An outsiders questions on US gun control.

I understand I am opening the same old can of worms here and I usually refrain from getting involved in this topic but thought I would put this out here as a genuine question.

I used to be against the US laws on owning and carrying guns but in recent years have changed my mind.

I am actually for your right to own all manner of guns for hunting, home protection and for the possible need to fight back against an unjust government.

So how would you feel if a law was passed that meant the owning of any gun you choose was perfectly legal as long as it was in your own home secured or you had a legitimate permit for say hunting or carrying it to a gun range but carrying a gun in public imposed a heavy prison sentance like it does here in the UK?

I perfectly understand wanting a gun in your own home for protection and having a cache stashed for the upcoming civil war but how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benifit your society?

Hee in the UK you can own all kinds of fire arms as long as you have the justification but get caught with one without just cause and your looking at several years?

Sorry to cut this short but my son has just arrived for christmas.

I would say no.
I don't want to let the goverment decide if my reasons for owning a gun are "legitimate"

a reply to: nonspecific

If you can guarantee that nobody else has any weapons on them, I'd say sure. But since the people who don't care about the law will continue to have guns, I think the current laws allowing us to legally carry weapons to protect us, and those around us, is more than fair.

a reply to: network dude


You need to go to your "safe place"
Nothing can hurt you there from words to bullets.....

originally posted by: nonspecific

I perfectly understand wanting a gun in your own home for protection and having a cache stashed for the upcoming civil war but how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benifit your society?

There's an old saying, and armed populace is a safe populace. If you look at the statistics, the vast majority of the armed crimes that take place here in the states take place in towns or areas where they are "gun free zones".

Chicago and Washington D.C. come to mind.

I lived in the D.C. area for 25 years. D.C.'s laws are draconic vs gun ownership that even if you are driving from gun friendly point A to gun friendly point B through Washington D.C. with a weapon locked and secured in your trunk, it is still a violation of the law and can land you in serious trouble.

Yet D.C. has ridiculous murder rates involving guns.



I can feel the heat now...but, I could care less.

a reply to: nonspecific

We already have that here in New Jersey.

It sucks.

a reply to: nonspecific

The debate boils down to a simple question:

Should you be allowed to defend yourself?

The answer to me is clear:

Yes.

a reply to: nonspecific

I perfectly understand wanting a gun in your own home for protection and having a cache stashed for the upcoming civil war but how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benefit your society?

It doesn't. Because the next time this happens the perps will again have planned to kill as many people as possible in places where most people congregate that they know ahead of time the patrons don't have any firearms to defend themselves.

The more 'gun free zones' there are like malls, schools, movie theaters, health care centers, and the like, the more vulnerable people are to these types of nuts.

You notice they don't attack police stations, not much chance for a mass murder there.

And remember that instance in Texas where they came with automatic weapons to kill and were shot dead by local dudes packing? It wasn't a big story because they were shot dead before they had a chance to kill large numbers of people.

The difference between what happened in Texas and what happened in California are the number of restrictions placed on carry laws.

a reply to: nonspecific

So how would you feel if a law was passed that meant the owning of any gun you choose was perfectly legal as long as it was in your own home secured or you had a legitimate permit for say hunting or carrying it to a gun range

Owning a firearm is a right. Asking permission from the government to excercise your right defeats the purpose.

originally posted by: nonspecific
I understand I am opening the same old can of worms here and I usually refrain from getting involved in this topic but thought I would put this out here as a genuine question.

I used to be against the US laws on owning and carrying guns but in recent years have changed my mind.

I am actually for your right to own all manner of guns for hunting, home protection and for the possible need to fight back against an unjust government.

So how would you feel if a law was passed that meant the owning of any gun you choose was perfectly legal as long as it was in your own home secured or you had a legitimate permit for say hunting or carrying it to a gun range but carrying a gun in public imposed a heavy prison sentance like it does here in the UK?

I perfectly understand wanting a gun in your own home for protection and having a cache stashed for the upcoming civil war but how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benifit your society?

Hee in the UK you can own all kinds of fire arms as long as you have the justification but get caught with one without just cause and your looking at several years?

Sorry to cut this short but my son has just arrived for christmas.

See, this goes nowhere. A good percentage of the US population thinks it is logical to walk all over the place with any gun of any kind at any time. And they will fight for it, as if it is necessary. Like recent laws that say you can carry guns in bars in places like Georgia and Tennessee. There is no rhyme or reason. There will not be any compromise from the people that answer you. They seem to think the 2nd Amendment reads that way, and no other way. Good luck on this thread. 'tips hat'.

a reply to: nonspecific

"how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benifit your society? "

www.breitbart.com...

"driver was sitting in his car on Milwaukee Avenue, watching people shuffle back and forth in front of the car just before midnight. As he watched, a gunman raised a weapon and began to fire, so the driver then sprang into action.
According to the Chicago Tribune, 22-year-old Everardo Custodio allegedly “began firing into the crowd,” and the Uber driver fired back. He fired a total of “six shots at Custodio,” striking him three times and wounding him in “the shin, thigh, and lower back.” The attempted mass shooting was over and the the only injuries were to Custodio."

I don't know where you live; I'd have guessed the UK.

