What are "Reasonable Restrictions"?

[MountainBear]

Good luck. The reason is either systemic failure of our civilization, entropy, aging, can't be stopped, or it is orchestrated decline by a group of powerful people. Theoretically we could halt the first if we all exerted enough energy, but I give us 500:1 odds.

I'd rather try at 500:1 odds than start shooting. I will protect my family and my kids, I will protect them with all I have. But I have no desire to start a bubbleguming revolution. Sorry.

 

[Goosebrown]

26th Amendment established 18 as the age to vote, if they can vote they're an adult.

No. If they can vote they can vote that does not make them an adult. States can and do limit things by age. Tobacco and alcohol come to mind. If a state wants to bar gun ownership at 18 then that is what they are going to do and it will be totally constitutional.

You're welcome to opinions but not your own facts.

 

[Goosebrown]

That is a great argument. Except the court has stated that restrictions are valid and legal.

Some are. Not banning weapons in general. Time and place and age restrictions are totally constitutional.

 

[Boboclown]

No. If they can vote they can vote that does not make them an adult. States can and do limit things by age. Tobacco and alcohol come to mind. If a state wants to bar gun ownership at 18 then that is what they are going to do and it will be totally constitutional.

You're welcome to opinions but not your own facts.

Tobacco and alcohol have nothing to do with being an adult.

If you can vote die for your country, you can own a gun. Any age limit they want to do is arbitrary and will solve absolutely nothing.

 

[Cavedweller]

As they (and the rest of us) age, they loose the enthusiasm for the kids and the job they had when younger. .

This guy never lost his "enthusiasm" for the kids:
Broward School District Refused To Fire Security Guard Who Allegedly Sexually Harassed Students

(I know, he wasn't a teacher)

 

[druiseeker]

I don't see any reasonable "restrictions" on firearms or other arms. The only restriction I can see as reasonable is a limitation on the people who can carry firearms. My neighbor is an addict (alcohol & other drugs), mentally ill, and a criminal . He's been committed multiple times for both psychological and criminal reasons. He is no longer allowed in county offices for some of the things he's done. I see restrictions on someone like him carrying a firearm as reasonable. I believe that our founders would have also thought of it as reasonable.

 

[DuneHopper]

Tobacco and alcohol have nothing to do with being an adult.

If you can vote die for your country, you can own a gun. Any age limit they want to do is arbitrary and will solve absolutely nothing.

This !!

 

[druiseeker]

The military doesn't allow an 18 year old unsupervised access to lethal weapons even in combat situations. Young troops are highly trained and have proven abilities before being allowed to use them even with supervision. If a young person has endured and succeeded in basic training, whatever combat and ordinance schools they may earn the opportunity to carry a weapon but never without close supervision. It is not the same as a person without any accomplishments other than achieving a particular chronological age access to a lethal weapon.

I was a young E-2/E-3 traveling all over Iraq and Afghanistan unsupervised with an M4/M16 on all my deployments. We were armed ALL the time. Even in garrison at the DFAC, gym, or our personal sleeping quarters. We routinely had young Marines off on their own all the time. We had squads out on patrol led my young E-3/LCpl's when E-4/Corporals weren't available. Freedom to carry whenever/wherever was more a matter of personal maturity than age. If someone was properly trained (everyone was), and they weren't trusted to carry, they weren't allowed on our deployments. I'll admit that our command would only trust young Marines with that freedom off on their own if they had proved themselves on a case by case basis.

 

[CHLChris]

There has to be an underlying reason these shootings are happening. Find that reason, solve it.

What if the reason is spiritual? You know, a movement away from God as the definitive center of right and wrong? A growing level of rejection of man's provider of purpose and peace? Is there actually a way to solve such a thing?

 

[Geardo]

What if the reason is spiritual? You know, a movement away from God as the definitive center of right and wrong? A growing level of rejection of man's provider of purpose and peace? Is there actually a way to solve such a thing?

I am not religious, but I think this is a large part pf the issue. Christian values are the best way to set up a society.

 

[Sandaholic]

I am not religious, but I think this is a large part of the issue. Christian values are the best way to set up a society.

