Is There such a thing as a "Reasonable Gun Law?"

[rob-c]

The problem with everyones thoughts on what legislation or laws would help is NONE will work ZERO, NADA ,ZILCH.    A criminal will not I repeat will not try and  buy  a gun, there are so  many ways to get any gun illegally. Just look at the poster child for gun control Chicago.. 

[Northcountryman]

19 minutes ago, rob-c said:

The problem with everyones thoughts on what legislation or laws would help is NONE will work ZERO, NADA ,ZILCH.    A criminal will not I repeat will not try and  buy  a gun, there are so  many ways to get any gun illegally. Just look at the poster child for gun control Chicago.. 

No arguments here, but  from the perspective of a law abiding red-neck country boy like me, I just cant imagine where the hell they would go to buy a gun illegally! I mean, if I was a scumbag, and wanted to get a gun for nefarious purposes , where would I go? If I couldnt purchase one illegally due to my past and/or psycholigical state, I would say the current gun laws would work very well in terms of preventing me from getting one.  I wouldnt know where to get one otherwise; so how do all these other people get them illegally? They cant all be stolen from legal registered gun owners right?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

On 3/26/2021 at 1:51 PM, Northcountryman said:

As for me, I'm a firm believer in 2nd A. rights but I'm more moderate in terms of what level of gun control measures I will tolerate.  Heres a summary that hopefully, pretty much elucidates my beliefs in regards to the 2nd A. and Gun control:

1. Right to purchase/own and utilize rifles/shotguns and any other weapons primarily intended for recreational use/pursuits related to hunting should be unfettered.
2. Right to purchase handguns permitted with successful completion of a basic background check and an approved handgun safety course; subsequent to this, applicant then should be eligible to receive their firearm after a reasonable waiting (i.e., cooling off) period .
3. Right to purchase a military/assault rifle (AR-15s, and other automatic weapons that can still reasonably be considered a hunting weapon)should be permitted after successful completion of a more thorough background check and also includes a psych eval ; additionally, a longer cooling off period should be required (length and duration IDK, but longer than 3 days , I would think!!).
4. Right to purchase anything else that can be classified as military and not included in the aforementioned points , such as bazookas, grenades, 50 cal machine guns, etc.(for want of a better term, serious military hardware) should not be allowed mostly (exemptions can apply, of course in certain situations). 

 

What do you think?

1. The "right" has nothing to do with any recreational use. That is one of the biggest misconceptions. 

2. Why would a handgun course be required and not a course for any firearms ownership?

3. What exactly in an "assault rifle" in your definition? You list the AR and other automatic weapons. That would lead me to surmise that you believe and AR is also automatic? 

[Northcountryman]

11 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

1. The "right" has nothing to do with any recreational use. That is one of the biggest misconceptions. 

2. Why would a handgun course be required and not a course for any firearms ownership?

3. What exactly in an "assault rifle" in your definition? You list the AR and other automatic weapons. That would lead me to surmise that you believe and AR is also automatic? 

All 3 of your points are valid ; let me reply:

1. Recreational use- Correct, the 2nd has NOTHING to do with recreation use which, in contemporary times, pretty much includes use for hunting and targetshooting -- perhaps theres another use that I'm not thinking of but I cant think of anything else that would contititute "recreational" use .  To the Founding Fathers, using firearms for hunting and shooting was a given --kind of like... "duh!" of course you can have guns to hunt!-- so they didnt even bother to introduce language into the 2nd to secure its protection.

2. You raise a good point; I have no problem w/ that .

3. I honmestly dont know what an AR is and need to educate myself in this area of the gun control debate. Are you saying that an AR is not automatic , then?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 minute ago, Northcountryman said:

All 3 of your points are valid ; let me reply:

1. Recreational use- Correct, the 2nd has NOTHING to do with recreation use which, in contemporary times, pretty much includes use for hunting and targetshooting -- perhaps theres another use that I'm not thinking of but I cant think of anything else that would contititute "recreational" use .  To the Founding Fathers, using firearms for hunting and shooting was a given --kind of like... "duh!" of course you can have guns to hunt!-- so they didnt even bother to introduce language into the 2nd to secure its protection.

2. You raise a good point; I have no problem w/ that .

3. I honmestly dont know what an AR is and need to educate myself in this area of the gun control debate. Are you saying that an AR is not automatic , then?

1. Personal protection form enemies overseas and domestic. Per their original intent the domestic includes a government that is no longer for the people and by the people

2. So are you good with requiring insurance policies by gun owners as well?   What other "right" do we require training and a course to participate in? 

3. That would probably be a great idea before you form an opinion on the subject. The AR is NOT automatic. Doesn't even stand to "assault rifle". The biggest problem I see with gun owners that don't have an issue with the "common sense gun control" that has been rolled out in the past and proposed in the future is they know about as much about the topic and the firearms as the ones writing the laws. Look at the "evil features" that make an firearm an assault weapon in the Safe Act. REALLY look at them and understand how stupid that listing is. When you understand what they are banning then really look at traditional old hunting weapons and tell me how much of a stretch it is for someone that owns  grandpa's Remington 740 in 30-06 to be worried about it being included in the ban. 

