National POLL: Support For Gun Control Measures

[2ndtimer]

I also could not support any of the changes listed as they all are either in violation of right to privacy, 2nd amendment, or basic common sense. For instance, banning sale of firearms to anyone under the age of 21, yet still recruiting 18 year olds for military service to be issued and trained with firearms is the height of hypocrisy. Also, the lifetime ban for anyone convicted of a "hate crime". I don't believe in differentiating crimes based on victims race, sexual orientation, political persuasion or ethnicity. The very idea of different sentencing based on those matters imply that one class of victims is more important than another. IMO, violates the equal protection under the law principle. Murder is murder, assault and battery is assault and battery regardless of the victim's race, gender, age, etc. I would be very interested in seeing the crime statistics of the number of hate crimes prosecuted by perpetrators who aren't majority members (caucasians). I guess under CRT, only white people can commit hate crimes.

 

[OldTengu]

No

 

[HelloKitty187]

Seriously?

 

[Jay Walk]

50% for National red flag laws. Which is confiscation on demand.
Yikes.

The winds of change, they are a blowin.

 

[GrayGoose]

One must support one form of increased gun control to even participate in this poll, which makes this a completely invalid and nonsense poll.

 

[arrowshooter]

None for sure.

Most all of the choices could and would be abused/interpreted/changed beyond whats in black and white. Look what is happening to the FFL's as we speak, along with all the new "interpretations" the ATF is slinging. Just think about it.

The issue with "data bases" is that someone is responsible for filling in the blanks which is the problem with the current system. Omissions and disinformation (yeah I used it, but I hate it) would continue, making any new system abusive and ineffective. Heck, even just using your words has been labeled a hate crime. Just think about it.

My heart is broken for those poor kids, the teachers and their families. Nothing will ever bring them back, but something could have been done to save some or all of them. These "somethings" were glaring from the git go, but we will never really know anything other than "it was the gun".

Now my opinion of this poll: Information such as this is exactly what is used when it is said that "these new laws/rules are supported by gun owners". What chaps mine is that I am a gun owner on this forum and I never agreed to shart. Having a conversation in an "objective manner" is not possible since by not including None Of The Above as a choice means that 100% of those being polled agreed to some sort of new laws. This by the way could be considered racist in todays meaning of the word, and I would vote to have this thread deleted from all data banks.

 

[BSchmidt]

I assume he's trolling… or just has no social awareness of the people on here. It almost feels antagonistic to be honest.

 

[Koda]

I wonder if the people voting for universal background checks would also vote for registering their guns with the govt. ?

 

[Will_White]

I wonder if the people voting for universal background checks would also vote for registering their guns with the govt. ?

Personally no, my vote had caveats that would prevent it from being used as a de-facto registry.

 

[drstrangelove]

Liberalism is a mental illness… ergo democrats should not own guns… QED.

I find your poll choices repugnant.

 

[Koda]

Personally no, my vote had caveats that would prevent it from being used as a de-facto registry.

and thats the complicated part about background checks. There is no way to conduct them without creating a registry. How would we prove a background check took place?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

and thats the complicated part about background checks. There is no way to conduct them without creating a registry. How would we prove a background check took place?

Maybe have it so.....
All it checks is if
Andy54Hawken ( or whoever ) passes the all the questions on the current 4473....without asking for the make , model and serial number of the firearm to be purchased or transferred
As in one doesn't need to know what I buying ...only if I am legal to own firearms.....
Andy

Edit to add :
Please note that even with the above...I am not in favor of BGC for private sales / trades / transfers of firearms.

 

[Will_White]

and thats the complicated part about background checks. There is no way to conduct them without creating a registry. How would we prove a background check took place?

Keep a record of the checks not the guns. Buyer keeps the receipt with make model serial number and BGC # but only the Buyer's information is called in.

It could be used as a registry of gun owners but if people used it for other things, which is very likely that goes out the window too.

 

[trevi]

I vote on the hate crime option. Dealt with too much of that.

 

[Koda]

Keep a record of the checks not the guns. Buyer keeps the receipt with make model serial number and BGC # but only the Buyer's information is called in.

This only works for the good guys. The problem is if someone sells a gun without doing a background check, there is no way to tell the seller didn't conduct the check without the registry. Thered be no way to even trace the gun back to the last owner.

 

[Will_White]

This only works for the good guys. The problem is if someone sells a gun without doing a background check, there is no way to tell the seller didn't conduct the check without the registry.

Buyer keeps the reciept, there would have to be some way to prove you had a gun before the law went into effect (time stamped picture could work) but with that figured, if you can't prove that you had the gun before or that you passed a BGC to buy the gun then thats on you.

Thered be no way to even trace the gun back to the last owner.

That's a feature not a bug. An accessible and up to date stolen gun registry would solve tracing a gun back to its rightful owner.

 

[arrowshooter]

I vote on the hate crime option. Dealt with too much of that.

Understandably this is an issue for you, I get it. But, there is going to be a point when "hate speech" is going to become a hate crime and then what?

 

[The Heretic]

No to all of the above.

The only one that comes close would be the age limit, and even there I have serious problems with it. I bought my first guns when I was 19 and 20.

But teens can get guns now on the black market as easily as they get drugs, and upping the age limit would just cause more gun theft.

 

[Mikej]

I didn't read through all replies, so...

The only things that "MIGHT" make sense are:
Red flag laws, very carefully administered.
A national data base of people that are clearly unfit to have possession of firearms, very carefully administered.

Yep, that's it! But considering who ever made this list for the poll is so stupid that they believe there is such a thing as a "GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE"? Just no, NO, Hell NO, Not in any way, EVER, eff NO. And no way in hell! To any of it!

 

[Bobbygun]

I just viewed the results. While they looked pretty depressing, without having a "none of the above" type of option the people who don't support further regulation are not reflected in the percentages. The results are therefore horribly skewed. (I minored in applied mathematics and took several 400 level statistics classes in college.)