People allways talk about it, but doesnt it really depend on what Gun control really is? Are you for outright outlawing guns, or making it so ANYONE, ANYTIME can just buy one at the sput of the moment. Would gun control be kind of the way it is, at least in my state of Michigan where you have to have a criminal check?
2006-11-20 01:27:23 · 15 answers · asked by Jon J 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
OK, lets keep politics aside, both sides have gone for some form of gun control if you do your research, What do you think gun control should be? Background checks? No checks, buy whenever you want?,
2006-11-20 01:41:49 · update #1
My definition of gun control is to stop Hillary and the other liberals from altering the Second Amendment.
In our research we should both find that it's from the left that the most stringent (infringement) controls arise.
2006-11-20 01:30:33 · answer #1 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The do gooders in the UK managed to get them banned and now it is worse than ever.
Banning was not the answer, Tighter control was.
People with FC's were the most law abiding people you could get. I was scared of getting a speeding ticket in case it went against me holding fire arms because I used to very much enjoy shooting.
Since guns were outlawed the only people that have them are the outlaws.
I can now get hold of a gun easier than when I had a License.
There was an interview with some US army guy once who was showing kids how to shoot guns and the interviewer ask the question "if you are teaching these kids how to shoot guns then arnt they going to go around shooting people equipped with this new knowledge." the army guy responded to the reporter saying "you are equipped to be a prostitute but this doesnt mean you are."
There should be background checks
Psychiatric tests.
Character witnesses
Regular inspections and re testing
All of these we were willing to do.
2006-11-20 01:46:51 · answer #2 · answered by maka 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
My idea of gun control is being able to put every bullet in the 5X ring. Others do have some different ideas but, basically, we have enough gun control laws right now and we don't need any more of them. If the Judges would apply the sentences properly, the criminals would be taken off the streets.
2006-11-20 01:31:06 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
My definition of gun control is hitting my target. I have owned guns since I was 9 years old and have never shot a human, much less I have never pointed at a person. However I like to have that option to protect myself. I would not like to let Joe Hood buy a gun when he feels like it and I think criminal and sanity test should be passed before a person is allowed to buy a gun. To hell with the NRA and their right wing politics. I am in Michigan also, and I should be deer hunting instead of answering questions. Oh Well, maybe this afternoon.
2006-11-20 01:46:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It relies upon, some places like DC and long island city fantastically plenty ban any inner maximum gun possession, so while diverse people use the term, that's what they recommend. it is obviously a contravention of the 2d exchange on condition that basically each U.S. male is a member of the militia (as defined in U.S. Code call 10). i admire your definition and have confidence that's the way it is going to be, "stringent history exams". As a gun proprietor, i'm additionally in prefer of a waiting era. If i elect to bypass pistol shooting in the present day and that i don't own one, I see no reason i won't be in a position to attend until next Saturday, yet I do think of a cooling off era is clever. i for my area do not basically like the assumption of somebody desperate that they elect to possess a firearm on the spur of the 2nd besides. i could additionally not have a difficulty with having every person who needs to purchase any gun have an NRA certificates crowning glory for risk-free practices training direction for each variety of weapon that they elect to possess (pistol, rifle, shotgun). i think of if every person who owns weapons have been required to take those classes, we would have plenty much less issues of injuries and stolen weapons. i don't understand why the NRA opposes waiting classes and needed risk-free practices classes (fantastically on condition that they provide the main suitable risk-free practices classes). I see no difficulty with rules of this form, on condition that that should be a area of the "properly regulated militia" clause of the 2d exchange. something previous rules to make gun possession safer which includes prohibiting mentally sound, regulation-abiding voters isn't gun administration, that's a contravention of the form.
2016-10-22 10:11:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, guns are part of our culture. I don't want to legislate guns from hunters but I don't want criminals to have "widow maker" guns to mow down the youth of our society. Seems like the extremists on both sides of this issue are the only voices heard. I am for moderation.
2006-11-20 01:33:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think background checks are acceptable. Other than that is just wrong. The constituion supports our right to bear arms and I think if gun owners are responsible then there won't be any trouble.
2006-11-20 10:52:39 · answer #7 · answered by cynical 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gun Control is the attempt of the government to regulate the means private citizens choose to use to defend themselves. More people die every year from drowning in pools than die from accidental discharge of a firearm, yet we do not talk about "pool control".
It comes down to one simple thing. Rulers always want to limit the means of revolution left to the people. Take away our guns and you make it more difficult for citizens to express their right of revolution.
2006-11-20 01:39:49 · answer #8 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
My definition of gun control is being able to hit the target
2006-11-20 01:30:03 · answer #9 · answered by newheartin03 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
hitting what I aim at is the only gun control I am willing to discuss. If you want to take away my right to bear arms, you may be what I aim at.
2006-11-20 01:53:52 · answer #10 · answered by RenoRoveR 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