[Five Seasons]

I've said it 100 times. I don't have any issue with background checks for ALL gun purchases/transfers. I understand the concern surrounding giving an inch, but I assume we're having a philosophical discussion and in that realm, one should not concern themselves with future laws, but focus on the one at hand and its implications. Not what comes next. If we always focused on "what next" we'd never get out of bed in the morning. 

[Northcountryman]

47 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

3. That would probably be a great idea before you form an opinion on the subject. The AR is NOT automatic. Doesn't even stand to "assault rifle". The biggest problem I see with gun owners that don't have an issue with the "common sense gun control" that has been rolled out in the past and proposed in the future is they know about as much about the topic and the firearms as the ones writing the laws. Look at the "evil features" that make an firearm an assault weapon in the Safe Act. REALLY look at them and understand how stupid that listing is. When you understand what they are banning then really look at traditional old hunting weapons and tell me how much of a stretch it is for someone that owns  grandpa's Remington 740 in 30-06 to be worried about it being included in the ban. 

Wait: Are you saing that I cant have an opinion unless I'm an expert? Thats a little extreme dont you think? If thats the case, then almost NONE of us should have an opinion on anything pertaining to governent regs/laws because very few of us are experts--are you? 

 

I dont think I called for a ban on AR's, I'm just saying that I think its reasonable that theyre sale/ownership and distribution is regulated a bit more fastidiously than say, a rifle or a shotgun.  As for the minutiae pertaining to what contitutes an AR, that is up to the "Experts".  If-- by your example-- said experts decided that Grandpas 740 30-06 would be included in the designation as an "AR", then I would be against that, certainly. 

[Northcountryman]

1 hour ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

2. Why would a handgun course be required and not a course for any firearms ownership?

Forgot something: Based on this part of your reply, are you saying that youre against requiring a handgun safety course in order to purchase a handgun? 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

5 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

Wait: Are you saying that I cant have an opinion unless I'm an expert? Thats a little extreme dont you think?

 

5 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

 

No I am saying you should understand the basics. I don't mean this as a deep dig but based on your understanding of "assualt rifles" and what an AR actually is you don't. And since you don't and you want to discuss the point you should. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

6 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

Forgot something: Based on this part of your reply, are you saying that youre against requiring a handgun safety course in order to purchase a handgun? 

I am.

[Buckmaster7600]

Forgot something: Based on this part of your reply, are you saying that youre against requiring a handgun safety course in order to purchase a handgun? 

How can any gun owner not be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Northcountryman]

9 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Quote

 

No I am saying you should understand the basics. I don't mean this as a deep dig but based on your understanding of "assualt rifles" and what an AR actually is you don't. And since you don't and you want to discuss the point you shoul

Perhaps you’re right about  this , but’s it’s not like we’re passing legislation here ourselves , making any impactful decisions ; after all , it’s just a discussion forum , correct ? And the purpose  of a discussion forum— I think— is to share ideas , thoughts , and well , learn something new isn’t it ? And I’m learning !! I don’t think it needs to be taken That seriously consequently and think anyone who want to can join and offer an opinion . 

[Northcountryman]

14 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I am.

I respectfully disagree; can you explain why ? When if a single woman who’s girlfriend just experienced a home invasion and wanted to purchase a handgun for protection ; however , she knows absolutely NOTHING about firearms , hasn’t even held a gun in her life . Despite this , her record is clean and she has the cash so she is eligible to purchase one . You think that she should be able to without taking a safety course? 

[Buckmaster7600]

I respectfully disagree; can you explain why ? When if a single woman who’s girlfriend just experienced a home invasion and wanted to purchase a handgun for protection ; however , she knows absolutely NOTHING about firearms , hasn’t even held a gun in her life . Despite this , her record is clean and she has the cash so she is eligible to purchase one . You think that she should be able to without taking a safety course? 

Yes 100% it’s not the governments job to ensure she’s trained! It’s hers! There’s plenty of training available.

A white male is almost 20x’s more likely to be injured or injure someone with a chainsaw than a handgun in America. Is there a mandatory class to buy a chainsaw?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

10 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

I respectfully disagree; can you explain why ? When if a single woman who’s girlfriend just experienced a home invasion and wanted to purchase a handgun for protection ; however , she knows absolutely NOTHING about firearms , hasn’t even held a gun in her life . Despite this , her record is clean and she has the cash so she is eligible to purchase one . You think that she should be able to without taking a safety course? 

Yes.  Do we require an IQ test or any other training is how the system works to vote? Hell in many areas you don't even have basic ID requirements? Do I think the woman in your example should...hell yes. I don't agree it should be a requirement. ESPECIALLY since those courses aren't free so you are now imposing restrictions on those of fewer means (that likely live in an area that many require personal protection more than you or I). SO you are no making exercising a right easier for the wealthy and harder for the poor. Just like the insurance requirement they are tossing around. 

[Northcountryman]

11 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

Yes 100% it’s not the governments job to ensure she’s trained! It’s hers! There’s plenty of training available.

