How can I keep my Gun Rights?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by lostngone, Feb 2, 2015.

  1. lostngone, Feb 2, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2015

    lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #1
    What can be done to make make everyone happy? Is there some way, crazy or not to do this that would have a chance of working.

    I ask this because I really do not see any way to make these anti-gun people happy. I am pretty sure these anti-gun people feel the same about the people they call gun-nuts.

    As a pro-gun person why should I be willing to budge an inch on my views when we all know in a very short period of time the same group or another group will be asking for another inch?

    For example lets say all the pro-gun people got together and said we will support a law that bans all rifles that can hold more then 5 rounds and even limit those to bolt action only. How long before these groups started claiming that these 5 round hunting rifles are just "sniper guns" in disguise and should regulated even more or claiming that there is no reason for any person to own any caliber over X?
     
  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    No. Not when it comes to guns.

    Pleasing every faction is impossible.
     
  3. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #3
    its a never ending mess. give an inch, they want a mile.
     
  4. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #4
    Why are you acting if there is no restrictions that already exist? Some I'm actually for, and some I'm against. Regulations can't stand still forever as time goes by.

    I'm personally against severe bans and unquestionable gun rights. Problem with BOTH sides is they suddenly become ignorant when advocating for their agenda. In general, the conservatives don't give a damn about the dangers and social effects of fire arms, and the liberals don't know a damn thing about fire arms to pick and choose what to ban or restrict. Again, speaking in general terms.
     
  5. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #5
    The opposite is also true; keep that in mind. There are those who want to prevent more gun related deaths, but having the mindset like the OP (based on the title of this thread) is what grants those who cause those gun-related deaths to have the guns to begin with.

    And please don't bring up the argument that guns are used more in self defense than anything else, because that sure as hell is not true.

    http://www.onthemedia.org/story/myth-behind-defensive-gun-ownership/

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262.html#.VM_UoC6qGM5

    BL.
     
  6. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #6
    I agree that those who want to keep their guns rights as is, should focus more on those who abuse and overuse those rights. Most laws come from a reaction effect, from those who caused the concern in the first place. It's surely not those without guns that make this topic so relevant.
     
  7. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #7
    Well, for one, start to sound sensible about it, and agree to actually have a conversation about it.

    Repeatedly saying "I don't think any restriction is necessary and anyone and everyone who wants to carry should be able to carry whatever they want wherever they want without any requirements or restrictions" is not going to get you anywhere. It only makes you sound just as crazy (maybe even moreso) as the people who say that all firearms should be smelted into metal cubes and everyone should be completely banned form having them.

    Decide that you want to have a realistic conversation about the sheer number in this country, along with the high number of murders, non-fatal shootings, accidents, and other repercussions, and what the requirements should be for owning or carrying, and more people will listen to you.

    In other words: if you are so absolutist, no one will listen to you.
     
  8. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #8
    I'd agree with that, especially the bold. Case in point, LaPierre's "good guys with guns/bad guys with guns" statement.

    If anything, those that are for their gun rights are always wanting the flout and flaunt the 2nd Amendment more times than not (case in point: the OP in various different threads), when the 2nd Amendment doesn't just cover ONLY guns.

    In fact, I'd pick an archer with the right training and history behind his training over a nonchalant person with a gun any day, such as Lars Andersen:

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...-archer-goes-old-school-and-wows-the-internet

    Keep in mind, that this is also covered under the 2A, but no-one seems to think about that. Also, if not to be believed, here you go:



    BL.
     
  9. Mac'nCheese macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #9
    I also thought it was the other way around. That since pro-gun people (the most vocal, the ones people call gun-nuts), are actually doing more harm than good for gun rights. Since they never seem to want to support any kind of gun control, back ground checks, waiting periods, limiting rounds... people who would settle for some regulation would have no choice but to try and completely repeal the 2nd A. Then, since there would be no protection for gun owners, any restrictions, including complete banning of firearms, could be legal. If the gun owners would give an inch, maybe people could find middle ground, with some common sense regulations while still protecting the 2nd A.
    After all, who says laws against slander are a slippery slope to abolishment of freedom of speech?
     
  10. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #10
    Compromise. What's realistic in terms of protecting rights while also giving law enforcement and society structure to keep guns out of the wrong hands and mitigating damage when this fails?

    This could mean a mix of solutions ranging from better mental health programs to a ban on magazines that hold more than 20 rounds. Or, we could make the ability to purchase and own guns more restrictive. Or we could just simply increase the liabilities and raise insurance requirements.


    Essentially, you're arguing a slippery-slope, which isn't necessarily wrong, but almost impossible to argue with.

    So far, most people are willing to accept hunting rifles and shotguns as part of modern life. People are even willing to accept pistols, but they want stronger laws on their sale and better training and more responsibility from owners.

    Of course, there are people who would ban firearms entirely, but they have very little traction. The other side has adherents who would allow any firearm, anywhere, but they also have little traction.
     
  11. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #11
    your out of date they are now known as ammosexuals (G)
     
  12. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #12

    Damn that guy is nice!!!!

    If fire arms required even 10% of that skill to operate, most would not have one.


    Just curious, how do you feel about rubber bullets? It's far less fatal and can't go through most things in the way, like walls, cars, and etc. But it can still be ugly.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #13
    I think we ought to start by saying we are never going to make everyone happy.

    I also think that we ought to state, very clearly, that many of the people who express concerns about the present state of firearms ownership in the United States, are also themselves enthusiastic firearms owners.

    It is possible to be a farmer, rancher, hunter, or sportsman - someone who was raised around firearms - and still be concerned at the level of firearm violence in this country.

    You can be all of those things, and still be horrified at the ease with which deadly weapons find their way into the hands of criminals; of the mentally ill; and other people who should not have them.

    Where the NRA and a great many responsible gun owners part company is here: The dogma that any attempt to restrict the private ownership of firearms is the start of a "slippery slope" that inevitably ends with the confiscation of all guns.

    If that is the "gun nut's" starting point - then indeed it is going to be all but impossible to reach any sort of broad consensus that satisfied anybody, let alone everybody.
     
  14. richwoodrocket macrumors 68020

    richwoodrocket

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hamburg, NY
    #14
    I say, as long as you're the one with the gun, you're going to win an argument... ;)
     
  15. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #15
    unless you have a shovel. or you shoot yourself accidentally
     
  16. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #16
    bringing a shovel to a gun fight, brilliant:p
     
  17. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #17
    worked well for the concerned bystander. and the victim who finished the job on the guy after he was shot.
     
  18. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #18
    cool, give ALL cops shovels :D
     
  19. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #19
    That ladies bruise might be real, but the inch-deep hole was shopped in, which makes the entire photo suspect. And why is she carrying one size-18 sneaker?
     
  20. TheHateMachine macrumors 6502a

    TheHateMachine

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #20
    I do not think that is a hole, maybe blood pooling on the point of impact?
     
  21. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #21
    That was my impression as well.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Even in Britain people who are mentally stable and have a gun collection or go hunting can own them. That makes most people happy.
     
  23. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    Banning guns would make me happy. I'd be even happier if every gun in the world was destroyed.
     
  24. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #24
    Man, that makes for a helluva good optical illusion.
     
  25. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #25
    Ahem...... Quit stealing my jokes damn you!
     

Share This Page