Some Wisconsin Gun Owners Think More Regulation Would Be OK.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Appeasement is never viable in this context.

Can you define what makes one "much of an American". Is there a checklist out there I can reference?

Do you support the right to keep and bear arms? Including semi automatics?
 
I'll work on a checklist for you if you need one. Pretty easy really. Founding principles. I'm pretty sure that categorizing people with different opinions than you as "enemies" and fantasizing about warring with them isn't one of them.....
I absolutely support the right to keep and bear arms. I've hunted and had guns for as long as I can remember. I own semi-automatics. I am also rational enough to realize that there do need to be limits and regulations. If someone is on the "no fly" list, to me, it is common sense that they should probably not be able to purchase a new AR. I also have enough common sense to realize that there should be limits on the weapons of war that the average citizen should be allowed to own. I am humble enough to realize that this is a complicated and tough issue to deal with and acknowledge that I don't have all the answers. However, I'm not blind and can clearly see that we have a problem in this country with mass shootings. Does the average person need to own a fully automatic high capacity weapon? If only responsible people bought them, then the answer is easy. The same can be said for nuclear weapons across the world. And we spend a lot of time and tax dollars trying to make sure that bad actors across the globe don't get their hands on them, do we not? Same concept.
 
Interesting that you mention founding principles and the no fly list in the same post. Not sure if my categorizing people who advocate for restrictions on the Second Amendment as an enemy is mentioned in any founding principles. But I am almost certain due process is. Many people that are not terrorist, like young children & members of Congress, have found themselves on the same no fly list that you say should be a disqualification for owning a firearm, without due process of law.
 
I agree that the no fly list should not be used. In reality, congressmen and children were not on the no fly list. They just had the same name as someone on the no fly list so they got flagged. Its a poor system. The other issue with the no fly list is that actual terrorists being watched by the government are not on the no fly list because they don't want the terrorists to know they are being watched. A better idea would be to make it mandatory for all law enforcement agencies, including the military to update NICS, a system supported by everyone including the NRA. I would not be against mandatory background checks on private sales as long as we didn't have to pay an FFL a transfer fee to do it. I see it as an insurance policy. If you sell a firearm to someone who uses it in a crime, it can't come back on you.
 
Oh man...I'm eating this thread up...nom nom nom. What's reasonable? What more would you like to give up since our fellow country men are voicing their opinions? Here's the compromise you "reasonable" gun owners wanted....

1934
1938
1968
1968 AGAIN
1986
1988
1990
1993 (edit)
1994

If you don't know the significance of any of those dates you're part of the problem.

Keep being fudds....

@ButterBean get in on this ridiculous thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh man...I'm eating this thread up...nom nom nom. What's reasonable? What more would you like to give up since our fellow country men are voicing their opinions? Here's the compromise you "reasonable" gun owners wanted....

1934
1938
1968
1968 AGAIN
1986
1988
1990
1994

If you don't know the significance of any of those dates you're part of the problem.

Keep being fudds....

@ButterBean get in on this ridiculous thread.
Are you sure its not 1993 rather than 1990?
 
Oh man...I'm eating this thread up...nom nom nom. What's reasonable? What more would you like to give up since our fellow country men are voicing their opinions? Here's the compromise you "reasonable" gun owners wanted....

1934
1938
1968
1968 AGAIN
1986
1988
1990
1993 (edit)
1994

If you don't know the significance of any of those dates you're part of the problem.

Keep being fudds....

@ButterBean get in on this ridiculous thread.
I'm on deck, Ready 5, Holding
 
Curbing "High Capacity Clips"

Laugh.gif
 
Gun control is always take from the law abiding. If there was some give to go along with the take, it would be an easier sell. Want universal background checks? Ok with me as long as silencers become readily available and un regulated.
 
Gun control is always take from the law abiding. If there was some give to go along with the take, it would be an easier sell. Want universal background checks? Ok with me as long as silencers become readily available and un regulated.

They aren't silencers, they are suppressors. The only people that would be affected by my suggestions would be criminals trying to buy firearms and people trying to sell firearms to criminals.

Interestingly, one of the dates mentioned was 1986. That was the Firearm Owners Protection Act which enacted protections for gun owners — prohibiting a national registry of dealer records, limiting ATF inspections to once per year (unless there are multiple infractions), softening what is defined as "engaging in the business" of selling firearms, and allowing licensed dealers to sell firearms at "gun shows" in their state. It also loosened regulations on the sale and transfer of ammunition.

Other dates left out of that list were
2003 - The Tiahrt Amendment which prohibited the ATF from publicly releasing data showing where criminals purchased their firearms and stipulated that only law enforcement officers or prosecutors could access such information.

2005 - Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which prevent gun manufacturers from being named in federal or state civil suits by those who were victims of crimes involving guns made by that company.

I know I must be a traitor in many people's eyes and need my throat stepped on and a bayonet shoved in my face because I don't feel that felons, drug addicts, and the mentally unstable should be able to purchase fully automatic weapons, grenades, rocket launchers, and land minds out of the back of Popular Mechanics and have it delivered directly to their homes via the mail without anyone knowing it and allowing them to carry those things into a school zone. I mean, what could possibly happen? I know I sound like a crazy liberal for thinking that way. I must have been raised wrong.

I am not saying there aren't any stupid, useless, feel good gun control laws that only affect law abiding citizens. The assault weapons ban is a prime example. I am saying not all of them are bad and were effective and the majority of people in the country agree with me. We can't address crime in this country because people are so worried that it might result in another gun control law so we can't even study it. They prefer that crime continue and we throw everyone in jail after they committed the crime. Just give everyone a gun, that should solve the issue. People want to point out the shootings in Chicago but God forbid we actually try and figure out why it is happening. We want to take the easy way and blame it on the fact that its run by democrats rather than actually look at what is happening there because we might not like the reason. The reality is that it will have more to do with poverty, overcrowding, and history than guns but we don't want to deal with that either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top