A white male is almost 20x’s more likely to be injured or injure someone with a chainsaw than a handgun in America. Is there a mandatory class to buy a chainsaw?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A gun is far different Than a chainsaw as , although it’s not impossible for murders to occur that way, it’s far less likely . Do you believe that you need to take a course in order to operate a motor vehicle ? I think it’s analogous to purchasing — and using — a handgun.  

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Since we are just throwing $hit against the wall here let me have ultimate authority for a day and this would be my common sense reform. 

1. Firearm used in the commission of a crime with discharge or injury/death...death penalty...one appeal and off to the chair. Sell raffle tickets to toss the switch if the victim or victim's family declines to do it themselves. 

Firearm used in commission of the crime no discharge or injury/death.....life

Change to prison system to require hard labor of lifers and mandatory career training for all others

2. Nationwide conceal carry. once you go through this background you can purchase over the counter for pistols and long arms. no further background checks required unless revoked. 

3. Background checks on all sales dealer and private. (unless you have #2 above)

4. Must be a US citizen to exercise any right in US including voting and forearms possession. 

5. Felons forfeit firearms possession until 10 years after discharge of offense. (non violent) . Violent felon never can possess. 

[Northcountryman]

7 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I don't agree it should be a requirement. ESPECIALLY since those courses aren't free so you are now imposing restrictions on those of fewer means (that likely live in an area that many require personal protection more than you or I). SO you are no making exercising a right easier for the wealthy and harder for the poor. Just like the insurance requirement they are tossing aroun

I think that cost wise , the purchase of the hand gun itself presents more of a economic barrier than the hand gun safety course. Come on, If she can afford the gun , she caN  Afford the course !! 
 

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

8 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

Do you believe that you need to take a course in order to operate a motor vehicle ? I think it’s analogous to purchasing — and using — a handgun.  

Operating a motor vehicle is not a Constitutionally guaranteed right. It also don't require a course. Are you under the impression a course is currently required to get a handgun permit in NY?

[Northcountryman]

1 minute ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Since we are just throwing $hit against the wall here let me have ultimate authority for a day and this would be my common sense reform. 

1. Firearm used in the commission of a crime with discharge or injury/death...death penalty...one appeal and off to the chair. Sell raffle tickets to toss the switch if the victim or victim's family declines to do it themselves. 

Firearm used in commission of the crime no discharge or injury/death.....life

Change to prison system to require hard labor of lifers and mandatory career training for all others

2. Nationwide conceal carry. once you go through this background you can purchase over the counter for pistols and long arms. no further background checks required unless revoked. 

3. Background checks on all sales dealer and private. (unless you have #2 above)

4. Must be a US citizen to exercise any right in US including voting and forearms possession. 

5. Felons forfeit firearms possession until 10 years after discharge of offense. (non violent) . Violent felon never can possess. 

No arguments here , although I’m not sure about mandatory death penalty for ALL gun related injuries — deaths maybe but injuries ? Maybe , IDK but I’d let the judge have some discretion there , I. Care of extenuating circumstances 

[Northcountryman]

1 minute ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Operating a motor vehicle is not a Constitutionally guaranteed right. It also don't require a course. Are you under the impression a course is currently required to get a handgun permit in NY?

No it is not , but in order to drive one legally , you have to take a course and pass a drivers exam . 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Just now, Northcountryman said:

No it is not , but in order to drive one legally , you have to take a course and pass a drivers exam . 

You have to pass a written permit test and a road test. What course is required?

Are you under the impression a course is currently required to get a handgun permit in NY?

[Buckmaster7600]

A gun is far different Than a chainsaw as , although it’s not impossible for murders to occur that way, it’s far less likely . Do you believe that you need to take a course in order to operate a motor vehicle ? I think it’s analogous to purchasing — and using — a handgun.  

So you think a class will prevent a murder?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

A gun is far different Than a chainsaw as , although it’s not impossible for murders to occur that way, it’s far less likely . Do you believe that you need to take a course in order to operate a motor vehicle ? I think it’s analogous to purchasing — and using — a handgun.  

Motor vehicles are operated on public roads.

That’s the same reason why I am completely ok with a concealed carry course. If you’re carrying concealed your doing so in public.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

Since we are just throwing $hit against the wall here let me have ultimate authority for a day and this would be my common sense reform. 
1. Firearm used in the commission of a crime with discharge or injury/death...death penalty...one appeal and off to the chair. Sell raffle tickets to toss the switch if the victim or victim's family declines to do it themselves. 
Firearm used in commission of the crime no discharge or injury/death.....life
Change to prison system to require hard labor of lifers and mandatory career training for all others
2. Nationwide conceal carry. once you go through this background you can purchase over the counter for pistols and long arms. no further background checks required unless revoked. 
3. Background checks on all sales dealer and private. (unless you have #2 above)
4. Must be a US citizen to exercise any right in US including voting and forearms possession. 
5. Felons forfeit firearms possession until 10 years after discharge of offense. (non violent) . Violent felon never can possess. 

I wish there was a a million like button!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk