• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Prevent criminals from having guns

Akivah

Well-Known Member
I think people on both sides of the gun control issue in the USA agree with my title. The problem lies in what sort of limitations should be in place. Personally, I'm in favor of gun ownership, but do think some limitations should be in place. I'm looking for common goals from people on both sides of this issue. My two categories below are first on the weapon itself and the second category is on the purchaser.

I. What, if any, weapon limitations should exist on law-abiding people (LAP):
Should LAP be allowed to own military grade weaponry, such as mortars or shoulder-launched missiles?
Should LAP be allowed to own fully automatic weaponry (i.e. multiple shots per one trigger squeeze)?
Should LAP be allowed to own semi-automatic weaponry (i.e. one shot per one trigger squeeze)?
Should there be limits on the number of weapons per law-abiding person? On the caliber?
Should LAP be allowed to own antique weapons that only have one shot per re-loading?
Should non-gun weaponry (e.g. blades, clubs, arrows) be limited in some way?

II. What hurdles should be placed on LAP for gun acquisition:
What sort of background check should there be?
How (or should) can ex-criminals earn back their ability to legally acquire a gun?
What age limit (both low and high) should there be on gun acquisition and usage?
Should there be a waiting period between purchasing a gun and acquiring that gun? If so, how long?
Should gun training classes be required?
Should periodic testing (e.g. annual, bi-annual, etc.) be required after the purchase? If so, what sort of testing?
Should mental testing be required? If so, what type of testing?
Should there be an additional government fee/tax on gun purchases?
Should there be limitations based on the purchaser's US citizenship?
Should there be differences if the purchaser is former military or former law enforcement?

Thank you for your help and opinions.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I. What, if any, weapon limitations should exist on law-abiding people (LAP):
Should LAP be allowed to own military grade weaponry, such as mortars or shoulder-launched missiles?
NO
Should LAP be allowed to own fully automatic weaponry (i.e. multiple shots per one trigger squeeze)?
NO
Should LAP be allowed to own semi-automatic weaponry (i.e. one shot per one trigger squeeze)?
YES
Should there be limits on the number of weapons per law-abiding person? On the caliber?
Maybe. Depends on how the law defines "limits"
Should LAP be allowed to own antique weapons that only have one shot per re-loading?
Yes
Should non-gun weaponry (e.g. blades, clubs, arrows) be limited in some way?
No

II. What hurdles should be placed on LAP for gun acquisition:
What sort of background check should there be?
Extensive background checks. Such as, mental health, domestic violence, felonies etc.
How (or should) can ex-criminals earn back their ability to legally acquire a gun?
Depends. Violent criminals? Never.
What age limit (both low and high) should there be on gun acquisition and usage?
14 on single shot hunting rifles/shotguns (supervised.) 21 on all others.
Should there be a waiting period between purchasing a gun and acquiring that gun? If so, how long?
Not if there is instant background check available.
Should gun training classes be required?
For rifles and shotguns no. For handguns, yes.
Should periodic testing (e.g. annual, bi-annual, etc.) be required after the purchase? If so, what sort of testing?
No
Should mental testing be required? If so, what type of testing?
No. Background checks should cover that.
Should there be an additional government fee/tax on gun purchases?
No, government collects too much as it is, they don't need more money to throw away.
Should there be limitations based on the purchaser's US citizenship?
Yes
Should there be differences if the purchaser is former military or former law enforcement?
No
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
First we confiscate all fire arms.

gun_confiscation.jpg


Then we destroy them all.

2346345.jpg

Anyone caught with a firearm after the Confiscation Period will be fined $10,000 for each weapon in his/her possession.

The U. S. saves the lives of 38,000 + people* and pays off the national debit with scofflaw fines.


animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif
EVERYBODY WINS
animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif

* firearm deaths in 2016
source

.
 
Last edited:

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I just had a thought. Illegal immigrant supporters say it isn’t possible to deport them because there are millions of them, and we don’t have the resources to do that.(Plus that would be, like, so mean, for sure.) But gun confiscation advocates think we can find, collect and destroy the 300 million guns in the U.S. Hmmm.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I think people on both sides of the gun control issue in the USA agree with my title. The problem lies in what sort of limitations should be in place. Personally, I'm in favor of gun ownership, but do think some limitations should be in place. I'm looking for common goals from people on both sides of this issue. My two categories below are first on the weapon itself and the second category is on the purchaser.

I. What, if any, weapon limitations should exist on law-abiding people (LAP):
Should LAP be allowed to own military grade weaponry, such as mortars or shoulder-launched missiles?
Should LAP be allowed to own fully automatic weaponry (i.e. multiple shots per one trigger squeeze)?
Should LAP be allowed to own semi-automatic weaponry (i.e. one shot per one trigger squeeze)?
Should there be limits on the number of weapons per law-abiding person? On the caliber?
Should LAP be allowed to own antique weapons that only have one shot per re-loading?
Should non-gun weaponry (e.g. blades, clubs, arrows) be limited in some way?

