[Ty]

Been thinking about that term and wanted to know what others thought about a few of the issues. Tell us why you picked what you did. Poll is open so you can change your answers. There are a few others I can think fo but the poll only goes to 20.

 

[m&p40]

For my .02 worth, I dont believe felons should be allowed guns. It may be my narrow mind that says this, but I think when you commit a felony, you foreit the right to carry and own a gun.

I also dont believe any person from another country, legal or otherwise, should be allowed to carry a gun.

We should ALL have training with guns, regardless of the fact if you carry or not.

I also think permits are a good idea. It allows for background checks as well as an opportunity for us to work on our temper.(When I first sent in my paperwork, I had the biggest temper and shortest fuse when I drove. )

Other than that, REASONALBLE gun control to me is hitting paper from 10 yrds. GOOD gun control is hitting the target on said paper

 

[MarshallDodge]

I will say this first: Gun laws only apply to honest citizens. If the bad guy wants to do something bad with a gun then no law is going to stop him.

Felons and the mentally ill should not have guns. They lost that right when they committed the crime although I might feel better about non-violent felons being allowed if they had a 10 year period where they did not commit a crime and then took a class and were tested on whether or not they were fit to own a gun.

I have mixed feelings about concealed permits and don't think they should be mandatory. I do think the background check is a good thing and so is the training on the laws. I felt that getting my Utah permit was pretty painless and the class helped me understand the law much better.

Gun registration is ridiculous.

If you are going to drink alchohol then put the gun away.

Store the gun how you think is best. I have a safe but I am not going to tell others that they must.

Foreigners should go through a class in order to carry or own a gun just so they get a good knowledge of our laws.

 

[NPD]

I don't think people convicted of "white collar" felonies should lose their right to own a firearm. For example, my grandpa was convicted of a felony for involvement in a business that had some shady practices, even though he didn't necessarily do anything wrong his business partners did things in his name that got him in trouble. They set him up to take the blame, and he went to prison. He was only guilty of putting too much trust in his business partners. He is a WWII vet and I think he is the last person that should be restricted from firearm ownership.

 

[divegeek]

I also dont believe any person from another country, legal or otherwise, should be allowed to carry a gun.

I'm curious as to why you think this. My opinion is that the right of self-defense is unalienable (barring some specific reason that makes the person a danger -- e.g. felony or mental illness) and that every person should have that right. The fact that other countries take away that right has no bearing on the fact that ours shouldn't.

I think that position is consistent with the way we apply other elements of the law and constitution to non-citizens, as well. Everyone in our country, regardless of national origin or legal status, is entitled to due process and the rest of the constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

 

[m&p40]

swillden,

Your post got me to thinking.... Maybe it does matter their legal status. Maybe I would allow people in our country legally to have guns, however how does an illegal alien get the same rights I do? This is such a topic not appropriate for this thread, but I do concede people with LEGAL status in this country should be allowed to have guns.

 

[xmirage2kx]

There are some felonies that should cause you to lose your gun rights, but others that shouldn't, same with mental illness. I think you should be a citizen before being allowed a gun (or be required to take a class to assure knowledge and conformance with laws). Other than that (and a handful of other minor things) I think guns should be allowed by anyone (18+), in any condition, anywhere.

I feel anywhere (including Wal-Mart, etc, etc) that takes measures to assure our safety (metal detectors, armed guards, secure gates/doors, etc... Like airport, courts, jails, etc currently have) and can restrict guns (but it must be REAL protection, not the fake pat downs like they do at the E-center), but anywhere else should be required to accept guns. They should also be required to assume ALL responsibility for your safety while in there "secure" locations (including all financial responsibility for lawyers and a $10 million insurance for each person while on site) and provide lockboxes for your gear. If they do all that then they can ban guns.

I think employers can ban guns unless you take a class (private or government, I don’t care) to assure proper gun handling/knowledge, but if you pass the class then you can carry there too (just like operating a fork lift, etc).

Bad Guys don’t obey the law, so any laws in place need to be to help the good guys, not restrict the good guys.

 

[divegeek]

Maybe I would allow people in our country legally to have guns, however how does an illegal alien get the same rights I do?

To my way of thinking, an illegal alien gets them from the same place you do: God (or nature, if you prefer). I like that the Constitution protects our rights (somewhat), and I think it should protect them for everyone on American soil. I have no problem with disarming illegals before giving them their due process and deporting them.

I understand your point, though. I just see it a little differently.

