[Jacob85]

Interesting how people think it is the criminals we have to worry about when every person who was someone who shot several people, including the last one did not have a significant record and bought the guns legally!

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by dougawhite

If a city truly wants to remove guns in a way that is meaningful to reduce crime they should do stop and frisk every night in crime-ridden neighborhoods. Also, regular no-knock warrants of known ex-con residences. If they don't do things like that then they are NOT serious about the problem.

Bingo!

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by dougjb

Cars are dangerous instrumentalities. We register our cars. We pass a driving test to drive this inherently dangerous thing.

We should demand that each and every gun in America be registered. We should demand that each and every gun owner pass a mental fitness test and a rigorous test as to a gun's usage.

Unlike cars, however, we should demand that any person wishing to own more than one gun, PROVE their need!

And, in my plan, anyone not registering all their guns and taking the required tests would be guilty of a criminal act subject to jail time.

Of course, law abiding citizens would want to comply and seek compliance. But, criminals and gun nuts (aka criminals) would forego compliance. Give the coppers another chance to lock these folks up.

Perhaps we might ultimately realize that gun ownership is counterproductive in our society. Then, only criminals and gun nuts will own guns.

Almost all other civilized countries in the world have gotten their arms around gun violence. Shootings in Western Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand have annual shootings of people in the the low two digit range while we have over 30,000. Some like Australia historically had a gun heritage similar to our own (think Wild West). But, when they experienced a nut case going off the rails and shooting up a bunch of people, they got together and realized they could not keep going on this way. Mass ownership of guns in Australia is a thing of the past. New Zealand recently did the same thing. It is not unusual in the UK for instance to be in Southeastern England to have the BBC report a shooting (not a killing) that occured in Scotland, such is the uniqueness of gun violence there. Here, we don't even hear of a killing by a gun being reported in the next neighborhood over.

The time has come for all people, gun owners and non gun owners to demand action.

Ultimately, we should just ban guns...totally....except for cops and military.

For those who argue, guns don't kill people, people kill people, I would argue its a lot easier to ban guns than people. If people want to kill others, let them do it the old fashion way, with fists and stones. We would have a lot fewer mass killings!

Unconstitutional for sure, and unworkable in any case. Any such move on the part of any government entity would immediately be challenged in court, and it would go down to certain defeat.

There are an estimated 400 million to half a BILLION guns in private hands in this country, and there is "paper" maybe on, at most, 15% of them. Guns are unique in that, given proper care, they do not necessarily deteriorate with age. I've fired guns well over 120 years old and they shoot as well as they did when new. Better, in fact, because ammo has improved so much. Also following WW II the military had huge surpluses of military-grade weapons, several hundred thousand as I recall, mainly M1 Carbines but some older 30-06 rifles and I believe some 1911 pistols, and sold them (many were actually given away) either through intermediaries or by the government itself under the Civilian Marksmanship Program, directly to citizens. There was no record kept of which gun went to which person: you could buy them through the mail--they were actually listed in the Sears & Roebuck catalogue for a time--and they were delivered packed in Cosmolene. Bottom line: if the government appropriated every gun that they could trace to individual owners (very unlikely) that still leaves something like 450 million guns, probably more, in the hands of American citizens and I'll guarantee you that very few of those owners would voluntarily give them up.

We see so much public angst over gun ownership. Don't people understand that there IS a way to get guns out of private hands? It's call a Constitutional Amendment and the mechanism to change the Constitution has been there since the inception of this country. Why don't the anti-gun people take THAT route?

[GOLFER54]

I will NEVER surrender my guns !

[Jeffery M]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Gas for guns.

They offered gift cards for $50 of gas for guns - legal or illegal - and ran out of cards the first day - LOL!

Dozens of guns turned in to Sacramento Police in exchange for gift cards

A lousy $50 for something worth much more than that? Quit picking on guns. They don't do anything wrong. They are innocent. That is bigotry. Is it because many guns happen to be black?