II. What hurdles should be placed on LAP for gun acquisition:
What sort of background check should there be?
How (or should) can ex-criminals earn back their ability to legally acquire a gun?
What age limit (both low and high) should there be on gun acquisition and usage?
Should there be a waiting period between purchasing a gun and acquiring that gun? If so, how long?
Should gun training classes be required?
Should periodic testing (e.g. annual, bi-annual, etc.) be required after the purchase? If so, what sort of testing?
Should mental testing be required? If so, what type of testing?
Should there be an additional government fee/tax on gun purchases?
Should there be limitations based on the purchaser's US citizenship?
Should there be differences if the purchaser is former military or former law enforcement?

Thank you for your help and opinions.

There is no reason for a person who will always follow the law (and whose
stuff wont get stolen!) not to have anything he wants.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
I think people on both sides of the gun control issue in the USA agree with my title. The problem lies in what sort of limitations should be in place. Personally, I'm in favor of gun ownership, but do think some limitations should be in place. I'm looking for common goals from people on both sides of this issue. My two categories below are first on the weapon itself and the second category is on the purchaser.

I. What, if any, weapon limitations should exist on law-abiding people (LAP):
Should LAP be allowed to own military grade weaponry, such as mortars or shoulder-launched missiles?
explosives should be limited at a federal level.
Should LAP be allowed to own fully automatic weaponry (i.e. multiple shots per one trigger squeeze)?
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
Should LAP be allowed to own semi-automatic weaponry (i.e. one shot per one trigger squeeze)?
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
Should there be limits on the number of weapons per law-abiding person?
this should not be regulated at a federal level.
On the caliber?
This should not be regulated at the federal level with the exception of material such as anti-lead ammunition.
Should LAP be allowed to own antique weapons that only have one shot per re-loading?
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
Should non-gun weaponry (e.g. blades, clubs, arrows) be limited in some way?
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
II. What hurdles should be placed on LAP for gun acquisition:
What sort of background check should there be?
A background check that searches criminal history only.
How (or should) can ex-criminals earn back their ability to legally acquire a gun?
through petition of the court.
What age limit (both low and high) should there be on gun acquisition and usage?
18 to purchase, no limit on ownership, no limit on usage.
Should there be a waiting period between purchasing a gun and acquiring that gun? If so, how long?
this should not be regulated at a federal level. But I see no problem with a waiting period.
Should gun training classes be required?
Not for ownership. For concealed carry, perhaps.
Should periodic testing (e.g. annual, bi-annual, etc.) be required after the purchase?
Not for ownership, for concealed carry perhaps.
If so, what sort of testing?
marksmanship, safety, and knowledge.
Should mental testing be required? If so, what type of testing?
Absolutely not.
Should there be an additional government fee/tax on gun purchases?
as long as the do not make the purchase cost prohibitive.
Should there be limitations based on the purchaser's US citizenship?
don't particularly care, but sure.
Should there be differences if the purchaser is former military or former law enforcement?
no
Thank you for your help and opinions.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
I think this is a state level discussion not a federal one.

The federal government should be in charge of a limited set of things: not education, not drug enforcement and not many other things. It is failing with social security and with medicare and in every situation where it has control does a terrible job. It does a terrible job regulating DC for example. Show me any federal action that is well managed and not wasteful. Go ahead and take the good government challenge.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
First we confiscate all fire arms.

gun_confiscation.jpg


Then we destroy them all.

2346345.jpg

Anyone caught with a firearm after the Confiscation Period will be fined $10,000 for each weapon in his/her possession.

The U. S. saves the lives of 38,000 + people* and pays off the national debit with scofflaw fines.


animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif
EVERYBODY WINS
animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif

* firearm deaths in 2016
source

.

No right to hunt for food, and certainly no right to self defense....That makes sense:rolleyes::facepalm:
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
First we confiscate all fire arms.

gun_confiscation.jpg


Then we destroy them all.

2346345.jpg

Anyone caught with a firearm after the Confiscation Period will be fined $10,000 for each weapon in his/her possession.

The U. S. saves the lives of 38,000 + people* and pays off the national debit with scofflaw fines.


animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif
EVERYBODY WINS
animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif

* firearm deaths in 2016
source

.

So if I don't pay does this go to credit collections?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
No right to hunt for food, and certainly no right to self defense....That makes sense:rolleyes::facepalm:
Tough it out like most of the people in other industrialized nations. You don't see the British whining about their lack of firearms---although a few citizens may have a registered gun or two if they're able to show sufficient cause.


