Are the president's gun control proposals "common sense"?

Common sense would let him know it will not pass the house.

NO, obama's proposals are COMMUNIST sense.

Not even close.

He's a moron.

Why should any gun owner give up their gun because someone else kills someone with their gun? Then in that case, everyone needs to give up their cars because drunk drivers kill more people than guns do.

If someone wants a gun bad enough they will find a way to get one and use it how ever they want, regardless of the law. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

there are about 20,000 rules , laws , regulations on the books already

just which NEW law that obomma wants is going to be the one that the criminal is going to obey ?

oh, those silly rabbits ,,,,,

how about enforce the existing laws ? how about getting violent criminals off the street ?

now how bout that for common sense ?

It's comon sense less gun mean less gun deaths. More guns more gun death.

Thats tripe.. America is #1 in private gun ownership (by a large margin) but doesn't even rank in the top 25 in gun homicide rates. But please feel free to go with your emotonal "common" sense as is your right instead of looking up the facts. Which by the way blows away all gun ban supporters arguements. Just look up the unified crime stats(FBI), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime annual crime survey, just to name a couple.

Lol.

This guy's an idiot.

Why would he listen to reason or fact?

He doesn't get it. In the last 20 years, gun ownership has skyrocketed. More than 100,000,000 more guns are out on the streets of America. In that time, murder has dropped by more than 50%, and other violent crime has dropped by almost as much.

Less guns does NOT mean less gun deaths. More guns does NOT mean more deaths (in fact, the exact opposite has happened).

They refuse to listen to facts or reason!

Common sense would be fixing a security problem when there is no gun problem.

Then why is it that as more states adopt concealed carry laws , putting more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens the FBI has reported a continuous decline in violent crime.
FBI statistics show that even with the crappy economy violent crime and murder rates are half what they were during the Clinton era.

Yes, absolutely . . . although not "common" sense for the American gun-o-philes.

Common sense would dictate that you fix a security problem where there is no gun problem.

Common sense says there's a gun problem.

Common sense says that there's a gun violence problem.

Common sense says that if bad people have guns, and because you'll never get all of the guns out of bad people's hands, you should have a gun yourself.

Common sense says that if your kids have access to your guns, they can shoot themselves, so you probably shouldn't allow them access.

Common sense says that when kids get killed in schools, the right thing to do is fix the security problem, not remove rights from law-abiding citizens.

Common sense says that our money is safe, because it's protected by armed guards.

Common sense says that when our children are NOT SAFE, it's probably because they're only protected by words on paper (laws), words on signs (gun-free zones), and good intentions expressed by idiots like you.

This man has no idea what common sense even is!!!

Common sense says numbers mean things.

No common sense is, that is our 2nd amendment, don't screw with it!
People kill people, not guns....In our schools, hospitals, police, jails, prisons, etc....should have better laws regarding the mentally ill!!! Normal people don't throw fits, kill animals, etc.....That is the best place to start, that is common sense!

Ignoring numbers while you rant talking points is NOT common sense.

Yeah and posting half azz graphs are, lmao!
If you want facts...here ya go;
The actual claim is something like this

The top five causes of death in the United States, in order, are tobacco, alcohol, medical malpractice, traffic and firearms. According to JAMA, doctors kill more people than auto accidents and guns.

Another website looks at the above claim and finds that they are comparing oranges to apples and with out any solid data. But then they do their own math and finds it could be true?

There are 700,000 physicians in the United States.
There are 120,000 accidental deaths in the United States caused by physicians every year, and the accidental death percentage per physician is 17.1%.
There are 80 million gun owners in the United States.
There are 1,500 accidental deaths from guns every year, regardless of age group, and the accidental death percentage per gun owner is 0.001875%.

This means, the letter points out, that doctors are 9,000 times more deadly than gun owners.

look it up!

By your logic, states with the lowest gun ownership rates should have the lowest crime rates. They don't. Gun crime and gun ownership are NOT related. Good people with guns stop crime. Bad people with guns commit crime.