I know that the concept that people are responsible for their vile misdeeds and not a lifeless object is radical, but it could possibly be true according to some researchers somewhere that I heard about from somebody one time.

I'm thinking about starting up a "Gum for Guns" program, where you transfer legal ownership of a gun to me and I give you a piece of bubble gum. Please include a full load of ammunition.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Jeffery M

A lousy $50 for something worth much more than that? Quit picking on guns. They don't do anything wrong. They are innocent. That is bigotry. Is it because a many guns happen to be black?

I know that the concept that people are responsible for their vile misdeeds and not a lifeless object is radical, but it could possibly be true according to some researchers somewhere that I heard about from somebody one time.

I'm thinking about starting up a "Gum for Guns" program, where you transfer legal ownership of a gun to me and I give you a piece of bubble gum. Please include a full load of ammunition.

Good points.

Why not a "flowers for guns" program, where you could turn in a gun and get a bouquet of roses or something AND your name chiseled prominently on the Honored Virtue Signalers Wall of Merit? Soooo much better than a $50 gas card (and so much EASIER on the environment as well!).

I know that $50 these days doesn't buy much gas--but every little bit helps.

[Joe C.]

For all you people who want to take our guns or have them "registered", or only let us have one gun, or show proof of needing more than one ........

I'LL AGREE TO THAT WHEN YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, AND YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right that I will fight for and am willing to risk my life for.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

Maybe the NRA and the Government should sit down a come to a compromise.
Right now, the way things are is not working.
The NRA has to stop acting like the second amendment gives us the freedom to own whatever armament we desire. We already have guardrails on what type of weapons someone can own. And people believing we're going to live in a gun free America need some professional help.

I suspect that the NRA would gladly agree to make fully automatic firearms, bump stocks, ghost guns, and large capacity magazines illegal if the government in turn would agree to draw the line there. No responsible gun owner besides Military or LEO’s has any functional need for those. The problem is that if the NRA were to give up those first lines of defense, there are those in the government that will endlessly keep trying to chip away at all firearms, including hunting, target practice, and self defense. Gun owners don’t want their hunting firearms to be the next first line of defense in the crosshairs of the government.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

In the process of downsizing, recently sold the motorcycle and snowmobile and going to sell one of the ATV’s and several firearms, only going keep the 9mm Sig, the Marlin lever action 22, the Savage Arms bolt action 30-06, and Thompson Center Fire muzzleloader. That being said, I would be crazy to trade in any of my firearms, which are worth significant $$$, for a $50 gas card. And the world won’t be any safer when I downsize since the firearms are always locked in a safe unless being used for hunting or target practice. But I will be happier, since I’ll get much more use out of the new Yamaha Quiet Tech that I buy with the sale proceeds : (

You know there turning in broken or cheap Saturday night specials, which is good thing. (IMO saturday night specials (raven arms and the like) kill more that all<others combined). I would be surprised to see 1 AK, AR, or clocks in the bunch?

[KYtoTV2021]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

hmm, I don't agree, it means fewer guns in circulation. If a million cities did that (I don't think we have a million cities even if you count towns) it would remove 134 million guns.

Not going to happen, it is just a symbol. But, symbols are good. The Flag is a symbol. It wont stop a bullet, but it is still good to have.

Bad guys will never turn in their guns. Good guys keep their guns for self-protection.

[Jensor17]

The government and You will NEVER GET GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF CRIMINALS. It is usually law-abiding citizens that give up old guns, non functioning guns or their deceased husband’s guns. Ask any police officer! Criminals have huge arsenals of weapons in their homes, vehicles and hidden places. Always did, always will.

[Blackbird45]

Let's be reasonable, as a gun owner I am not advocating the banning of guns, but there are some firearms that do not belong in a civil society. AR 15s and weapons of that type were designed to kill people. Not for hunting and not for home or self-protection. Here is a weapon that even in a novice's hands can fire 30 rounds per minute. It has a range of about two football fields and has the power to crush bone and vaporize organs. I'm not saying you can't own one, but maybe they will have to be confined to an official gun range. Where you can own or rent one for the day. I like roller coasters, but for practical reasons I've decided not to build one in my living room.