Our nation doesn't have spotlessly clean hands by any means. We have done our fair share of e'ffed up eyebrow raising stuff. Having said that, ain't nobody out there doing it better than us.......IMO. Although I do think we aren't necessarily heading the right direction anymore. And with that we swing back to the Christian values.

 

[Cavedweller]

I don't see any reasonable "restrictions" on firearms or other arms. The only restriction I can see as reasonable is a limitation on the people who can carry firearms. My neighbor is an addict (alcohol & other drugs), mentally ill, and a criminal . He's been committed multiple times for both psychological and criminal reasons. He is no longer allowed in county offices for some of the things he's done. I see restrictions on someone like him carrying a firearm as reasonable. I believe that our founders would have also thought of it as reasonable.

Our Founding Fathers would probably be totally perplexed that this would even come up for discussion. They probably would have hung your neighbor by now, shot him during the commission of one of his criminal acts, or locked him away in an asylum. But allow him to roam free while depriving him of his right to keep and bear arms? Never!

 

[Goosebrown]

Tobacco and alcohol have nothing to do with being an adult.

If you can vote die for your country, you can own a gun. Any age limit they want to do is arbitrary and will solve absolutely nothing.

I think you're wrong and the Supreme Court agrees with me so....

Age limits are legal and you aren't going to stop them by denying it.

 

[Boboclown]

I think you're wrong and the Supreme Court agrees with me so....

Age limits are legal and you aren't going to stop them by denying it.

Then get rid of the 26th Amendment. If you're not an adult you shouldn't be voting.

Get rid of other amendments then while at it.

 

[MountainBear]

Well, this is rapidly devolving. I've said my piece and have nothing further to contribute. Enjoy! I'm out...

 

[raftman]

I served 10 years in the army and air guard, I have seen some serious bad days.....HERE'S MY OPINION....there is no way on earth that any 18 year old should be allowed to go buy an AR15 and 30 round mags...NO WAY.......
.....Now i do think that an 18 year old should be able to buy a hunting rifle or shotgun right away....And after maybe a few years, like 3 or 4; said firearm owner could then apply for a purchase of a AR15 style rifle. IF they have a clean record for those previous years of ownership......sorry that's how i feel....you wanna fight me over it, ill meet you at the safeway parking lot in woodland at 3pm.......and that was 10 years of highly decorated service.

I'm curious, where do you draw the line then, and why? You say an 18-year-old shouldn't be able to own an AR-15... so at what age should you be able to? 21? Lots of people older than 21 have misused AR-15's, heck that Las Vegas shooter was 64. So maybe 65 then?

It's a bit like asking a socialist what do they mean by a "living wage" when they demand one. Most can't assign a concrete number. Some try, but when they find it doesn't work (e.g. Seattle's $15/hr failing to raise standards of living for anyone), they will just demand even more than they got before.

So it is with those wanting "reasonable restrictions" on arms. There isn't really ever enough. They pass a law, it doesn't work, so their answer is to pass yet more laws/restrictions.

Furthermore why do you feel such a law could ever be effective? You need to be 21 to buy alcohol which is why no under 21 ever gets drunk? And everyone 21+ who drinks does so safely and responsibly?

 

[Boboclown]

Furthermore why do you feel such a law could ever be effective? You need to be 21 to buy alcohol which is why no under 21 ever gets drunk? And everyone 21+ who drinks does so safely and responsibly?

The 21 age limit for alcohol alone should be proof that its arbitrary and won't solve anything as far as guns go.

The only thing that stopped me from drinking underage was I simply didn't want to. Teenagers can and do get drunk. They also smoke, despite having to be 18 to buy cigarettes.

 

[raftman]

The 21 age limit for alcohol alone should be proof that its arbitrary and won't solve anything as far as guns go.

The only thing that stopped me from drinking underage was I simply didn't want to. Teenagers can and do get drunk. They also smoke, despite having to be 18 to buy cigarettes.

Another example would be any illicit drug at all. They may be illegal for anyone of any age and yet are trivially easy to obtain anyways.

