Do we even need any gun laws?

[CountryGent]

Agreed with @AndyinEverson. There are already way too many laws, firearms or otherwise, on the books. Many are worthless, unconstitutional, and in most cases, both.

Here's a wild idea: let adults be adults and run their lives the way they see fit, provided they aren't hurting anyone else. If someone is an idiot and/or criminal, then apply the full force of the law on their backside.

 

[GUNARCHER]

BGC are OK ---but not having to list the S/N and any info about the gun would be better

 

[SUPER X]

Do we even need any gun laws ?
I say no, not at all.
There should also not be near as many laws in many other areas either, as often the goal of the law written is to deter and then punish for those who violate them.
But all one has to do is look at the millions of three strikers out there to know laws really do not do allot in many cases, mostly because we give more rights to the criminals then the law abiding.

So to digress, someone name a gun law that prevents a crime?
There exist no anti-gun law on any books that prevents a crime.
There is however something on the books that can prevent a crime and thats being able to defend
ones self with a firearm.

So why a firearm, why not a bat or golf club or a knife as a means to prevent a crime?
Because in this country there exist only one personal tool that when needed equalizes ones ability to stop a crime. It also does not matter how big or small the perpetrator or victim of a crime is a firearm has the ability to equalize the situation.

These crimes below have the ability to be prevented when the victim has a firearm.

• Rape
• Robbery
• Home-invasion
• kidnapping
• Deadly assault
  
• Car jacking

There are thousands of would be victims that ended the ability to become a statistic simply by owning a firearm. And the more laws we pass restricting access, the more criminals will continue to create more victims as the ability to defend ones self becomes severely complicated.

I would bet that if any of this anti gun advocates were to become victims of 1 or more of the above 6 crimes they would change their stance.

 

[OldBroad44]

I'm for background checks. That's about it.

I'm against all the gun and knife laws we have, including the background checks.

The reasons I am against background checks. First, there is little evidence that they are effective in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. As long as there are guns available widely, guns are readily available to criminals by robbing houses or cars or buying stolen guns.

Second, background checks are a huge hassle, and the devil is in the details. Only a rule change is needed to make the fee $100,000, at which point only the rich could have guns. Or the fee could be changed to a trillion, and then nobody could buy a gun. When BCs started in Oregon it took about ten minutes. Now people, even those with CHLs, are often denied and held up for days or weeks.

Finally, there will always be powerful people as well as some in government who want to completely control and tyranize over a helpless citizenry. To these sorts, guns in the hands of citizens is the biggest barrier. These people will not be able to resist keeping records on all gun transfers with the object of confiscation. So I consider background checks as de facto gun registration, and that as a step to inevitable confiscation.

 

[Flymph]

I'm pretty happy with it being illegal for criminals and the criminally insane to have firearms, but that's about it.
I don't have an issue with BGC's either, just how the law was implemented.

And I support a gun for every citizen through taxation. We're already being taxed for fighter jets, and missiles, why not guns for the citizenry too?

I spend my tax returns on guns, does that count? LoL

 

[RVTECH]

How 'bout taking a long hard look at the laws that are already in place and see , just what is actually working...

I agree completely and on this note does anyone have saved a good, clear website that shows state crime stats by state? Reason is on another forum a member from CT was explaining its gun laws - one being a permit is required to even take a gun out of ones house! He stated in a follow up post 'Regarding firearms, it's working here.' - and I am waiting for clairification on this (as he did not explain what he meant by 'working here') BUT if by 'working here' he means less gun crime I can hardly imagine Connecticut having having less gun crime due to an extreme law such as this and would like to have some data to look at. Thanks!

 

[dwaineshort]

I agree completely and on this note does anyone have saved a good, clear website that shows state crime stats by state? Reason is on another forum a member from CT was explaining its gun laws - one being a permit is required to even take a gun out of ones house! He stated in a follow up post 'Regarding firearms, it's working here.' - and I am waiting for clairification on this (as he did not explain what he meant by 'working here') BUT if by 'working here' he means less gun crime I can hardly imagine Connecticut having having less gun crime due to an extreme law such as this and would like to have some data to look at. Thanks!

Reported violent crime rate in the U.S. by state 2016 | Statistic

 

[dwaineshort]

The problem with comparing one state to another is you have to take in consideration the population and the gang activity. According to the FBI about 80% of violent crimes have a link to the drug war.

 

[Jeedia]

I agree there shouldn't be gun laws. However I think there should be laws regarding their use or rather their abuse. Ex. Leaving access to a child. Or negligent discharge.

 

[308]

I'm for background checks. That's about it.

