• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is "common sense" gun control?

What is "common sense" gun control?

  • Total voters
    28
Tucker Case said:
It creates a precondition that by necessity means that it no longer is a right, but a privilege. You don't need to ask for permission from "daddy" to do something that is an inherent right.

Licensing is a form of permission asking.
Click to expand...

You do if you told daddy that you and your siblings should be denied the right if you did something bad.
 
Tucker Case said:
It creates a precondition that by necessity means that it no longer is a right, but a privilege. You don't need to ask for permission from "daddy" to do something that is an inherent right.

Licensing is a form of permission asking.
Click to expand...

So let me get this right, owning a gun becomes a privileged if you are forced to apply for a license (which only would be denied to those we agreed should be excluded). Daddy always says yes unless you've done something bad.
 
shiznit770 said:
So let me get this right, owning a gun becomes a privileged if you are forced to apply for a license (which only would be denied to those we agreed should be excluded). Daddy always says yes unless you've done something bad.
Click to expand...

It's a precondition to a right. That cannot exist.

As far as checking to see if the person committed a felony before hand, I supported the idea of instant background checks. It's not asking permission, it's preventing a crime from occuring (selling a firearm to a felon).
 
Tucker Case said:
It's a precondition to a right. That cannot exist.

As far as checking to see if the person committed a felony before hand, I supported the idea of instant background checks. It's not asking permission, it's preventing a crime from occuring (selling a firearm to a felon).
Click to expand...

So how is requiring voter registration any different?
 
shiznit770 said:
So how is requiring voter registration any different?
Click to expand...

Voter registration helps prevent manipulation of the election system. It's a way to make sure that voting isn't beign done over and over again by the same people. It's not permission, it's for tallying the votes.
 
Tucker Case said:
Voter registration helps prevent manipulation of the election system. It's a way to make sure that voting isn't beign done over and over again by the same people. It's not permission, it's for tallying the votes.
Click to expand...

I guess I can see a problem with the idea of licensing, but still not how it would prevent someone from exercising their right. Maybe inconvenience.

How is registration different then, its not permission, but a system of "tallying the" guns. Its a way to aid in solving gun crimes.
 
shiznit770 said:
I guess I can see a problem with the idea of licensing, but still not how it would prevent someone from exercising their right. Maybe inconvenience.

How is registration different then, its not permission, but a system of "tallying the" guns. Its a way to aid in solving gun crimes.
Click to expand...

I think the registration issue is about tracking the legal gun owners. It doesn't necessarily prevent illegal gun owners from getting weopons, so I don't see it's purpose.

I'd be in favor of every legal gun having a stamped number that is unique and then all of those numbers being entered into a database by the manufacturers and dealers. Then the gun owner has a record of the number and in case of theft, the number can be given by the owner to the police and they would be able to know more about the guns used illegally were obtained (through theft, illegal smuggling etc).

I think something along these lines would not infringe on rights, but would serve the same purpose as registration of the weapon would.

This is what I had in mind when I voted for the registration of guns option, but that wasn't what was meant by the option.


the reason it is an infringment is that it is mandatory and non-registration would be a crime. Thus it is another precondition to ownership.
 
Let me add, VOLUNTARY registration of guns should be an option along with teh serial number idea I gave. It would be a protection to the gun owners, but it's volutary status would prevent it form being a precondition to possesion.
 
Tucker Case said:
I think the registration issue is about tracking the legal gun owners. It doesn't necessarily prevent illegal gun owners from getting weopons, so I don't see it's purpose.

I'd be in favor of every legal gun having a stamped number that is unique and then all of those numbers being entered into a database by the manufacturers and dealers. Then the gun owner has a record of the number and in case of theft, the number can be given by the owner to the police and they would be able to know more about the guns used illegally were obtained (through theft, illegal smuggling etc).

I think something along these lines would not infringe on rights, but would serve the same purpose as registration of the weapon would.

This is what I had in mind when I voted for the registration of guns option, but that wasn't what was meant by the option.


the reason it is an infringment is that it is mandatory and non-registration would be a crime. Thus it is another precondition to ownership.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing this up, I made a similar assumption to the registration option and could not see how entering a gun's unique number into a database would infringe on someone's right.
 
Bonnie1988 said:
What about a 16 inch caliber "gun" off an old warship?
Click to expand...

Fully armed Merchantmen with Cannon were in Private Hands in the States on the day the Second Amendment was written.
 
shiznit770 said:
Thanks for clearing this up, I made a similar assumption to the registration option and could not see how entering a gun's unique number into a database would infringe on someone's right.
Click to expand...

When you try to charge me with a crime for filing it off of my own property.
 
I think an issue comes into play regarding what is "common sense". I think evveryone can agree by the results that "Banning guns from felons and the mentaly infirm" with over 80% of voters agreeing on it falls into that category.

But what about the near 50% responses. Is that common sense? Or is that a dichotomy on views? I would lean towards the latter.
 