 

[divegeek]

I feel anywhere (including Wal-Mart, etc, etc) that takes measures to assure our safety (metal detectors, armed guards, secure gates/doors, etc... Like airport, courts, jails, etc currently have) and can restrict guns (but it must be REAL protection, not the fake pat downs like they do at the E-center), but anywhere else should be required to accept guns. They should also be required to assume ALL responsibility for your safety while in there "secure" locations (including all financial responsibility for lawyers and a $10 million insurance for each person while on site) and provide lockboxes for your gear. If they do all that then they can ban guns.

+1

I don't think we need to make them comply with a bunch of specific requirements to ban guns, though. I think we just need to make it clear (legislatively) that any facility that disarms people is fully responsible for their safety, and liable for 100% of the damages if they are injured or killed in a situation that could potentially have been prevented by an armed citizen.

The lawyers and insurance companies will take care of the rest, when it's discovered that it's way too expensive to either secure the facility or to buy insurance against the potentially huge liability.

 

[eddified]

Maybe I would allow people in our country legally to have guns, however how does an illegal alien get the same rights I do?

To my way of thinking, an illegal alien gets them from the same place you do: God (or nature, if you prefer). I like that the Constitution protects our rights (somewhat), and I think it should protect them for everyone on American soil. I have no problem with disarming illegals before giving them their due process and deporting them.

I understand your point, though. I just see it a little differently.

I certainly see your point, swillden, but aliens grew up (or might have grown up) with entirely different belief systems than ours. What if the alien grew up in a society where it was perfectly OK to shoot someone over petty theft? I know you stated on a different thread that you don't believe it is right to shoot over theft.. but what if we have a bunch of armed aliens in our country assuming it is OK? I know this is a bad example because I can't think of any such societies, but.... you never know how strange of beliefs are out there. I'm ok with aliens carrying guns as long as they have been instructed in the law, etc (ie, take a class).

I agree with other posters above that said EVERYONE should take a class -- i agree that everyone probably SHOULD take a class, but I don't think I'd want a law saying they should (unless they're an alien -- the logic is that if you grew up here, you have a fairly good grasp on the idea that you can't just go shooting people because they look at you funny, but who knows what kinds of weird ideas are out there in other societies.)

As for the poll, I checked both "felon can possess guns" and "felon can't possess guns" because I agree that certain felonies like 'white-collar' crimes shouldn't restrict a person's right to self-defense. However, I'm ok with taking guns away from violent felons because you just shouldn't trust those types of people with guns.

 

[eddified]

I feel anywhere (including Wal-Mart, etc, etc) that takes measures to assure our safety (metal detectors, armed guards, secure gates/doors, etc... Like airport, courts, jails, etc currently have) and can restrict guns (but it must be REAL protection, not the fake pat downs like they do at the E-center), but anywhere else should be required to accept guns. They should also be required to assume ALL responsibility for your safety while in there "secure" locations (including all financial responsibility for lawyers and a $10 million insurance for each person while on site) and provide lockboxes for your gear. If they do all that then they can ban guns.

+1

I don't think we need to make them comply with a bunch of specific requirements to ban guns, though. I think we just need to make it clear (legislatively) that any facility that disarms people is fully responsible for their safety, and liable for 100% of the damages if they are injured or killed in a situation that could potentially have been prevented by an armed citizen.

The lawyers and insurance companies will take care of the rest, when it's discovered that it's way too expensive to either secure the facility or to buy insurance against the potentially huge liability.

That's quite an idea --- I like it. Make them face up to the responsibility... face up to the consequences of banning guns.

 

[Tarzan1888]

Is;

1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded.

2. Never point any gun at anything you don't want to destroy.

3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you have identified your target.

4. Know your target and what is behind it.

5. Hit what you aim at.

Merely this and nothing more.

QED

Tarzan

 

[usSiR]

I didn’t pick one for felon one because some of them should not have one but some of them should be ok with having one, violent felons no...
Mentally ill should not have any
Registration is dumb and its really dumb at this point, people will steal your guns and its registered to you and there are way too many out there to try and register them now.
There should be a license to carry... People will learn something from the class weather its safety or laws and might deter people that should not carry ie. criminal people should not carry.
Training.. Yes, there are people out there that think they are something else because they have a gun and really don’t know how to handle it safely
18yo CCW yes
Alcohol like DUI maybe less, but if the person is really responsible they won’t drink and drive or carry at all.
Its your gun, store it like you want for your defense
Foreigners on vistas... I think it should depend on where there from, there are just some people from certain countries that I personally think should not have a gun here in our country, its just one of those things that some of the people from their country ruined for them.

