Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Good. That means mandatory permits for all firearm possession. It also should apply to private sales. Only permit holders should be allowed to transfer ownership of firearms to other permit holders. Case closed, problem solved .Concealed carry permit holders are arguable the single most law abiding group of people in the country
The vast majority is no where near enough. Permit holders are required to have training in most states that issue permits. The problem is, there is no requirement to prove the buyer of a firearm in private sales, to show he has met any requirements. None, nada, nix.And the facts bear out that this is exactly what the vast majority of gun owners do.
Private sales laws provide no provision for Enforcement.There are already. The problem is our gun laws are not enforced.
Guy, that moron believes democrats wants to protect his right and have no intention of taking his guns. He will never comprehend the fact that Democrats will abuse any mandated training to achieve the goal of confiscationYou moss the point.....intentionally.
The democrats ised literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.... if you mandate training to own or carry a gun the democrata will make the trainimg so time consuming, expensive and difficult only the rich and politically connected will be able to go theough it....
Thi is also one of the ways European countries limit access to the few hunting shotguns they allow poeple to own...
Leftosts will exploit any training mandate the same way they used literacy tests to keep blacks from voting...but their target will be
everyone, not just blacks
Good. That means mandatory permits for all firearm possession. It also should apply to private sales. Only permit holders should be allowed to transfer ownership of firearms to other permit holders. Case closed, problem solved .
The vast majority is no where near enough. Permit holders are required to have training in most states that issue permits. The problem is, there is no requirement to prove the buyer of a firearm in private sales, to show he has met any requirements. None, nada, nix.
Private sales laws provide no provision for Enforcement.
And Mandatory Drug Screening it’s every 4473 Form ( Including SSRIs )Good. That means mandatory permits for all firearm possession. It also should apply to private sales. Only permit holders should be allowed to transfer ownership of firearms to other permit holders. Case closed, problem solved .
Hidden meaning somewhere. Are you a druggy ? .And Mandatory Drug Screening it’s every 4473 Form ( Including SSRIs )
And yet, many of these same gun owners are responsible for moving firearms around in private sales that easily allow them to end up in the hands of criminals.,The vast majority of gun owners will never commit a crime
Very few gun owners will sell to criminals. Those that do are criminals themselves and should be in prison.And yet, many of these same gun owners are responsible for moving firearms around in private sales that easily allow them to end up in the hands of criminals.,
And yet, many of these same gun owners are responsible for moving firearms around in private sales that easily allow them to end up in the hands of criminals.,
Few knowingly transfer to criminals. So you don’t have a clue. It’s no different then letting anyone drive a car or attend an adults only establishment or hire a school bus driver. Without mandatory checks, you have no idea.Very few gun owners will sell to criminals. Those that do are criminals themselves and should be in prison.
Ha haVery few gun owners will sell to criminals. Those that do are criminals themselves and should be in prison.
Few knowingly transfer to criminals. So you don’t have a clue. It’s no different then letting anyone drive a car or attend an adults only establishment or hire a school bus driver. Without mandatory checks, you have no idea.
All firearms must first be sold to the public though an FFL dealer. Criminals get them after that first sale…..through private unregulated transactions. Case closed. You don’t know, but I do.
Ha ha
And you find out who they are because they what, turn themselves in ? What a self serving post. Gun a holics routinely transfer firearms to any breathing humanoid …they view it as their right to arm criminals to keep gun makers in profits.
Of course, making up shit doesn’t explain anything. McCarthy allows the introduction of bills to be voted upon. They aren’t laws till voted upon and signed by the other branches.So you’re pretending democrats would agree to an illegal action. So yes, the woukd not go along with McCarthyIf Kevin McCarthy introduced a law to outlaw guns, Democrats would scramble for a reason vote against it. Democrats are phonies.
Straight edger since 2004 ( And California CCW holder since 2011) so noHidden meaning somewhere. Are you a druggy ? .
Legal Gun Sales are not easy in any way in California .And yet, many of these same gun owners are responsible for moving firearms around in private sales that easily allow them to end up in the hands of criminals.,
All you have to do is stop letting violent criminals go free. It's as simple as that. But no..Gun control is a legal, philosophical and moral issue.
About half the country wants to live in a society where citizens have the right to buy and carry firearms. Given our country's history, many of them raise valid points. Our country was founded because of a revolution against England and would not have won that war had the citizens not had firearms. Most people back then lived in rural areas where having firearms was essential for both protection and hunting. (Which still holds true in many areas throughout the country, especially in smaller communities and very rural areas where it could take the police a very long time to respond)
Our country also has had somewhat of a violent past, if you think of the Wild West, the Civil War, and numerous other wars internationally. So "Gun Culture" is somewhat embedded in a large part of American Society.
The other half of the country wants to live in a society where most (if not all) firearms are used primarily for hunting purposes but rarely for self defense reasons. They've witnessed the alarming amount of gun violence that's plagued many of the cities throughout the country for decades now. They've also witnessed the increased amount of mass shootings and school shootings over the past few decades. They're also tired of fearing for their lives over road rage incidents, bar fights, sporting event fights, etc etc.
The debate over gun control will likely continue until people on both sides of the issue have a reason to "change" their opinion on the matter.
A good start (in my humble opinion) would be figuring out a way to drastically reduce inner city gun violence. How do you do it? Well, let's take a look at why there's so much violence in some of our cities. It's common knowledge that a large part of the violence is related to various networks of illegal drug trade, human trafficking and various other criminal enterprises.
Our current "War on Drugs" has been going on for 50+ years, yet the violence in most cities hasn't decreased. Is it time for a different approach? Decriminalization of possessing a small amount of drugs could be a start. Decriminalization is NOT legalization. It would simply treat drug possession cases as a civil infraction instead of a criminal infraction. It would also do wonders for our Criminal Justice System, incarceration rates, facilities, etc. It would likely save billions of dollars, which then could be used for rehabilitation programs, etc. Rehabilitating people involved with drugs, instead of sending them to prison, where many come out even more violent than when they went in.
Think of it like this: If you're a drug dealer or drug user, you won't go to jail for the drugs you possess but you will likely face heavy jail time for possessing a gun. The smart ones will likely figure it out pretty quickly and not carry guns. If you're a police officer, how much better would it feel knowing that the drug dealer you just pulled over probably won't shoot you, since he knows he won't go to jail for drugs. Decriminalization won't necessarily end the higher level trafficking but it certainly could help with the street-level drug trade. And could likely drastically reduce street-level gun violence.
The first thing that comes into the minds of gun advocates nowadays when a progressive talks about gun regulation, etc is, "They want to regulate our guns when most of the gun violence is in the cities and they can't even get that under control, despite heavy regulation in many cities". And they have a valid point. BUT if pro-gun culture folks see that inner city gun crime has finally been reduced, would they be more willing to listen to the other side of the argument? I would think so.
There are many other ways to help resolve the gun control issue within the US, including better education, better mental health programs and various other programs that can gradually change our "gun culture".
Mandatory background checks, including gun shows and private trade should be standard. I would also look into mental health screenings, classes, tests, etc If we need to take a class and a test to drive a car, we should require something similar to possess a firearm. I (and I'm assuming most people) would want the peace of mind knowing that if someone legally owns a gun, they are: A. Mentally stable. and: B. They know how to safely use it.
My 2 cents.
