Do you support gun regulation?

[Goldmund]

I'm just curious. All of us on DU have a lot of common ideologies; but for some reason, the gun issue seems to be one of the most contentious ones, and one of the issues farthest from a consensus. I find it pretty fascinating -- you won't find two liberals who disagree as substantially on our current economic or foreign policy as you will find them disagreeing about gun laws.


Edit: I started a related thread in GD: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2429181 -- discussing why gun control seems to be the issue on which liberals agree less than any other major issue.

[UpsideDownFlag]

1. ..new to the gungeon? nt

[Goldmund]

2. kinda

Though I'm not new to the "Latest" page. I've taken part in some gun discussions before, though I don't usually venture to the "gungeon" specifically.

[Fire]

24. gungeon?

gungeon?

(I'm new though I registered a while ago)

[Still_Notafraid]

3. Canada

Has the same amount of guns per person as we do and they don't have our gun crime problem,everyone who hasn't watched Bowling for columbine watch, it will explain why we have a gun problem.its not about the guns,the laws we have now i think are about as perfect as they should be,I do like Kerry's plan for child safety locks,just hope they don't ease them anymore.

[iverglas]

20. Canada

... does NOT have the same number of firearms per person as the US does, and I don't understand where this notion comes from. I'm really going to have to get out the Columbine video and see whether Moore actually said this.

These facts are slightly out of date, but if anything the gap has likely widened:

http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/en/research/other_docs/notes/canus/default.asp

There are more than 30 times more firearms in the United States than in Canada. There are an estimated 7.4 million firearms in Canada, about 1.2 million of which are restricted firearms (mostly handguns). In the U.S., there are approximately 222 million firearms; 76 million of the firearms in circulation are handguns.

The US has 9 times Canada's population, and 30 times the number of firearms.

That's more than 3 times as many firearms per person in the US.

The other significant difference is in the kinds of firearms owned. Comparing ownership of hunting weapons with ownership of handguns is a simple case of apples and oranges. They are not owned for the same reasons, they are not used for the same purposes, and they are *not* the same.

The US has about 75 times as many handguns as Canada -- more than 6 times as many handguns per capita.

To conclude that "it's not about the guns" based on this persistent factoid -- bit of false information circulated as if it were true -- is extremely inadvisable.

"It" is plainly about quite a number of things, which can be reasonably thought to include the number of firearms in circulation, the kinds of firearms in circulation, the conditions that people who possess firearms are required to comply with, and the broader culture of the societies in question.

But it makes no more sense to dismiss any one of these obvious factors out of hand than it does to attribute the entire "it" to any one of them.

[Heyo]

4. More gun laws...

... would just wind up like more drug laws.

Are drug laws keeping drugs off the street?

Heyo

[gatlingforme]

9. I think the war against drugs is doing catastrophically perfect. LOL n/t

[mosin]

25. Yes!

That's it exactly! The "War on Drugs" has been a "catastrophic success!"

I'm going to try that line on some conservative co-workers today. :)

[Romulus]

5. LOL - I had to vote "stricter"

That was the only choice for someone who wants:

1) An end to the "private sale loophole" - by adopting the Swiss-like system where every transfer needs to go through a fed dealer so a background check can be done and the seller needs to keep a receipt of sale for 10 years or so (since time-to-crime for guns is something like seven years, making tracing easier, without an "owner roundup database").

2) State police registration of any handgun transfer, with similar 10-year receipt deal. Handguns are the problem, not Jeb's shotgun. Like it or not, this is the only idea that ensures accountability for where all those handguns go. State police holds the info, not fiefdoms like Chicago or Ashcroftian fed government. And the info would only be on handguns.

3) Safe storage of handguns to prevent theft. Meaning, either get a gun safe of some sort (like Gunvault after they fix the kryptonite-Bic pen lock thing) or leave them at the range vault. Stolen handguns wind up on the black market, and yes, owners can be sued TODAY for not protecting their handguns from theft. A $150 gun safe is a better use of MY money than defending a $500k wrongful death suit.

4) Three-day wait on handgun sales. Someone at my grad school (two years after I graduated) killed herself the same day she bought a handgun. A three-day wait won't stop every suicide, but would help stop some of them. Plus, some "heat of the moment" purchases may be rescinded on second thought. Hey, if you NEED a gun right now, and you didn't think of that ahead of time, well who's fault is that?

5) No Vermont or Alaska CCW, or VA open carry. All public carry requires a shall-issue type permit. Any old fool should not walk around in public with a handgun unless they know what they are doing. This is no different than driver licensing; stay on your property and you don't need a license, but venture out in public and you need to know your ass from your elbow. Shall-issue because nobody should have their personal safety decisions subject to veto on the unprincipled whim of some government official, especially when the same official rubber-stamps identical permit applications for people wishing to guard banks or celebrities' families.

