselves or their parents. Children have shot visiting children.
All of which are extremely rare. When an incident in a small town is national news, that means it is extremely rare.
They may be rare, but laws aren't just based on statistics, they are based on a sense of outrage, the feeling that certain things just shouldn't happen. We are more outraged by plane crashes than car accidents, even though car accidents are much more common than plane crashes. Therefore air travel is much more regulated than car travel. The reasons for outrage are complex, emotional and buried deep in our psyches. Those small town incidents make news, not just because they are rare, but because it is outrageous that children are shot dead.
If you commit gun crimes in one state, you should not be able to go to another state, buy another gun and commit the same crime.
Criminals don't go to gun stores, and the background check system uses the FBI data base, and is usually done by the FBI.
Correct, that is a national framework. But I think there is loophole for gun shows. Is that correct?
Also, gun laws vary greatly from state to state, much more so than for cars. Some sort of national framework is necessary, even if it is limited to a background check to make sure you didn't commit a gun crime in another state.
Actually, there is a national framework. There are several federal laws concerning guns, there are none about driving. Also, criminals buy their guns on the black market.
I was talking about the justification for the framework. You asked why you should be able to buy a car without a national framework, but not a gun. I am not actually in favor of federal gun regulation in general. But I do think national background check makes sense.
There is a risk with having a gun in your home that is much greater (such as it is) than keeping a car in your garage.
Statistically, it is about the same.
Please provide your data
Since gun laws are impossible to enforce like drug laws..........
No law is impossible to enforce. Just some are harder than others.
How do you get grey highlighting in your posts?
Actually, it is very safe when done properly like on a range with proper backstop.
If you took your gun to a range, then you didn't keep it at home. If you have a gun range at home, then you own a lot more land than the average person. If you shoot at home on your own land, then the law should require that you build a proper range. I would consider that a form of gun control.
People have shot themselves or others by mistake or on purpose in their homes. People have shot through walls and killed their neighbors. People have shot visitors to their home. Visitors have shot their hosts. Children have played with guns and shot themselves or their parents. Children have shot visiting children.
All of which are extremely rare. When an incident in a small town is national news, that means it is extremely rare.
They may be rare, but laws aren't just based on statistics, they are based on a sense of outrage, the feeling that certain things just shouldn't happen. We are more outraged by plane crashes than car accidents, even though car accidents are much more common than plane crashes. Therefore air travel is much more regulated than car travel. The reasons for outrage are complex, emotional and buried deep in our psyches. Those small town incidents make news, not just because they are rare, but because it is outrageous that children are shot dead.
If you commit gun crimes in one state, you should not be able to go to another state, buy another gun and commit the same crime.
Criminals don't go to gun stores, and the background check system uses the FBI data base, and is usually done by the FBI.
Correct, that is a national framework. But I think there is loophole for gun shows. Is that correct?
Also, gun laws vary greatly from state to state, much more so than for cars. Some sort of national framework is necessary, even if it is limited to a background check to make sure you didn't commit a gun crime in another state.
Actually, there is a national framework. There are several federal laws concerning guns, there are none about driving. Also, criminals buy their guns on the black market.
I was talking about the justification for the framework. You asked why you should be able to buy a car without a national framework, but not a gun. I am not actually in favor of federal gun regulation in general. But I do think national background check makes sense.
There is a risk with having a gun in your home that is much greater (such as it is) than keeping a car in your garage.
Statistically, it is about the same.
Please provide your data
Since gun laws are impossible to enforce like drug laws..........
No law is impossible to enforce. Just some are harder than others.
How do you get grey highlighting in your posts?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Unreal, Canadian being fully prosecuted, for using a home invader's gun against him... [View all]
virginia mountainman
Aug 2017
OP
Me? out on the street? I wont.. Unless you're pointing a gun at me as you run...
virginia mountainman
Aug 2017
#5
Dunno if you noticed, but this Monroe guy isn't even named AS THE HOMEOWNER ...
mr_lebowski
Aug 2017
#14
Not only does it not say Monroe is the homeowner ... it doesn't even say he's not one of the 3
mr_lebowski
Aug 2017
#15
Judging by the discussion on this, the NRA will have a field day using this as "proof" of what will
Nitram
Aug 2017
#16
"the most tightly regulated consumer product in the US." That is patently false.
Nitram
Aug 2017
#22
No, the National Guards were what became of the militias, which were originally conceived to protect
Nitram
Aug 2017
#63
No, you did not say that. You said, "The National Guard and Reserves are simply reserve forces..."
Nitram
Aug 2017
#67
It does not say THE PEOPLE have a right. It says, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary
Nitram
Aug 2017
#69
Like the guy who has 5 cars that he never drives off his property so he doesn't have to
Nitram
Aug 2017
#72
It isn't a restriction, it is a right. Every property-owning white man (as the Constitution
Nitram
Aug 2017
#62
If you have to use that silly argument that you don't have to pay insurance except on vehicles
Nitram
Aug 2017
#57
It is in fact assumed you'll drive it public, so laws are all about driving
marylandblue
Aug 2017
#31
You asserted that it is assumed that most all car buyers will drive in public.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Aug 2017
#33
Maybe you could cut to the chase here and list what you want as law
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Aug 2017
#48
You raised a lot of issues at once: Some questions and responses about that
marylandblue
Aug 2017
#38