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

Let's be reasonable, as a gun owner I am not advocating the banning of guns, but there are some firearms that do not belong in a civil society. AR 15s and weapons of that type were designed to kill people. Not for hunting and not for home or self-protection. Here is a weapon that even in a novice's hands can fire 30 rounds per minute. It has a range of about two football fields and has the power to crush bone and vaporize organs. I'm not saying you can't own one, but maybe they will have to be confined to an official gun range. Where you can own or rent one for the day. I like roller coasters, but for practical reasons I've decided not to build one in my living room.

Your post suggest a lack of familiarity with firearms, people do hunt with hand guns they are not very effective hunting firearms, basically hand guns are made to shoot human beings, the greater the lethality of a particular handgun determines how effective it is , as to the ar15 " Point target effective range: 550 meters (602 yards)" " American Minuteman " personally I think that's a bit of exaggeration .223 has lost a lot of energy at that range, I have no data on hand but think the military would have a shorter effective range, someone is likely to give better info

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by dougjb

Cars are dangerous instrumentalities. We register our cars. We pass a driving test to drive this inherently dangerous thing.

We should demand that each and every gun in America be registered. We should demand that each and every gun owner pass a mental fitness test and a rigorous test as to a gun's usage.

Unlike cars, however, we should demand that any person wishing to own more than one gun, PROVE their need!

And, in my plan, anyone not registering all their guns and taking the required tests would be guilty of a criminal act subject to jail time.

Of course, law abiding citizens would want to comply and seek compliance. But, criminals and gun nuts (aka criminals) would forego compliance. Give the coppers another chance to lock these folks up.

Perhaps we might ultimately realize that gun ownership is counterproductive in our society. Then, only criminals and gun nuts will own guns.

Almost all other civilized countries in the world have gotten their arms around gun violence. Shootings in Western Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand have annual shootings of people in the the low two digit range while we have over 30,000. Some like Australia historically had a gun heritage similar to our own (think Wild West). But, when they experienced a nut case going off the rails and shooting up a bunch of people, they got together and realized they could not keep going on this way. Mass ownership of guns in Australia is a thing of the past. New Zealand recently did the same thing. It is not unusual in the UK for instance to be in Southeastern England to have the BBC report a shooting (not a killing) that occured in Scotland, such is the uniqueness of gun violence there. Here, we don't even hear of a killing by a gun being reported in the next neighborhood over.

The time has come for all people, gun owners and non gun owners to demand action.

Ultimately, we should just ban guns...totally....except for cops and military.

For those who argue, guns don't kill people, people kill people, I would argue its a lot easier to ban guns than people. If people want to kill others, let them do it the old fashion way, with fists and stones. We would have a lot fewer mass killings!

This is the U.S. of America, not the United Socialist States of Amerika. We have a Constitution that limits what the gov can do to us. Thank goodness!

[Blackbird45]

Originally Posted by jimbomaybe

Your post suggest a lack of familiarity with firearms, people do hunt with hand guns they are not very effective hunting firearms, basically hand guns are made to shoot human beings, the greater the lethality of a particular handgun determines how effective it is , as to the ar15 " Point target effective range: 550 meters (602 yards)" " American Minuteman " personally I think that's a bit of exaggeration .223 has lost a lot of energy at that range, I have no data on hand but think the military would have a shorter effective range, someone is likely to give better info

I believe you misunderstood my post. I'm not suggesting a ban on hand guns or hunting rifles. The AR 15 was design to kill people and I'm not even saying to ban them.
All I'm am saying that these weapons should be confined to a gun range. You want to experience of this type of weapon you either buy one and keep it in a locker at the range or you rent one at the range. This type of weapon has no business on the American streets.