Where do you draw the line? Suppose you're asked to support a gun control bill, and it includes all the laws you think are reasonable and sensible. But it goes farther than that. How far is too far? Which policies, if included, will cause you to say, 'I can't support this'?
303 under 13 year olds hold a Shot Gun certificate in the UK. You have to be over 13 to hold a firearm certificate. All the stats and types of guns can be found in - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/firearms#statistics ..that is for those that wish to check the various pdf's in the link.
The UK has few gun problems. The link covers how the types of guns are regulated/controlled etc.., which types are allowed and there are various stats and background knowledge included. It's legislation that's suited to UK culture. For it to work in the US, it would have to be implemented, say in 2020, for the unborn American. Then as people are born into that legislation, newer generations will have that level of gun culture as older generations die out. Let's just say, American's dummies (pacifiers) will fall out it the legislation was implemented overnight for all. The pain against "rights" would be unbearable
I wouldn't go as far as the gun policies of Japan where your family and friends are also checked out to see if you can own a gun. Also in Japan, I think, you can only buy the same amount of ammo to empty shells you hand over. I wouldn't be for that.
How can we give definite answers without definite examples? There are so many variables. Personally, I'm a lifelong hunter and gun owner - but I have no need of a gun that isn't a breach load, so large magazines and rapid fire are just ways to have accidents in my books - but I know that's not for everyone.
If a proposed gun control bill included a ban on breachloaders, would that cause you to refuse to support the bill?
So it seems you believe people should be able to own some sort of guns and ammo. Which sorts of guns and/or quantities of ammo, if banned by proposed legislation, would cause you to refuse to support it? I'm trying to get people to pick a precise, objective line here that they will not cross, because, quite frankly, I don't believe many even have one. Prove me wrong?
If next week, a weapons researcher developed a hand held laser that had a breach load power pack and could fire non-stop for 30 seconds, yes. There will always be new lines drawn. New tech.
No offense, Americans hold wrong views about British gun laws. This video explains, and it's interesting. It's quite self explanatory on why guns have to be a certain length (hard to conceal), how rapid they can fire and number of bullets they hold (less shots in a given time etc..) and so on.
One thing Americans keep going on about is protection, to protect you and your family. Can you do that with a gun greater than 30cm (12") long and hold a maximum of 3 shells/bullets?
Probably not. That said, I'd be satisfied with the same armament that policemen are allowed to use. After all, they usually have backup, I don't. If a large gun with a small magazine is sufficient for a policeman, it's sufficient for me. That said, I don't think there is a chance in hell that U.S. policemen will agree to that.
All semi-automatics (and all automatics) and all cartridge firearms (single shot, bolt-action, revolver, double-barrel, over-under, etc.) are breech loaders. The dichotomy is muzzle loader vs. breech loader, not breech loader vs. magazine fed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breechloader
We're not talking about the UK. I should be able to own the exact same gun that my neighborhood policemen uses.
Yes, and your neighborhood officer doesn't need to carry one, assuming America implements proper gun laws. But because the American gun situation is crazy, they have to.
I don't need guns to defend myself against other guns. If it comes down to that, it's too late. I need guns to defend myself from those not armed with a gun (80% of violent crimes involve no weapon at all). A gun is the best choice I have to defend myself without killing somebody. If I have to use a knife or baseball bat in defense, I have no choice but to attack. With a gun, I can hold off an attacker at a distance.
OK... would you refuse to support any bill that included a ban of 'all breachloading rifles and shotguns that utilize chemical combustion or explosive compounds to propel a projectile or projectiles at a potentially lethal velocity'?
14 hours 49 views 21 replies (granted, close to 1/3 are mine...) and only one gun control supporter has yet clearly indicated they would refuse to support a particular gun control policy (draw a line, as it were)... and that person is, iiuc, in the UK. Just for the record.
The cat's already way out of the bag with that. I don't care what any politician tries to spin, you are NOT getting guns out of the United States. No this isn't some "From my cold dead hands" type of statement but rather a statement of pure logic. We literally have more guns than citizens in the US, over half of which are unregistered untraceable guns. Even if we banned guns tomorrow you still have to deal with the fact that there are something like 400 million of them already here. Law Enforcement can only "find" less than half of those if they looked hard enough to trace them from the registry. The other half, over 200 million+ are floating around in both legal and illegal possession of citizens. The cops will ALWAYS be required to be armed here. We have that many guns here NOW and no magic politician promise will ever change that. There is no "proper gun law" to tackle that FACT. Even Joe Biden stumbled over his own words the other day during his "assault weapons ban" proposal interview. He stuttered (like he always does to be fair) when asked about HOW he planned to "come for the assault rifles that shouldn't be legal in the first place, period". He mentioned some gun buyback program like Australia did, but even he knows that's nonsense and won't work. These are all just feel good proposals for voters. There is nothing at all anybody can ever do about getting firearms out of the hands of US citizens. We have more guns than we have people here and law enforcement agencies literally have no idea where hundreds of millions of them even are. We have 300-400 million+ guns in the hands of US citizens, and technically a very small percentage of US citizens actually "own" any guns as far as records are concerned.....Think about that for a minute, and then now think about what sort of "proper gun law" could even begin to deal with that.