Democrats Need to Drop the Gun-Control Issue

[MarcATL]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

 

[Blues Man]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people keep their guns, but let's all be safe about it.

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

In fact it is an almost vanishingly small percentage of people that commit any crimes involving guns and violence.

Our gun crimes are so concentrated in very small areas of the country that you can see drastic crime stats in a 3 or 4 block distance but outside of that area gun crimes are virtually nonexistent.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

 

[Rambunctious]

Americans are use to the 2nd amendment and appreciate its value in the preservation of freedom...the minority of anti gun ownership gets smaller every day....I have anti gun friends that have armed themselves this past year...every time a dem brings up gun control folks go out and buy more guns....you had better get the message democrats....

 

[Rambunctious]

Think about our weak leader we have today in Joe....China could invade the USA and walk right down Main street and Joe wouldn't stop them...what would happen if none of us had guns?....

 

[JoeB131]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people keep their guns, but let's all be safe about it.

That will not happen. Communists, socialists, marxists......todays dems, take guns away from the populace.

 

[Blues Man]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

OK so why don't you quote where I said i want illegals "rounded up"?

And FYI the gun industry doesn't make a profit on the illegal sales of guns to criminals.

And everyone is killed by someone they "know" but so what? I could say I "know" thousands of people w=but not have any type pf relationship with any of them

 

[BlackSand]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people keep their guns, but let's all be safe about it.

.

Thanks for your input and some good ideas.
I can say that Democrat attempts are selling, and have always sold, more firearms.

Proper gun safety courses, tactical training and situation awareness courses have seen an increase in interest.
There has been a steady increase in firearm owners doing what is necessary to obtain a Conceal and Carry Permit.
Those categories have also seen a steady increase with women and other minorities.

A firearms owner can purchase firearms use insurance.
That insurance often includes legal representation should they use their firearm in an incident.

However ... It is safe to say that better enforcement of existing laws, may have more impact.
Law-abiding citizens have already chosen to obey the law.

. ​

 

[Harry Dresden]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

your last sentence is a crock of shit joe....you just ate up some anti gun bullshit....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns

It's not a question of fear, but of personal responsibility. The police cannot defend you.

 

[BluesLegend]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Dems can't win on gun control because their proposals are beyond stupid! Heaping gun control laws onto already law abiding gun owners accomplishes none of the gun control objectives. Meanwhile the criminals and mentally ill IGNORE gun control laws. This is why law abiding gun owners tell gun control advocates to fuck off!

 

[BlindBoo]

I'll always support good gun control measures.

Balance is very important in controlling your weapon. Knowing where the safety is. Knowing how to clean and maintain your weapon is pretty important too.

 

[MarcATL]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

In fact it is an almost vanishingly small percentage of people that commit any crimes involving guns and violence.

Our gun crimes are so concentrated in very small areas of the country that you can see drastic crime stats in a 3 or 4 block distance but outside of that area gun crimes are virtually nonexistent.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Republican USMB posters are always emphasizing how bad crime is in the only city in America, Chicago and you come waltzing in to burst their bubble with these alternative facts.

Who should I believe?

 

[MisterBeale]

Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

I have no problem with gun owners being held financially and criminally liable. . . however, if you make insurance mandatory?

Only the rich and the elites will be able to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

This is akin to the poll tax that we once had that excluded folks from voting.

It is also why our elections tilt toward the rich and the powerful. . . money is speech in this nation.

Once you require folks to need money to exercise their rights? You start to go down are very dangerous path.

The corporations are already very busy at subverting the public government and replacing it with a corporatacracy controlled by technology. . . you want to help strip the poor even more of their natural rights?

Which billionaire corporatist do you work for?

 

[pknopp]

There is no issue. It's like immigration and abortion, everyone knows nothing is going to be done of any real difference.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

I fully support gun safety and training. I even want it to be mandatory curriculum in high schools which ensures that all students are familiar with the safe use of firearms.

Gun accidents are so rare that it should be fairly inexpensive to insure, but what do we get in return? Also, insurance would not cover intentional actions, so I don't know what the goal would be.

Other than that, I agree with your OP.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Agreed.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Agreed.

Can we repeal the Hughes Amendment?

 

[BlackSand]

I fully support gun safety and training. I even want it to be mandatory curriculum in high schools which ensures that all students are familiar with the safe use of firearms.

Gun accidents are so rare that it should be fairly inexpensive to insure, but what do we get in return? Also, insurance would not cover intentional actions, so I don't know what the goal would be.

Other than that, I agree with your OP.

.

They made Hunter's Safety Courses (conducted by the Sheriff's Department) something they had to offer at the High School (Gun Free Zone) ...
When the State Legislature started requiring Hunter's Safety Certification to get a Hunting License.

The People in this state ... We don't let shit slide by ...

.​

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Most Democrats and liberals likewise agree.