Can you tell me where I said I wanted to ban guns ? Can anyone read? I want to control them. Yes. Do your homework, "good gun owners" are a real tangible way to positively change the problem in which they contribute to. Sorry bucko. For example, I love when women in particular (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about gun control when it is them that would be more likely to die by that gun being in their home.
You do what other countries have done - make people register the guns. If they are found in possession of an unregistered firearm it is jail time here. You also make people responsible for gun safety - if someone uses a firearm registered to you to shoot another person you too are culpable
This is because the NRA has inculcated the idea so firmly in many Americans that gun control = "They are going to take away my guns and leave me defenceless" that you have little hope of getting past that one point Talk about a broken record
I agree but I want to go further than just register. I want people to use a computer system (website). Be required to update it when changes are made with owners. Gun shops will have to provide this services to users who do not have a computer or say access to the public library. Gun shops, gun shows, and all of these places where straw sales go on (big issue) will have to be tracked better with this system. This kind of mining would get at the crux of the problem.
Personally I would make the gun shop owners a little like the old general store post office - THAT would be where you go to register transfer of ownership of a gun. This would ensure the expertise necessary for reviewing modifications and safety of the firearm.
That's an idea, but I'm not into the idea of creating a market. Plus one would have the excuse that they didn't have a store or something to make the change.
One of your biggest issues is the perception that any form of gun control will cause hardship among the gun market in America - my suggestion actually increases the market by tapping into the second hand market - - - Updated - - - One of your biggest issues is the perception that any form of gun control will cause hardship among the gun market in America - my suggestion actually increases the market by tapping into the second hand market
Its not controlling guns, it controlling people. A gun cannot get up and shoot something on its own, someone has to pull the trigger. The real problem is the violence in our culture. In other countries where they did ban guns, the overall murder rate did not change, showing that with the absence of guns after confiscation, people were still getting murdered by other means, so how would controlling do any better when taking them away does nothing?
To get a proposal like that to fly, you'll need to justify it. Feel-good and fear tactics aren't enough, you'll need some kind of evidence of a good cost/benefit for the program. First of all, how much will it cost. Canada's simple long-gun registry only had to track 7.6 million guns (actually it only tracked about 4 million, the rest remained unregistered). The cost of that registry was estimated at $2.7 billion in 2012. We have 50 times as many guns, so you are looking at a cost of at least $100 billion for a registry (twice that if all guns are actually registered). So exactly how many crimes can you reduce through this system? An estimated 40,000 guns are used in all forms of crime every year. That is a very high estimate, based on the assumption that every single crime was done with a different gun. So you are looking at spending about $2.5 million per gun to try to lock down on those crime guns. That just isn't worth the cost.
What statistics are you talking about? Less than .4% of new guns or less than .01% of all guns ever find their way into criminal hands. More than 99% of gun owners keep their guns out of criminal hands. That is a really good rate of responsibility.
With liberals like yourself in charge, criminals can freely steal guns and use them in crimes with little fear of being punished. Notice how you refuse to deal with criminals, and only look at the guns and legal gun owners to oppress. You should be proud to be a liberal/communist supporter. Your allies have been directly responisble for liberalizing our criminal justice system, and allowing dangerous felons take over large areas of dozens of large cities. You can even thank your brothers at the ACLU who helped shut down mental hosiptals that would have kept psychopaths like Adam Lanza and Jared Loughner from killing so many people.
Yes, I would like to control people's behaviours and actions around guns. you are entirely correct. Again, can you all learn how to read, I'm not advocating taking away all of the guns. I also do not agree that less guns made things worse or whatever nonsense people say on here. - - - Updated - - - You are lying to me, and even worse, to yourself. Take a look at WHERE criminals and suicide victims get their guns, it is not rare that it comes directly from the consumer market via friends and family, straw sales, and gun shows.
I think the idea is to get the guns away from people so they don't commit felonies in the first place.
LOL See your problem is that you are not capable of thinking things through. Of course I am thinking about the ciminal, it's the largest motivating factor for controlling guns... Lets see, do you REALLY think that the mentally ill can be stopped ? I can tell that you really think things through. Ooo the gun nazi can call people names ..
You are accusing me of lying, so you need to prove it. How many of the 6,500,000 guns produced or brought into the US each year are used in crimes? How many of the 300,000,000 guns currently in the US are used in crimes? You made the original accusation that legal gun owners weren't good about keeping their guns out of criminal hands. What percentage of legal gun owners' guns actually fall into criminal hands?
Look it up yourself. I can't be in the business of holding the hands of everyone on these forums. I don't care at all about the percentage of owners TOTAL guns (a tactic to skew the facts) but the percentage of their guns used in a crimes etc.. You are not properly assessing the problem. Where are you getting your propaganda from ? Give me your website. I would love to see where that thought came from, I doubt it's original.
That is not the right question The real question is - would reducing the number of easily obtainable firearms lower the homicide/suicide rate?
Here is an ATF document describing how many guns are produced and kept in the US, or imported to the US. It is more recent than previous ones I've seen, and in 2009 there were just short of 9 million guns added to the US circulation. Here is an article that compiles it all together nicely for you, including the fact that there were an estimated 310 million firearms in the US in 2009. Here is another website that compiles a lot of the data together. From it, in 2009 (using the same year for balance) there were 32,163 gun deaths. Of those 11,493 were homicides. So now I've met you halfway. If every single gun death was done by a different gun (which is no where near true) and if you include suicide deaths as well as crime deaths, 32,163 of the 9,000,000 new guns or 310,000,000 total guns in the US population were used to kill people, making it .35% of new guns or .01% of all guns used to kill people in the US. So now it is your turn. 1. Describe what rate of responsible ownership you would consider responsible. 2. Show that lawful gun owners don't make that rate of responsible gun ownership. You accused gun owners of being irresponsible, it is time for you to back up your accusation.
You mean you want to force your preferences on the rest of society. Gun ownership hurts noone - it's gun use that harms. Stop that, because gun ownership is perfectly legitimate and non-coercive. In my experience (even when I was on the left), a lot of the left is more concerned with stopping gun ownership and doesn't spend enough time trying to stop illegitimate gun use. You can do this through the founding of organizations to educate the public on proper gun storage (the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of gun deaths are due to accidents due in part to poor storage). I am for complete constitutional carry - open or concealed without a permit. Gun ownership and trade without regulation (including without background checks of any sort) or taxation or information gathering. It's a voluntary transaction between two consenting adults that hurts nobody.
Do you know how to read? I stated that taking guns away does nothing for the murder rate, so how will controlling them do any better? I didn't claim you said anything about bans.
Your talking about "tapping into a second market" but second hand gun sales are already just as big as the new market. If I sell a gun to someone, he turns out to be unable to own a firearm and uses it, it comes back on me for selling it to him. There is no need to bring more rules into the situation, just enforce the ones that are already there.
Brazil has some of the most strict gun laws and require all firearms be registered, yet out of 17,000,000 firearms in brazil, 9,000,000 are not registered. They are still at the top of the list for firearms related deaths. The black market for firearms in Brazil is booming. Canada gave up the their registration program in 2012 because they couldn't keep up or was too expensive. How many illegal guns show up in Australia every year. So much for their ban on firearms.