The situation in the US is so remarkably different than it is in the UK or Australia that it doesn't surprise me that people in those lands can't understand the US situation. Suffice it to say that the problem is at least two fold. First, no one knows or can have any idea who is circulating around them in public spaces; some are "bad guys" and they carry concealed firearms with intent to do harm and they don't care anything about "laws" regulating firearms. Second, in the US, there isn't a cop or a camera on every corner. The cops are spread very thin and essentially operate on an "on call as needed" basis. They can't "protect" the "good citizens"; and they've come to expect and will even tell you so if you ask, that protecting yourself from violent crime is the citizen's duty, not the cops simply because they can't be everywhere all the time.

Its a far different situation in the US.

a reply to: reldra

No rhyme or reason? You mean like being able to defend your own life?

This is a great recent example. I guy pulls up in front of a shop and starts shooting random people in the parking lot. Then this happens:

"An employee of the tire shop returned fire on Torres, hitting him. He drove himself to Baylor Hospital where he’s being treated. It’s not known how serious his gunshot wounds are at this time."

dfw.cbslocal.com...

a reply to: reldra


Which one of your rights are you willing to compromise on?
Free speech?
Search and seizure?
Fair trial?
You got to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I would say no.
I don't want to let the goverment decide if my reasons for owning a gun are "legitimate"

I understand that from your own perspective but by that you are also allowing anyone else the same right, does your regard for your fellow citizens go so far as to allow them the same rights regardless of there mentality then?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: nonspecific

We already have that here in New Jersey.

It sucks.

So why does it not work then, I can only assume it is because the population chooses to ignore the rules?

What is the current prison sentance for carrying a loaded firearm in public?

a reply to: nonspecific

I think that the US government has never been more arrogant and rogue than they are today. I think pharmaceutical companies push mind-altering legal psychotropics onto society with the blessing of the US government. I think Americas gang-banger culture will continue to breed generations of wannabe gangstas and I think criminals will continue to shun the law and continue to carry weapons in the public arena.

Punishing law abiding citizen Joe average for carrying guns in public is a moot point because the US government, pharmaceutical corporations, gang-bangers and criminals ain't going to change their current thought-process and suddenly stop being the root cause of Americas current gunundrum if such a law were to pass.

Because it will have pretty much literally zero effect on crime. Not all crimes happen inside the home. People get attacked, car jacked, mugged, robbed, raped, knockout gamed, etc all outside the home. If you prevent people from carrying outside the home, criminals will feel emboldened to attack them because they know your average Joe/Jane is not going to be armed, but because they are criminals, they are going to be armed. It's quite simple really. Literally thousands of people each year use a gun defensively. The kicker is you don't hear about these crimes BECAUSE THEY DIDNT HAPPEN. You can be damn sure Obama would never fund a study on defensive gun uses too because it would go against the narrative.l

Short version: If you stop people from carrying guns in public, criminals will continue to carry and use them anyway because they are criminals and don't care about breaking the law. They will then have an even bigger advantage over the public than they already do.

originally posted by: nonspecific
So why does it not work then, I can only assume it is because the population chooses to ignore the rules?

Not sure if I am following, Are you asking why I think a curtailment of my rights does not work?

What is the current prison sentance for carrying a loaded firearm in public?

It is a second degree offense and carries a maximum 5 to 10 year sentence.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: nonspecific

"how does carrying a loaded weapon in a shopping mall or pizza joint benifit your society? "

www.breitbart.com...

"driver was sitting in his car on Milwaukee Avenue, watching people shuffle back and forth in front of the car just before midnight. As he watched, a gunman raised a weapon and began to fire, so the driver then sprang into action.
According to the Chicago Tribune, 22-year-old Everardo Custodio allegedly “began firing into the crowd,” and the Uber driver fired back. He fired a total of “six shots at Custodio,” striking him three times and wounding him in “the shin, thigh, and lower back.” The attempted mass shooting was over and the the only injuries were to Custodio."

I don't know where you live; I'd have guessed the UK.

The situation in the US is so remarkably different than it is in the UK or Australia that it doesn't surprise me that people in those lands can't understand the US situation. Suffice it to say that the problem is at least two fold. First, no one knows or can have any idea who is circulating around them in public spaces; some are "bad guys" and they carry concealed firearms with intent to do harm and they don't care anything about "laws" regulating firearms. Second, in the US, there isn't a cop or a camera on every corner. The cops are spread very thin and essentially operate on an "on call as needed" basis. They can't "protect" the "good citizens"; and they've come to expect and will even tell you so if you ask, that protecting yourself from violent crime is the citizen's duty, not the cops simply because they can't be everywhere all the time.

Its a far different situation in the US.

As I said in the OP I am in the UK and yes I simply do not understand the need to carry a loaded handgun other than to protect myself from someone else with a loaded hand gun.

If you got a straight 10 years in prison for carring in public how many people would still carry?

That is why not many people get shot in the UK, it's not the lack of fire arms its the trouble you get in for bieng caught with one without reason.

a reply to: nonspecific


Everything has limits of course. Felons for example can't have guns,,,,,supposedly....
But on the other hand you can't give a psychological evaluation to everybody that wants to buy a gun.
Should we put a breathalyzer on every car just in case the owner was drinking?
No, we put one on somebody that has been caught drinking and driving.
The same should go for guns, that's what background checks are for.
Check the history of the purchaser, not read the future of the purchaser.
Should a man that was on antidepressants because of a bad divorce be eliminated from ever owning a gun?


This all comes down to who would get to determine who is going to be dangerous. That's the part that scares the hell out of me.