Reply to We shouldn’t have to live this way.

Forum Index » General Parenting Discussion

Reply to "We shouldn’t have to live this way. "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

I respect gun ownership, but I draw the line when gun owners believe their right to own weapons trumps [b]anybody else’s right to personal safety and freedom[/b], and frankly I believe that’s where things have has gone in the last decade.  I don’t think the second amendment is more important than any other amendment.

[i]I think we both agree on the bolded but are looking at it from different angles.  I would like to own a firearm for home defense and the second amendment guarantees that that right shall not be infringed.  Not to say that I'm drawing a line in the sand, but my freedoms should be as respected as yours and should not be changed because you disagree.

[/i]I support  mandatory mental health screenings for gun owners.
[i]
100% agreement.

[/i]I believe assault weapons should be banned. There is no reason for ordinary citizens to own these weapons. I believe service members should be required to return them upon leaving the service.

[i]Assault weapons are illegal (and should be).  They are defined as weapons with variable rates of fire, both burst and fully automatic modes.  Outside of very rare circumstances, they are illegal to be owned by the public.  An AR-15 is not an assault weapon.  The AR does not stand for Assault Rifle, it stands for ArmaLite, the company that designed it.  It is a semi-automatic rifle that, admittedly, is a bit intimidating looking but semi-automatic rifles have been around since the late 1800's.  Dick's Sporting Goods, which did quite a bit of posturing about the guns they sold, still allows you to buy semi-automatic rifles online.[/i]  https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/p/remington-597-semi-automatic-rifle-package-3-9x32mm-scope-15rema597blckwscprif  [i]And as far as I'm aware, service members must surrender firearms when discharged.
[/i]
I believe there should be a heavy tax on gun ownership over a certain number. Personally i do not think that people should be able to stockpile weapons, but can’t imagine legislation passing that would restrict the number of weapons people could own, so this is a workaround.

[i]Yeah, stockpiling has a real negative connotation, but I agree if your view of it is a stockroom full of weapons.  If you pheasant hunt and goose hunt and like to spend time at the trap and skeet ranges, you could end up with 4 or 5 shotguns easily.  If you hunt larger game and like to target shoot, two or three rifles isn't out of the question.  And a sidearm if you're going to be in bear country.  I know it sounds like a lot, but 10 firearms isn't really that much of a stretch... especially with how difficult it is to sell them when you upgrade.  As for the taxing of that?  Perhaps a tax that is assessed annually/biennially unless you can provide a certificate of training recertification from an accredited vendor. *shrug*  I don't know... interesting concept.[/i]

No one should be able to have an unsecured or concealed weapon on their person unless they are licensed law-enforcement officer. 
[i]
I disagree with this, but I will concede that there must be serious need, training and evaluation to obtain a permit.  Also annual review of those with permits.[/i]

Until mental health screening and licensing and securing of weapons is universally enforced, I don’t believe there should be open carry in this country.

[i]Fair enough, but I don't think that the incidents that bring gun control to the foreground are typically by people with licensed firearms.[/i]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics