Opinions/Discussions on Guns

[phgreek]

Originally Posted by Kaneyoufeelit

Care to explain why you think this would be better handled at the state level?

Do you think that it should be something completely left for states to decide to do on their own, or do you think that the federal government should give guidelines and leave it up to the states to write conforming laws, or......?

Sure...I always believe those at the state level are far more capable of acting in an uninfluenced and reasonable fashion. When you concentrate these issues at a Federal level the strongest special interest tends to win...or at least dominate such that the compromise is crap. This then results in folks being generally unsatisifed with the outcome, potential judicial activism, and incessant continued lobbying and litigation.

States, in my view make it hard for any one view to dominate, and for a deeper discussion that leads to the avoidance of most unintended consequences...

[DSully1995]

Originally Posted by goldandblue

God is pretty hardcore when it comes to punishing the wicked... Don't think he'd mind one second for putting a bullet in someone who is killing people especially 6 year old kids... God did not create the Justice System...

Then shouldnt he do it before?

[phgreek]

Originally Posted by DSully1995

Then shouldnt he do it before?

No accounting for instances of divine intervention, but as a general rule...God is a spectator 'til ya die.

[JadeBrecks]

Originally Posted by Buster Bluth

Agreed but now its illegal to possess. Or at least purchase. I don't know, it's something.

My brother just bought an assault rifle that was California spec, so it had ten-round clips and is a bitch to switch clips. You can simply go to a gun store and buy a 100-round drum for it! ONE HUNDRED ROUNDS! Jesus. The Founding Fathers didn't know such things could ever exist.

They may not have foreseen it but you can't argue with the fact they put the second amendment in so the government couldn't restrict citizens ability to get firearms to defend themselves from an oppressive government. The main firearms to defend yourself from such a case would be an "assault" rifle. All firearm laws do is restrict law abiding citizens not the criminals. All these mass shooters break countless laws to do these atrocities. None of them are going in to gun stores, buying these guns and ammo, then going and performing these crimes. They are illegally obtaining them. More laws won't stop them they just prohibit the possibility of someone being able to slow/stop this individual before the cops show up.

[cody1smith]

bam

[chicago51]

I think most gun owners would be okay with resonable restrictions and checks. NRA is a different story as they are in the businesses of selling gun and are going to be against anything that slows down their sales.

If the federal and state legistlatures but as much effort of putting resonbale restrictions and checks in place as do with these voter ID laws (cough cough voter suppression laws) we can make progress. Some states seem to want to make harder vote than to own a gun.

[JadeBrecks]

Originally Posted by chicago51

I think most gun owners would be okay with resonable restrictions and checks. NRA is a different story as they are in the businesses of selling gun and are going to be against anything that slows down their sales.

If the federal and state legistlatures but as much effort of putting resonbale restrictions and checks in place as do with these voter ID laws (cough cough voter suppression laws) we can make progress. Some states seem to want to make harder vote than to own a gun.

The problem is you already have these "reasonable" gun laws. All they do is slow down law abiding citizens not someone illegally obtaining them.