But all in all, criminals will do what ever they want laws don’t matter to them

 

[bane]

I think violent felons should be barred firearms -- probably for life. I think non-violent felons should not be barred firearms especially after they have served the fullness of their sentence. Our country is based on a fair sentencing/punishment that fits the crime -- I don't see how removing a person's right to defend themselves is requisite with, say, white-collar crimes.

I think most mental illness should bar firearm ownership -- but I am cautious in this as well b/c I am not convinced that Doctor's can fairly assess their patients' status -- I think a large number declare the person incapable of possessing a firearm merely b/c of expediency and "c.y.a."

Registration is a crime -- I used to not think it was such a big deal but I have come to see that when gov't goes awry this can be a very powerful tool for evil.

I don't agree with mandatory licensing for CC but only b/c OC is not sufficiently protected. If stronger civil rights for OC'ers were put into place, and ridiculous laws that unjustly regulate their normal daily movements were removed, so that an OC'er could go most anywhere without need to be concerned with violating a law or being kicked out of a business, then I would fully support mandatory CC licensing b/c I do agree the background checks are good for keeping the law-abiding CC'er better separated from the gang-banger. I just feel the current situation makes CC'ing almost mandatory -- and thus required licensing is heavy-handed.

Any individual which can be shipped off to die for our country should be a full-fledged adult. Period. If we don't like 18 year-olds having rights to things like CCW and alcohol consumption then we should raise the standard of being an adult in all other respects too. Don't get me wrong, I like "staged" development into adult-hood but we have the system backwards... you shouldn't ask a man to die for you before you allow him to defend himself, nor before you allow him to learn to practice self-control. Asking him to die for you is asking him to commit to the greatest loss he can commit to -- he should have at least been allowed a chance to live his life first.

I don't think CCW in the presence of alcohol should have anything to do with anything. I'm not really a drinker so I can (and frequently do) go out with friends into establishments that serve alcohol without consuming -- I just stick to soda. Just like allowing people to drive to and from the bar (and only punishing if caught driving drunk), so too should be CCW. But then when found guilty, we should be throwing the book at them.

I almost voted FOR gun safes b/c I don't like the idea of negligent parents with firearms -- but I'm not sure that a law would really matter much to someone who is negligent in the first place, so I chose 'no' instead b/c I DO like the idea of responsible parents being able to stage firearms in out-of-reach/out-of-sight quick-access methods for proper home defense.

I don't see any reason we should deny a foreigner on U.S. land access to a firearm for their defense. A human is a human, their life is life, just as they have the right to free speech and freedom of religion, the right to be armed is an extension of their basic rights. Now, they commit a crime with that firearm and there should be no such thing as extradition -- we should lock them up for a very, very long time.

I totally disagree with the general sentiment here regarding allowing public businesses and work-places from banning the individual to being in possession of a firearm. The unlawful will carry in secret despite the rules. These rules only affect the lawful, the vast majority of which are not a problem. Just as my right to free speech and free religion (so long as I am expressing them in reasonable ways) cannot be restricted in public arenas, my ability to defend my right to free speech and free religion (which is what this question ultimately comes down to) also cannot be restricted in public arenas. It is a grave crime against justice and logic to argue that a man is free in his expression but then permit he be placed in situations where the more powerful can actually take away that freedom of expression. Merely taking on responsibility for what might happen to him (though I would like to see it as a correct step in the right direction) still falls short of justice.

If a business really doesn't want firearms, let them close their business to the general public and open it only to approved memberships.

 

[jaredbelch]

My thoughts go along the line of this...

If an adult person is free to roam the streets (not locked up in a jail or mental institution) then that person should be free to do the following...
-Vote
-Have the freedom of speech
-Be able to worship
-Keep and Bear arms
-Be able to drive
-etc
-etc

I would be comfortable with probationary limits if the crime warranted...
-No guns during probation time for gun crimes
-No voting during probation for voting crimes
-No speaking during probation for speaking crimes
-etc...
But these should be lifted after a prescribed amount of time or after preset conditions are met (restitution etc...)

Why should someone with a mental disability who functions normally...
-Be able to drive
-Be able to vote
-Be able to write a column in a newspaper
-Be able to go to church
-But not be able to have a gun?