As long as they only ask for the person's ID and/or SS# and that is it
Collecting the make, model and serial number of the gun when doing the background check is nefarious data collection

 

[Kruel J]

As long as they only ask for the person's ID and/or SS# and that is it
Collecting the make, model and serial number of the gun when doing the background check is nefarious data collection

I agree. No serial numbers, just the basics to confirm the purchaser isn't a felon.

 

[KKG]

I believe we need a gun law as punishment for when a person uses a firearm during a crime. Will it stop a crime? We don't really know what might happen if that person does or doesn't spend additional time in prison. Making the use of a firearm during crime a Capital Offense would at least stop that person from committing another crime. Ted Bundy will never rape and murder another woman and that's a fact!!!

 

[NW Backpacker]

Reported violent crime rate in the U.S. by state 2016 | Statistic

Per that chart, Idaho has essentially the same violent crime rate as Connecticut and Vermont is lower than Connecticut. Idaho and Vermont are fairly free with respect to guns. Connecticut is a totalitarian police state by comparison. Marginally free Washington state has lower crime rate than severely restrictive Hawaii. The chart indicates that there is no correlation between gun laws and violent crime rates.

Hey! Did y'all hear that loud noise last night just after 6pm? Holy Cow! It was deafening here in Beaverton. I went outside and figured out it was the heads of anti's exploding in droves after Trump announced the Supreme Court nominee!
Brett Kavanaugh: 'Semiautomatic Rifles Are Constitutionally Protected' | Breitbart

 

[Flymph]

As long as they only ask for the person's ID and/or SS# and that is it
Collecting the make, model and serial number of the gun when doing the background check is nefarious data collection

I'm cool with fingerprinting as well, helps verify identity past paper work which can be forged and I find the act sort of fun.

 

[RVTECH]

Dwaine - thanks for the link but I am not going even use it to respond to the answer to my question of this CT resident:

could you please clarify what you mean by 'it's working here' ?

Simply, CT has strict background checks and educational requirements for gun ownership, approved by a majority of its citizens. Gun ownership is regulated by requiring a "permit to purchase". Subsequent statistics indicate that, as a result, the state has very low "gun crime exports" to other states and lower in-state deaths involving firearms (per capita).

This does not even qualify for a response when in this case the 'question' is in the
answer' IE - so if the CRIMINALS do NOT have permits they are abiding by the rules and leaving their guns at home? Yea uh huh.

 

[Ownerus]

I'm in the group that says every "gun-control" law is unconstitutional. But, realistically, we have them and they aren't going away any time soon. So, in the vein of "compromise" with the other side I do have a suggestion.

Let's make eligibility to buy or own a gun to be a qualification to vote. If you can't own a gun, you can't vote. Seems reasonable to me. You need to be a citizen with no criminal record to buy a gun in most places (plus a lot of other crap in non-free states). That should also be a requirement to vote. Liberals are frequently arguing for felons, non-citizens (illegal aliens) and children (some have wanted to reduce the voting age to 16 or lower) to be able to vote. Let them own guns too.

You don't have to own a gun. You just have to eligible. It would improve the quality of voters and simultaneously put the damper on the left's enthusiasm for making it harder for decent folks to own a gun.

I'm all about "compromise"

 

[CountryGent]

The chart indicates that there is no correlation between gun laws and violent crime rates.

Indeed. And if you look to our neighbors south of the border, most of which have stunningly draconian gun laws, and you see El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela, and Mexico are ranked first, second, third, and nineteen, respectively, in homicide rate. Those societies all have firearms regulations well beyond anything here, including one with a complete ban on civilian ownership (Venezuela), yet they have murders galore. Clearly gun control isn't the deciding factor and other social ills are.

 

[Ownerus]

Yes, but that's HOMICIDE rates. They're only worried about "gun violence". All that "other" violence doesn't count doncha know.

 

[dwaineshort]

Dwaine - thanks for the link but I am not going even use it to respond to the answer to my question of this CT resident:


This does not even qualify for a response when in this case the 'question' is in the
answer' IE - so if the CRIMINALS do NOT have permits they are abiding by the rules and leaving their guns at home? Yea uh huh.

I think what is shows if you take your time to look at what types of crimes, and by who are committing them in the states with higher crimes rates. No matter what their gun laws are if there is a high volume of gang/drug war activity they deal with more violent crime. Take Texas, and California for an example. Both have pretty vast different gun laws, but have almost the same amount of violent crimes.

 

[alv7722]

The libs are too stupid to remember the consequences of Prohibition. More gun violence than any other time in US history, outside of war. I could see that happening around guns with passage of things like IP43!