.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
First we confiscate all fire arms.

gun_confiscation.jpg


Then we destroy them all.

2346345.jpg

Anyone caught with a firearm after the Confiscation Period will be fined $10,000 for each weapon in his/her possession.

The U. S. saves the lives of 38,000 + people* and pays off the national debit with scofflaw fines.


animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif
EVERYBODY WINS
animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif

* firearm deaths in 2016
source

.
So............ ..... ..

You took care of the legal upstanding citizenry.

Um...

What about the criminals?
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
I think people on both sides of the gun control issue in the USA agree with my title. The problem lies in what sort of limitations should be in place. Personally, I'm in favor of gun ownership, but do think some limitations should be in place. I'm looking for common goals from people on both sides of this issue. My two categories below are first on the weapon itself and the second category is on the purchaser.

I. What, if any, weapon limitations should exist on law-abiding people (LAP):
Should LAP be allowed to own military grade weaponry, such as mortars or shoulder-launched missiles?
Should LAP be allowed to own fully automatic weaponry (i.e. multiple shots per one trigger squeeze)?
Should LAP be allowed to own semi-automatic weaponry (i.e. one shot per one trigger squeeze)?
Should there be limits on the number of weapons per law-abiding person? On the caliber?
Should LAP be allowed to own antique weapons that only have one shot per re-loading?
Should non-gun weaponry (e.g. blades, clubs, arrows) be limited in some way?

II. What hurdles should be placed on LAP for gun acquisition:
What sort of background check should there be?
How (or should) can ex-criminals earn back their ability to legally acquire a gun?
What age limit (both low and high) should there be on gun acquisition and usage?
Should there be a waiting period between purchasing a gun and acquiring that gun? If so, how long?
Should gun training classes be required?
Should periodic testing (e.g. annual, bi-annual, etc.) be required after the purchase? If so, what sort of testing?
Should mental testing be required? If so, what type of testing?
Should there be an additional government fee/tax on gun purchases?
Should there be limitations based on the purchaser's US citizenship?
Should there be differences if the purchaser is former military or former law enforcement?

Thank you for your help and opinions.
I would put similar restrictions for driving and require liscense for anything more than a bb gun. Take away liscenses when people are arrested for any sort of violence and make them earn the privilege back. Take them away for not paying child support, what ever gets people to comply. Thats where the tracking and real id's exist to track anything the government wants , make the gun licencing part of the dmv. Just a few ideas, one good step is to detour unregistered guns as much as possible and keep them out of the hands of violent criminals and insane people.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
So............ ..... ..

You took care of the legal upstanding citizenry.

Um...

What about the criminals?
What about them? Criminals have to keep their guns somewhere, and with a weapon bounty of $10,000 for information leading to these criminals and their stash of guns, the Snitch And Get Rich program will have them rounded them up in a year or two.

.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
So............ ..... ..

You took care of the legal upstanding citizenry.

Um...

What about the criminals?
Why have laws? Criminals will just break them.
I don't agree with a gun ban but the idea that bans of weapons do in fact deter criminals is pretty evident by the lack of thugs with military grade weaponry. Just because they'd use it doesn't mean they can get it
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
explosives should be limited at a federal level.
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
This should not be regulated at a federal level.
this should not be regulated at a federal level.

This should not be regulated at the federal level with the exception of material such as anti-lead ammunition.
This should not be regulated at a federal level.

This should not be regulated at a federal level.

A background check that searches criminal history only.
through petition of the court.

18 to purchase, no limit on ownership, no limit on usage.
this should not be regulated at a federal level. But I see no problem with a waiting period.
Not for ownership. For concealed carry, perhaps.
Not for ownership, for concealed carry perhaps.
marksmanship, safety, and knowledge.
Absolutely not.
as long as the do not make the purchase cost prohibitive.
don't particularly care, but sure.
no
I have no dog in this race. So please note I'm completely a neutral party. Keep an entire Arsenal in your house for all I care.

But out of just sheer curiosity why don't you agree with mental health checks for gun ownership?
What if a person with a history of suicidal depression buys a gun and kills themselves and their family?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
First we confiscate all fire arms.

gun_confiscation.jpg


Then we destroy them all.

2346345.jpg

Anyone caught with a firearm after the Confiscation Period will be fined $10,000 for each weapon in his/her possession.

The U. S. saves the lives of 38,000 + people* and pays off the national debit with scofflaw fines.


animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif
EVERYBODY WINS
animated-fireworks-image-0094.gif

* firearm deaths in 2016
source

.

I imagine that the amount of standoffs and domestic terrorism as a result would be off the charts.
 
Top