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]discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,591 posts)51. Please see my embedded comments below
I prefer the term regulation. We regulate all sorts of products in all sorts of ways. Regulation is what keeps me from building a nuclear bomb in my backyard.
I'm fine identifying gun laws as "regulations". Calling them "controls" implies that prevention is possible which clearly is overcome often by those with sufficient motivation, patience and resources.
At the federal level, there should be a rigorous background check program including private sales. Private sales must go through a dealer. Federal law should require a state license system. The license system should require a course in gun safety and responsible gun ownership. The rest is left up to the states.
I believe in the NICS database which the FBI now operates. I like the idea of making this system available to individuals for private sales at a local police station or sheriff's office. I like the idea of a license system at the state level for those who want to carry. State standards for licenses that meet federal standards should be accepted nationwide by all states.
I think states should make a concerted effort to get guns out of the hands of criminals. The federal government should provide money to state and local law enforcement for this purpose.
People arrested and charged with crimes while in possession of a firearm (I would hope) have that firearm confiscated and not to be returned until and unless found not guilty. The feds should pony up dollars to help abate interstate crime, firearms trafficking and assisting underfunded local LE departments.
Is crime prevention really THAT difficult? We have a system of laws and enforcement aimed at prevention of crime. Do you really think everybody just obeys the laws by themselves and if there were no enforcement at all, crime would not increase?
No, bad things would become more widespread without laws. I think everyone's idea of good and evil is rather uniform but not everyone has the same idea of a safe speed for freeways and alleys. I think most people follow good advice about drinking and driving because they want to remain safe and not risk an accident. I think gun owners target shoot at a range because they know it's dangerous to start firing (without a proper backstop) in their backyards.
I think doing whatever is possible and reasonable to empower people is generally the best option.
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