Gun ownership has increased by more than 100,000,000 guns in the last 20 years. Murder has dropped by more than 50%. Other violent crime has dropped by more than 40%.

You're wrong. Stop picking and choosing your statistics.

"Gun crime and gun ownership are NOT related."

Gun DEATH and gun ownership ARE related.
Gun MASSACRES and gun POWER are related.

Solve the problems AND do not infringe on responsible gun ownership.
Why is that goal a problem?

IF RPGs are restricted without infringing on "the right to bear arms", then high powered semi-automatic rifles with high capacity magazines can be restricted without infringing on "the right to bear arms".

WRONG!

More than 100,000,000 guns have been purchased in the last 20 years! Murder has gone down more than 50%! Violent crime has gone down more than 40%!

The problem is NOT guns!

The problem is bad people with guns!

The solution is not just guns - it's good people with guns!

The only way to stop a bad person from shooting someone is to shoot him first. That means you need good people with guns.

Sorry to say - if RPGs are "necessary to the security of a free state" when in the people's hands, then they are constitutionally protected.

Maybe you should argue for changing or removing the 2nd amendment, instead of making unconstitutional laws. That'd work out better for you.

Who the hell does he think he is. If he wants to be in the public relations business or work as a snake oil salesman, let him resign and pursue his chosen vocation. He obviously hasn't read the job description of President. It doesn't include gallivanting around the country making speeches and selling smoke and mirrors.

And this question should put me into level 15.

I keep hearing that AR-15 's and other military styled rifles are weapons of war and have no business in the hands of private citizens. If these Semi-Auto rifles were truly the weapons of war then our soldiers in the USA would have them. I mean since the USA spends more on the military than any other nation on earth our military should be equipped with these fearsome "assault" weapons. The fact is, is that these semi-auto firearms are not in the military armories, not even in the National Guard armories. Why do you think that is? Perhaps its because these rifles are not weapons of war but in fact are sporting rifles that have no place on the modern battlefield. All of these semi-auto rifles lack the one feature that would make them weapons of war. That feature is the ability to be fired fully automatic or on a three round burst. Ask any soldier if they would like to go to war with a semi-automatic sporting rifle or a selective fire carbine.

That's right. Here's my weapon of choice (4th Inf. Div., Vietnam 1967-69). "Safe Semi Auto" (always on Auto). Notice it has forbidden grenade launcher. It came in handy for "hunting" deer. LOL And they say we don't need them for hunting.



Here's where we hunted...Central Highlands, Pleiku, South Vietnam.

Thank you for your service.

You're welcome and thanks. Also, thanks for your understanding about weapons.

In reference to "Common Sense", Thomas Paine will be spinning in his grave. Obummer is an idiot. His is "Uncommon Nonsense."

It is a start, and with much more efforts of background, guns should not be sold as easy as cakes to all. Once that universal law be reviewed, they should tighten and break any common ground of why people get themselves guns and am pretty sure things will move on to the best

It's "the authorities" that won't allow background checks, not the NRA. Try it - go down to your local police station, tell them your neighbor wants to buy a shotgun from you but you want to do a backgrouind check on them first and ask how much it costs. They'll refuse. Period.

and now, gun violence is growing out of control

Gun violence cannot be controlled by controlling guns, unless you actually succeed in removing all of them.

A ban on guns in this country is just words on paper. It would NEVER succeed in taking all guns.

Yes, i have been forwarded the universal law on how to get guns, it is so easy that i myself i could go, pay the registration fees, then own as much gun as i want then do some some underground trafficking, this is so sad, societies is as immoral as sun the sun shining high.... saddest thing in history

People are expected to follow laws. If the laws don't prevent you from doing illegal things, that's why law enforcement (cops) are around.

The cops NEVER do background checks on people for guns. NEVER do the cops handle that.

People already do background checks every time they buy from a dealer. The only reason the government can't go door to door right now to collect guns, is because some private sales don't require registration (which results every time you do a background check).