That's about it, except for "no bogus semi-auto bans based on false distincions." If you wish to ban all firearms that fire when you pull the trigger, them ask for what you want -don't try to fool people as to what you really mean.

[BigDaddyCaine]

22. sounds right on to me.

[slackmaster]

6. I think we should relax some regulations BUT...

We need a way for private individuals (people who don't have federal firearms licenses; i.e. are not gun dealers) to run a criminal background check on the buyer when the sell a used gun.

Here in California all sales of used guns have to be done through a dealer, so there is always a background check (except for sales on the black market). In most states the California system would be unpalatable, considered an infringement on the right to privacy and the right to keep and bear arms. But if the federal government provided an easy, secure way for people to make sure they aren't selling to a known felon or other prohibited person, I believe most people would take advantage of that system.

On the "less control" side I'd like to see the 1986 ban on new automatic weapons for the civilian market repealed, and a clarification of the meaning of the Second Amendment. If it is really supposed to protect the right of individuals to keep and bear arms (as I believe it does), then some state gun control laws are unconstitutional. I think anyone who can pass the federal requirements to buy a machinegun should be able to get one regardless of what state they live in.

[FatSlob]

7. I chose the first.

Repeal all gun laws after the NFA of 1934

[Jack_DeLeon]

12. thats about my position on the matter...

[getoffmytrain]

21. Totally agree with you.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

8. Sensible gun laws work when you enforce them.

BTW, how many people realize that most of the guns now legal after the ban expired, were legal before the ban expired?

[FatSlob]

10. What is "sensible"?

Please state what laws you feel are "sensible".

[MrSandman]

11. Vermonnt and Alaska CCW laws...nt

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

13. Background checks, laws that keep guns out of children's hands,

etc. The laws have to be enforced though. I'm assuming for you question's tone that you're not a big gun control fan? I'm not the biggest fan either, so I was just curious.

[FatSlob]

14. Most gun control laws are moronic.

Such as the AWB of 1994, and any other ban, including the import ban. Background checks are already the law, I have no problem with them. No law will ever keep a gun away from a kid. Only a parent can to that. My three year old knows the rules so well that if the word "gun" is mentioned around her, she'll say "I don't touch guns, only Daddy touches guns". We've even tested her. I set up a camera on top of the dresser, out of her view. I then rested a rifle in the corner (made safe by removal of the bolt) and watched via the camera from another room. I watched her get about five feet away from the rifle and say "I don't touch guns" and then go play with her dolls. Regardless of how she behaves around them, they are still locked up in a safe when I'm not using them.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

16. I agree with you on the AWB, as my other post clarified,

and you're right that MOST laws passed don't work. I just think we do need aome safeguards. Honestly, I'm just dealing in generalities, because I'm not as well-informed on specific laws as most in the Gungeon. I think the problem we have with a lot of gun control types, is the mindset that guns are intrinsically bad.

[Van23]

19. I agree.

I'm a flaming leftist who supports the Second Amendment 100% and has given lots of $$$ to MoveOn.org this season. I own a .38 revolver and a .45 SIG--and hope to add a .10 MM Glock soon.

However, good luck with convincing most people on this forum that guns are overwhelmingly beneficial. No matter what sociological studies or law journals you cite, some people have their minds made up. Don't try to confuse them with the facts.


www.liberalswithguns.com

[goju]

15. Other

Regulate who can own guns, not the type of guns. I wouldnt be opposed to safety regulations (trigger locks) but only if it accompanied legislation that relieved gun manufacturers of responsibility when their products are misused.

[Lefty48197]

17. It was NRA fan Tom DeLay who let the ban expire. Bush claimed support.

Of course, I didn't believe his lie.

[DHard3006]

18. the right to bear arms shall not be infringed!

Background checks are sensible gun laws? The gun haters at VPC claim more then 500,000 people have been stopped from purchasing a gun with this law. Yet only 7 arrest have resulted from this law.

It is a crime for a ex-felon to even attempt to purchase a gun not to mention the fact that the criminal breaks the law when they sign the paperwork claiming that all information on the form to purchase the gun is correct.


Pass laws that punish criminals and not law-abiding citizens!

[slackmaster]

23. I believe Bush doesn't give a rat's patootie one way or another

George W. Bush is a wealthy, connected man who lives in Texas. He can get any kind of weapon he wants.

His alleged commitment to individual privacy and liberty just isn't there. He wanted more than anything else to avoid making a commitement on the AWB issue, because he (correctly IMO) perceived doing so as a losing proposition no matter what party you belong to or which way you commit yourself.

Bush was perfectly happy to let DeLay bury the AWB. While I agree in principle that the ban was bad and that letting it expire was correct, Bush was quite disingenuous in his stated support for it. Given my 'druthers I'd take a President who would speak honestly about either wanting a ban enacted or wanting it to go away. While I might disagree with such a President I'd respect the candor.