It seems to me would could come to a compromise that everyone could live with.
Create a new Federal standard for a license to buy/own/carry guns. In exchange, close the gun show loophole, but otherwise leave current purchasing laws mostly intact.
To get the Federal license, you'd have to qualify with education, training, and a good background check--similar to standards for becoming a police officer. Once you're licensed, no waiting period, no limits. Like a driver's license, you'd have to periodically re-qualify.
With this in place, I think there'd be stronger arguments for unlicensed people to face tougher background checks and waiting periods, and limits on numbers of guns, types of guns, high-capacity clips, and ammo.
I used to be strongly anti-gun. I've come to believe there are plenty of people who can safely own and carry guns, but too many people who simply pose a danger to the rest of us. Separate these groups, and adjust laws for them respectively.
Would America be safer if handgun laws were tougher?
Mopeder
2012/08/08 23:02:22
|
|
|||||
|
30 votes
|
|
27% | |||
|
4 votes
|
|
4% | |||
|
9 votes
|
|
8% | |||
|
9 votes
|
|
8% | |||
|
50 votes
|
|
45% | |||
|
3 votes
|
|
3% | |||
|
3 votes
|
|
3% | |||
|
3 votes
|
|
3% | |||
Read More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_U...
Top Opinion
-
Steve 2012/08/08 23:14:03
1. Makes it more difficult for good reliable people to purchase one for their own protection and the families and personal belongings.
2. Will make it easier for criminals to invade, knowing that some will not have any protection, against their intentions.
But America would NOT be!
as a CCP holder ,, and for all you progressive gun control perps . it's not the gun , !
the purpose of th 2nd ammend is to protect the american people from a tyranical govt . get the story straight here AUTHOR !
I've had a CCP and carried for 30 yrs ,,,and have a fully auto AR15A1 ..(permitted )
so mopeder what ever ,,,or will you ever give these B/S polls a rest /
just saying !
Yet most of the Gun crowd is against anything..
The way I see it pass the ban because its meaningless and make afew people happy over nothing..
Only extremely tough guns laws would be effective and that I think would most definitely unconstitutional..
Consider the following case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Two guys were out on early parole. They invaded a home, raped and killed three women, tried to burn the house down, and were caught at the scene by police.
People like this don't give a hoot about gun control laws. How concerned should they be? Both murderers were already in jail for other crimes and the system let them go early.
Preventing crime by using gun control is about as effective as preventing drunk driving by taking away cars from sober people.
Now factor they have a population of nearly 7 million people so why is it their laws work? The government has very strict bylaws on how much ammo they can buy and do random home inspections to make sure they comply with it.
Now this does NOT take away their rights to have guns as so many on the right and the NRA want you to believe but rather balance the scales so that everyone who wants a firearm can be protected.
Imagine if the places where these massacres happened if at least one person carried a sidearm? There has to be some reasonable thoughts to this rather than the "my right to bear arms to defend the militia." or "take away all the guns and we will have better and safer places."