Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banning all Ar-15s, assault rifles, and extended clips.

Plus every bullet shout cost $200.

How many lives will this save?

One or more and that is enough.

[Anonymous]

The insurance argument makes 0 sense. Insure against what?
You insure your car against an accident, any damage done on purpose is not covered. Pulling the trigger is shooting it on purpose, so not covered…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many have asked how this 18 year old of limited means was able to afford to spend over $10k on assault weapons and a large stockpile of ammo. The answer seems to be credit. Gun manufacturers now offer financing for purchasing.

Why don't those that own a financial interest in the weapons have strict liability? Shouldn't there be a duty of responsibility for easy financing? These weapons cost thousands of dollars, they aren't cheap. A mass shooter isn't worried about the long term cost of interest payments because they don't intend to survive. The reduced up front cost also allows them to afford more ammunition.

Financing for guns is not something that should exist.

This, this, this!

[Anonymous]

To those arguing that this won't do enough which child is not worth saving?? do you have a name of this child because I'd like to look them up on my own to determine why you don't think their life is worth saving. Like are they that annoying kid who always leaves their bike in your yard no matter how many times you ask them not to or they steal your morning newspaper? Not saying you're wrong I would just like to double check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many have asked how this 18 year old of limited means was able to afford to spend over $10k on assault weapons and a large stockpile of ammo. The answer seems to be credit. Gun manufacturers now offer financing for purchasing.

Why don't those that own a financial interest in the weapons have strict liability? Shouldn't there be a duty of responsibility for easy financing? These weapons cost thousands of dollars, they aren't cheap. A mass shooter isn't worried about the long term cost of interest payments because they don't intend to survive. The reduced up front cost also allows them to afford more ammunition.

Financing for guns is not something that should exist.

This, this, this!

Pretty easy to rack up a huge bill when you know you won't be having to pay it back

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many have asked how this 18 year old of limited means was able to afford to spend over $10k on assault weapons and a large stockpile of ammo. The answer seems to be credit. Gun manufacturers now offer financing for purchasing.

Why don't those that own a financial interest in the weapons have strict liability? Shouldn't there be a duty of responsibility for easy financing? These weapons cost thousands of dollars, they aren't cheap. A mass shooter isn't worried about the long term cost of interest payments because they don't intend to survive. The reduced up front cost also allows them to afford more ammunition.

Financing for guns is not something that should exist.

This, this, this!

Pretty easy to rack up a huge bill when you know you won't be having to pay it back

Yes! And at 18, there is no background to check. Hormones, brain development…it’s a deadly cocktail in every way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many have asked how this 18 year old of limited means was able to afford to spend over $10k on assault weapons and a large stockpile of ammo. The answer seems to be credit. Gun manufacturers now offer financing for purchasing.

Why don't those that own a financial interest in the weapons have strict liability? Shouldn't there be a duty of responsibility for easy financing? These weapons cost thousands of dollars, they aren't cheap. A mass shooter isn't worried about the long term cost of interest payments because they don't intend to survive. The reduced up front cost also allows them to afford more ammunition.

Financing for guns is not something that should exist.

This, this, this!

Pretty easy to rack up a huge bill when you know you won't be having to pay it back

Yes! And at 18, there is no background to check. Hormones, brain development…it’s a deadly cocktail in every way.

They also have a clean credit history!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many have asked how this 18 year old of limited means was able to afford to spend over $10k on assault weapons and a large stockpile of ammo. The answer seems to be credit. Gun manufacturers now offer financing for purchasing.

Why don't those that own a financial interest in the weapons have strict liability? Shouldn't there be a duty of responsibility for easy financing? These weapons cost thousands of dollars, they aren't cheap. A mass shooter isn't worried about the long term cost of interest payments because they don't intend to survive. The reduced up front cost also allows them to afford more ammunition.

Financing for guns is not something that should exist.

This, this, this!

Pretty easy to rack up a huge bill when you know you won't be having to pay it back

Yes! And at 18, there is no background to check. Hormones, brain development…it’s a deadly cocktail in every way.

They also have a clean credit history!

Yep. Perfect storm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The insurance argument makes 0 sense. Insure against what?
You insure your car against an accident, any damage done on purpose is not covered. Pulling the trigger is shooting it on purpose, so not covered…

You buy insurance that covers personal liability for wrongful death using your weapon. Like an umbrella policy. Make it mandatory, every gun owner must pay in, and then when the a shooter or his estate is sued, victims and families get paid.

[Anonymous]

I just am so jaded right now. So many ways we can get at this problem and we have done NOTHING. Zero.

Can the president implement an EO that would establish a voluntary buy back program or something? Using HHS funds maybe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insurance argument makes 0 sense. Insure against what?
You insure your car against an accident, any damage done on purpose is not covered. Pulling the trigger is shooting it on purpose, so not covered…

You buy insurance that covers personal liability for wrongful death using your weapon. Like an umbrella policy. Make it mandatory, every gun owner must pay in, and then when the a shooter or his estate is sued, victims and families get paid.

It’s that and gun manufacturers will face civil suits. No insurance company will cover them.

[Anonymous]

Look it will take a hell of a lot of time, energy, cash etc to get any gun reform. Why take 1/2 measures when even a little reform will be fought tooth and nail by the republicans. Go for a complete ban on weapons and ammo. If you are going to break the republicans on the issue break them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look it will take a hell of a lot of time, energy, cash etc to get any gun reform. Why take 1/2 measures when even a little reform will be fought tooth and nail by the republicans. Go for a complete ban on weapons and ammo. If you are going to break the republicans on the issue break them.

This isn’t about breaking Republicans for me. This is about doing something, anything, to reduce the chances of this happening ever again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The insurance argument makes 0 sense. Insure against what?
You insure your car against an accident, any damage done on purpose is not covered. Pulling the trigger is shooting it on purpose, so not covered…

Oh no, not you again. Do you not understand insurance? If you drive a car and you end up injuring someone, wrecking someone else's car, or destroying property, your insurance company pays for medical bills, to repair/replace the other person's car, or to fix/replace damaged property. If your gun is used to hurt or kill someone, your insurance policy would cover the bills for the injured, pay out money for the dead, and pay to fix damaged property. Insurance kicks in whether or not you drive your car into some "on purpose" or "by accident." Same with guns. You own a gun, you buy insurance if you or someone in your household discharges the gun and injures, kills, destroys.
Let me tell you something, insurance companies are going to have insanely high premiums for young men and for families with young children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taking steps to keep guns out of the hands of those that should not possess them.

Raising age to purchase
Getting people on NICS more easily (e.g., prescribed psychoactive medication)
Severe penalties for straw purchases (and those selling to straw purchasers if it can be shown that seller had this knowledge)
Background checks for all transfers (i.e., no private or face-to-face sales except via federal licensee and with the NICS check)

More robust database to help crack down on straw buyers. It's insane that if you want to buy a box of Sudafed for a stuffy nose, your driver's license and info about your purchase go into a national database and if you try to buy more too soon, it will be flagged and you will be prevented from buying any more. But if you buy a bunch of AR-15s and thousands of rounds of ammo nobody knows and nobody cares. If you buy several 9mm pistols a week month after month nobody knows and nobody cares. There's an entire black market with thousands of guns changing hands.