In summary there shouldn't be a blanket ban on any group of person... Each situation should be evaluated individually, and judges should be able to make a decision. Also after the judge makes a decision the person has the right to appeal, ie. file a petition for redress of grievances.

 

[bane]

Jared, that is *BOLD* but I can't argue with the logic. I'm not sure if I fully agree, but the clear correlations you made between crime and punishment are convincing.

After all, if a man is too dangerous to have a firearm b/c he is considered "violent" what's to stop him from expressing his violence via a car, a hammer, a screwdriver, his fist and feet, some gas and a match, or a home-made explosive??? If we are that worried about his violence, perhaps he should not be in the streets in the first place. Such a bold statement will find *MANY* who oppose it but that's largely b/c most people can't accept the ultimate ends where clear logic terminates.

Last time I checked, Hitler was one of the most infamous (and worst) criminals in history -- few have killed more than he, but he didn't achieve the power to commit his crimes by the use of a firearm but rather by the power of his pen (and voice).

 

[xmirage2kx]

You know, the more I think about it the more I think that there is no such thing as reasonable gun control. :shocked:

A gun is a right PERIOD atriot: . Crimes should have laws, NOT OBJECTS.

Commit a crime with a gun… May god help you because our justice system shouldn't. Gun laws should read: Guns used in a manner in which injury/death is intended to occur or for the purpose of committing a crime is a felony (felony defined). And that is it.

(my wording may not be the best, but the point should be clear)

 

[Cinhil]

I posted my responses earlier today while at work. Here are my results;

Felon Gun Ownership - yes. When released from prison or probation ends their right to self defense should be granted them again.

Mentally Ill Allowed Ownership - yes. If they are in an institution no, but when released this right ought to be restored - provided, if required, that they take the medications prescribed them. If they go off of them they should lose that right until such time as they can prove that they are capable of obeying the law and taking their medication as prescribed.

Registration Illegal - Absolutely! Clear violation of the Constitution.

No License to Conceal Carry - No - Why should anyone have to ever worry about this? Everyone able to carry any weapon should be able to carry in what ever way they want, safely.

No Training for CCW - No. I believe we all should be trained in weapons and it should begin at home and extend into the schools. Training should already be a part of our lives as concerns weapons. That said, notice I also said no license to carry concealed should be law, this follows this thought.

18 Years old to ccw - yes. Considering the way laws are presently this should at least be allowed for law abiding citizens considered to be of legal age to join the military. It used to be 16 for Militias in most states of the Union so in a way this is a digression, but they ought to be able to carry.

CCW legal in places that serve alcohol - yes. But if they get into any altercation or get drunk they should be severely treated.

CCW like DUI can carry below .08% - yes. See above

No restrictions on gun storage - No. Enough said.

Foreigners on Visas allowed to conceal carry - yes. It is a God Given right to be able to defend oneself so I see no trouble with legally entered aliens carrying for their protection. As concerns other rights, other than basic human rights they are not entitled to the same rights as we are by virtue of their status as non-citizens. Some protections should be provided for them while legally residing here. If they are illegal, throw the book at them!

Bane had some great comments with wich I was in agreement with most of what he said. So +1!

 

[Jeff Johnson]

I agree with both Cinhil and xmirage2kx.

 

[Queen Kat]

The one that hits close to home for my family is Mental Illness. 4 years ago my brother and I got our CCP's together. He's recently been diagnosed Bi-polar and refuses to take his meds.

He has 2 assult charges that were commited against his now ex-wife, 1 domestic violence charge that was commited against me, and he's gotten away with strangling my mom twice and smacking my sister once in the last year. (Don't even get me started on why my mom and sister didn't call the police and charge him on any of these incidents!) He has 3 open warrants because he keeps failing to appear for court, his Drivers license is suspended, he still drives [without insurance], he's been to Jail twice, and he's addicted to meth.

His CCP was just BARELY revoked because I CALLED BCI and told them about his behaviors. As soon as they looked up his record the guy was like, "OH! we'll send him a letter right now explaining that he is now restricted and if he is caught with any weapons in his possession or ownership he can face up to 10 years in Federal Prison."

I remember being told in CC class that if you get in trouble with the law it is your responsibilty to make sure your permit is still in good standing at ALL TIMES. Obviously my brother is not being a responsible, law abiding citizen. Don't get me wrong, I love my brother VERY much but he is mentally and emotionally unstable! I worry because he is still carrying with a revoked permit. Out of everyone I know he is the LAST person I would want carrying a firearm!