 

[Colts4me]

My first gun was a Winchester model 67, winchester 67 - Bing images


It was given to me as a birthday present when I turned nine years old. My friend Gary and I would take our guns out to the rock pit miles from home to hunt frogs etc. He was 10 and not once did we ever get stopped by cops or where we ever even questioned about our guns.

A few years back I was working a contract over in central Oregon and on the weekend the gents I worked with wanted to go shooting in the forest east of Lapine. I took the full auto Uzi so everyone could have some fun and sure enough the state cop showed up. He never even got out of the rig to check my papers even though I invited him to shoot it for free.

Point being that over decades of shooting and no one ever getting hurt I am like the majority of people who are safe with guns and don't need restrictions. Cops could care less about the good guys owning guns as we are not the problem. Disarming the good guys so the bad guys can't get guns is foolish, that's a fact proven many times. Unfortunately the fools of the world are reborn in every generation and have to learn the hard way time after time.

 

[Boss]

Greetings,

Any time you put in subjective flexible terms such as 'reasonable' or 'common sense,' it gives the opportunity to have 'a conversation,' which in certain cases, can be a good thing...as long as it's an actual conversation.

However, I can't recall, ever, any hard core gun ban...er, I mean 'common sense gun control' advocates come out and say, 'Listen, we know you tens of millions of decent, upstanding gun owners and your firearms are not the problem, we have no issue with you. And we know there's already thousand of laws on the books making all of these tragedies illegal [murder, etc]. We're just looking for the ways, and we welcome your input, to try to prevent these types of tragedies from occurring and/or keep gun out of the 'wrong' hands,' be it better enforcement and prosecution of laws on the books, improved mental health services, etc.

Instead we hear 'have a conversation,' and 'compromise' that appears in reality to be just 'how much can we take away from you now/this time.' They're treating firearms/gun ownership like a disease/cancer, with increasingly aggressive 'treatment' through legislation that looks expand and expand, eventually making decent, law abiding citizens criminals by making inanimate mechanical objects they've legally owned for years, decades, perhaps even generations, now illegal because a criminal, perhaps thousands of miles away misused those devices illegally.

Taken even further, we've got brainwashed screaming people down with chants like 'HEY HEY NRA HOW MANY KIDS DID YOU KILL TODAY!' How do you change the minds of people who are so ignorant and close-minded? AFAIK, none of these deranged active shooters have been members of the NRA, tho some who have stopped them were (ie. Mr. Willeford, Texas incident and likely countless others].

Personally, I think all such 'conversations' need to start with laying the groundwork of actually establishing the credentials of the people involved. If participants are essentially ignorant besides the typical biased thinking 'guns are evil,' that needs to be shown from the outset. Questions like 'Well, since we're talking about firearms: How many firearms do you own? When was the last time you went shooting? Have you EVER been to a shooting range or match? What type of actual interaction with law-abiding gun owners do you have on a regular basis? When was the last time you went to a gun show? How many firearm related periodicals do you read? Do you know anything about many shooting events are in the Olympics and/or about how many medals are give out?

​

S

o when clarified some basically have zero-hands on experience in terms of the subject at hand, it might help throttle back a bit on the 'high and mighty' attitudes some of them try to pass off as being credible in the conversation. But probably not...they're usually too righteous to admit it. And as we've seen, some reporters/individuals, who are all smiles when they've actually gone shooting then try to claim how much they actually 'hated' it afterward, because enjoying shooting doesn't fit their and/or their network's narrative. ​

Then you could go into all the things we already know...the cities with the toughest laws having the highest crime rates, all the laws currently on the books that were broken in any of these recent tragedies, etc. etc. etc.

While many of the upper elites in the country with their gated communities and armed security might be relatively safe, I think the majority of people who are looking to ban guns in this country haven't thought things through very well. What exactly do they think keeps home-invaders, robbers, rapists, murderers out of their neighborhoods and homes at night? Think about that for a minute folks...its called deterrence...you know, like what countries spend billions/trillions of dollars on with their militaries.
​

But in the end, I think gun owners are going to have to be more proactive. As I've said before, I'd like to see a national 'free range' day or two a year ...take your relative, neighbor, friend, coworker, whatever out shooting. Lots of fun and positive interaction.

My $.02 worth...

BOSS