Tucker Case said:
I don't think that should be a crime at all, but why would you do that? Just curious.
Click to expand...

Show me one way it can help me to leave it there.

I can think of several ways it might inconvenience me. From the weapon being stolen, and wasting my time with an interview about a later crime, or investigating me for the same. Perhaps others feel the same as I and thus leaving it there would reduce resale value.
 
Voidwar said:
Show me one way it can help me to leave it there.
Click to expand...

If it is stolen and recovered you can get it back as it will clearly be the one reported stolen. If the numebr is filed off, then there is no way to know it was your gun. That's just one way it can help you personally.

I can think of several ways it might inconvenience me. From the weapon being stolen, and wasting my time with an interview about a later crime, or investigating me for the same. Perhaps others feel the same as I and thus leaving it there would reduce resale value.
Click to expand...

I don't think resale value would be an issue because anyone can file it off themselves. That appears to be grasping for an argument. As far as the otehr reasons, I would think it is in your best interests to assist the police with any investigations regarding violent crimes in your area, but I can understand the terpidation if one is worried about being convicted of a crime they didn't commit.

Plus the sale of weaponry is not a right. So I think it should be illegal to sell weapons that have the numbers filed off.
 
Goobieman said:
Bans for felons fall outside the "law abiding" requirement.
Background checks infringe on the rights of the law abiding.

How would it be determined if someone is a felon or not a felon without a background check?

I fully support any gun control law that means criminals will not have guns and that does not infringe on the rights of the law abiding.
Let me know when you find one of those.
Click to expand...

Excuse me if this question has been asked since I'm at work and unable to read the whole thread...

I'm curious how we separate the law abiding from the convicted felon without a background check when it comes to purchasing a weapon?

Let me know when you figure that out.
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
If it is stolen and recovered you can get it back as it will clearly be the one reported stolen.
Click to expand...

That gun is the insurance companies, as they already bought me a new one.

That doesn't help ME. That helps some insurance guy, but not really, since tracking it all down will cost more than the weapon.

Tucker Case said:
I don't think resale value would be an issue because anyone can file it off themselves.
Click to expand...

Then everyone files em off, and the whole idea is a joke.
 
Only the instant background check does not violate the second, 9th and tenth amendments.

Proper gun control is a figure 8 grouping on a double tap at 15Yards in 1/4th of a second:mrgreen:
 
EgoffTib said:
I'm fine with registering and licensing and waiting. I am, however, opposed to banning ANY gun.
Click to expand...

why should someone wait when it does nothing to promote public safety. Why should I register guns when criminals do not and every group that wants to ban guns and confiscate them say registration is a necessary tool to accomplish such nefarious schemes?
 
shiznit770 said:
Your posts are anything but clear. Since you're convinced that registration and licensing "infringes" on the 2nd amendment right, state clearly a scenario where your argument would apply. As I see it, anyone failing to meet these two simple requirements would be a threat to those around them, so show me a case where this is not true and we'll have something constructive to discuss.
Click to expand...

Registration facilitates confiscation or punitive taxation. It is like smoking-it might not always lead to or cause lung cancer but if you don't want lung cancer you should not smoke
 
Goobieman said:
Obama on guns:

"I think we can provide common-sense approaches to the issue of illegal guns that are ending up on the streets"

"...what we can do is to provide just some common-sense enforcement. "

"I believe in common-sense gun safety laws"

"There is an individual right to bear arms, but it is subject to common-sense regulation..."
et al.

So...
What IS "common sense" gun control?
Please explain how your choices are indeed "common sense".
Click to expand...

I should have picked other
I would have to say a instant background check could be considered the least unconstitutional as long as the dealer and buyer are not required to pay for the services of those instant background checks.

As far as I am concerned since the right to keep and bear arms is a right then there should be no registration,permits,waiting periods, bans or any other preconditions on any firearms. We don't require the same thing on other rights. I am sure that if anyone proposed that you had to have a waiting, license or had to register some paper,pencils,to buy a newspaper, watch broad cast tv or anything else that facilitated the verbal or written/typed speech or just to go to church that person would be labeled the anti-American that he or she is. That same anti-American label should slapped on anyone who proposes registrations,licenses or waiting periods for 2nd amendment rights. You don't impair or strip law abiding citizens their rights just so you can "stop" criminals who do not obey the law in the first place.

Most states do not have waiting periods, firearm registrations or licenses to purchase firearms.

I think common sense gun control would be to have firearms courses in high schools that teach firearm safety, how to fire a firearm properly, how to switch the safety on and off and maybe a Reflexive Fire/point shooting course.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
Registration facilitates confiscation or punitive taxation.
Click to expand...

I agree. Fire arm registrations and gun licenses are used so that later they can confiscate firearms, even in this country. No criminal is going to follow any law they find to be of an inconvenience. So this idea that somehow forcing those who already obey the law to register their firearms and or get licenses for those fire arms is someone how going to affect crime is totally absurd.

NRA-ILA :: Firearms Registration: New York City`s Lesson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom