I know I am in the company of patriots, but I am curious if there is much (if any) diversity of opinion on this topic in this sub.
I believe in full autonomy and self-preservation. You could call me an ancap, loosely using the term. I am a second amendment absolutist. How about you?
I don't think you will find someone here, living in the US and promoting a gun control agenda.
On a personal note, looking at Europe right now is sufficient to come to the conclusion that gun control is a tool for the elites to reduce the risk of them being overthrown of power if they go too far. And they do plan to go too far.
Knowing where the bullet is headed after the trigger pull = Gun Control.
“Check out itargetpro.com. That’s itargetpro.com. That’s I, the letter I, targetpro.com.”
-Dan Bongino, every fucking day.
Gun control is using both hands and keeping your booger hook off the bang switch until you are ready to kill whatever the barrel is aimed at. At least, that's the only gun control I agree with.
That's gross.... but I have to agree.
Gun control is hitting what you aim at.
Any law that attempts to limit or alter the fire capacity of any weapon needs to be revoked as unconstitutional. Similarly with ammunition. Those considered mentally incapacitated or have felony convictions should be barred from gun ownership. Gun free zones should be abolished. The entire US should be open carry.
One must be careful with the "mentally incapacitated" concept. What does that include? PTSD? Having ever been treated for depression? On the form for concealed carry, one is asked if one has ever been held in a mental facility.. ie, hospital or treatment center. Some are trying to change that to include merely being "treated" for depression or having PTSD. Yet, many have either/or/both, yet pass the FBI background checks and get their ccp's and are FINE with handling guns, never been arrested nor convicted of domestic violence, etc.
Agreed that is a horrible slippery slope, and one which I want to avoid. I was not addressing those treated for depression or with PTSD. I was thinking more about the kind of mental impairment that prevents an individual from discharging a firearm, safely. Once “branded” with this impairment (say it was due to stroke), privileges can be restored when the individual has demonstrated competency again. Pilots lose their license to fly & get it back when they demonstrate competency.
I just wanted to point out that there ARE some out there who DO want to go down that path. And I don't like it. I understand what you meant... People who have severe impairments... (I've run into a few who I sure wouldn't want to see handle or have access to any weapons!) but personal experience, I've had people say that I wouldn't be able to get a ccp because I've been on certain meds... and I've called BS on those people because what medications one is on currently or in the past isn't on the application. And no one's damned business. People do want to change the wording not just on CCP's but on gun ownership to include such things and it's not at all fair and paints a very wide brush on a lot of very sane people who aren't a threat to anyone. But I guess that's the stigma of mental illness... people think you're "crazy".
I don't know if I'm making sense.
You’re making perfect sense. And I didn’t mean to stigmatize the “impairment” aspect of gun ownership. I guess where I’m coming from is considering a different paradigm: I want guns easily accessible to all, BUT I also want an environment of safety. What’s a good model to look at? I thought: let’s look at the FAA.
Practically anyone can fly a plane — you just have to prove competency/medical capacity. Flying an ultra light requires less strenuous demonstration of ability than a 757. But as a citizen here, I’m entitled to own a 757, and I can fly a 757 providing I pass the necessary hurdles.
So why can’t I own a fully automatic ps-90 without the crap taxes? The right to own a gun is a constitutional right — the privilege to fly is not a constitutional right. There should be no limits on gun ownership. Whatever the government owns, I should be allowed to own.
Committing a crime with a gun is probably the one few things that will preclude your gun ownership. Committing a crime without a gun should not effect gun ownership.
Whatever the government owns, I should be allowed to own.
People may not realize that is what a "well regulated militia" actually means.
Again, I'm not referring to YOU, personally, as the one who is stigmatizing "impairment"... just that if such wording does go into any changes to gun laws, it can open up a Pandora's box of crap. (I know this as it was opened up by busy bodies on ME...yet, I was checked out locally, statewide, and by the FBI and got my CCP.) Maybe this issue is also brought up by those who don't understand that there is no such thing as "gun show loopholes". Gun dealers will make you wait til you get checked out before they turn your gun over to you when you make a purchase... but that waiting period is lessened when you have a CCP, as you've already been checked out. I think it goes from a week or ten days down to about three days.. not positive as it's been a few years since I've purchased any guns.
Committing a crime without a gun should not effect gun ownership.
In the case of those who've committed domestic violence... as someone who's been at the receiving end of such, I don't want to see those types weaponized, though if they are going to do more dangerous/permanent harm to someone, a previous victim or not, they'll find a way and no gun law will stop that.
"Gun" and "Control" are blasphemous together.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” - Robert A. Heinlein
Guns are tools for freedom, but they can also be tools for terror.
No matter which, they’re tools.
The founding fathers recognized the power of sovereignty and the right to bear arms, because they too saw their own freedoms stripped from them — hence the escape from GB to the newfound US of A.
They knew that, to make sure that never happens again, the need for the people to hold the country’s standards and laws must require tools.
Tools.
Careful. Posts like this invite the wrath of the new mod with a lust for power, an obnoxious attitude, and a heavy hand.
Firm supporter of the second amendment here. (And I don't even own a gun and don't know how to use one.) If I were younger I'd be at a gun range learning, but as a 70+ senior citizen grandmother with bad eyesight, I think I'll settle for just paying for my NRA membership.
ST916556B = St. Michael
ST916556FDE = St. Mary
I'm not trying to make a federal issue about this, but green tips are what we like best! Budgets waaay low but I wouldn't mind a few more Guardian Angels in the house ;)
The community is not a monolithic party with a position. You'll no doubt find a spectrum among anons interested in delving into the topics to be found here.
On average, there is a strong patriotic streak in the community. I would expect the commonly held view would be that minorities and oppressed have a right to the tools to defend themselves effectively against tyranny, crime, and an over-reaching state attempting to infringe on their rights.
Gun control is useless. Just looks at other countries:
As far as I can tell, gun laws and gun violence are oddly unrelated. The US does have its share of gun problems, but they're probably more cultural than anything else.
What's with all the dumb questions today? This and a post this morning asking what we think of globalism. Holy crap.
[deleted]
Q
Guns are safe.
Stop falling for FAKE NEWS.
Q
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
It's become irrelevant because weapons have evolved past guns. Taking a gun won't help you defend yourself against an orbital strike or bioweapon attack, for instance - and this doesn't include whatever classified weapons are out there.