TOTALLY GEEKED!

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Gun control ideas!

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Add your own, Geeks! What can you come up with?
I am trying to find things that wouldn't be a total inconvenience for law abiding gun owning citizens, but it is proving difficult. So, lets talk! What are the pros and cons of my ideas? Let's look at the pros and cons of yours!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Why is it assumed that this is a "problem" that govt needs to solve?

I like your idea of firearm safety classes. That makes sense. The rest of it I don't see the point. Stores who sell ammo aren't stupid. They already keep it in a secure location. And, if i have already done the background check to buy a gun, I don't see why i would need a background check to buy ammo.

As for online, why should it be illegal for law abiding citizens to buy and sell guns online?

Oh, BTW, one of Obama's Fast and Furious guns was found in the hands of El Chapo. A 50 CALIBER gun. So, we have a gun running President who doesnt' mind criminals getting guns but wants to disarm the law abiding.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

The point of the ammo license is that you can legally own a gun without a background check.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Do laws, laws and laws stop criminals? Why don't we outlaw crimes using a gun? Oh wait, we have.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Limiting ammo limits the ability to target practice. I really don't prefer the idea of gun owners that aren't allowed to practice shooting it.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Limiting ammo limits the ability to target practice. I really don't prefer the idea of gun owners that aren't allowed to practice shooting it.

I have a gun, and I don't see how presenting a license when I buy ammo would really inconvenience me. I might forget to renew it on time, but I am just lax like that.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Limiting ammo limits the ability to target practice. I really don't prefer the idea of gun owners that aren't allowed to practice shooting it.

I very specifically didn't set a limit on how much you can buy. I can go through 1000 rounds a week easily if I wanted to, and buying that or twice that at a time is not unreasonable.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

But, perhaps a better solution is to require presenting your gun license when buying ammo, and creating a database of gun owners.
The end result I would like to see it putting a safeguard in place that only law abiding gun owners can legally buy ammo.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

And, you guys, you are supposed to come up with your own ideas too, not just say why mine won't work. That is the problem--everybody has 100 reasons why nothing anyone says will work, but they aren't coming up with any ideas.
So, come on, IDEAS! What will help? Even a little?
I refuse to accept that there is nothing we can do about mass shooting. I refuse to accept that there is nothing we can do to prevent little kids from being massacred in their classroom. I refuse to accept that we, as a nation, are so willing to roll over and surrender to the criminals and the murderers.
The world is becoming more crowded, and it seems to be becoming more dangerous. Will laws fix the problem? I doubt it, but they could help, and I don't see what bad will come of the ones I posted above.
But if you do, then by all means, let's discuss it, and come up with your own ideas too. What can we do to prevent another Sandy Hook? Another Columbine? Another Aurora? What can we do to at least make it harder for the criminals? What can we do to make it easier for law enforcement?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Do laws, laws and laws stop criminals? Why don't we outlaw crimes using a gun? Oh wait, we have.

Not directed at you personally, but I HATE this statement more than I can say.

Have we come to the point where mass shootings don't faze us anymore?

There are limits on sales of cold medicine, ffs, why NOT try limiting ammo or requiring a license to buy ammo? If it stops ONE person from shooting up a school, isn't it worth it?

flan

p.s. Dona, I commend you for trying.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

I have a gun. My family all own guns. My boyfriend online a lot of guns. I am NOT for taking guns away, I am NOT do targetting the legal, law-abiding citizens out here.
I am looking for ways to make it harder for criminals, and easier for the law.

FNW · Guru

I got nothing. But I do believe that taking guns away from the victims is not the answer.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

FNW wrote:
I got nothing. But I do believe that taking guns away from the victims is not the answer.

Who is suggesting that?

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona - I'm not opposed to all your ideas, I'm not opposed to gun licenses per se, but they need to be inexpensive and not have excessive renewal fees. A gun license, if required, should be easy to obtain enough to obtain for any law abiding citizen, and with government involvement, I see that being a problem.

And just on principal, I'm against it unless voter ID is required everywhere. If I have to jump to hoops to exercise my constitution right to bear arms, others can get an ID to exercise that right.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.

Oh, no. I don't like that. Big brother is watching way too much on that one.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

I don't get the voter ID thing.
I have to remember to bring ID to vote, even in the silly town elections. It is not that big a deal.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I don't get the voter ID thing.
I have to remember to bring ID to vote, even in the silly town elections. It is not that big a deal.

No, it's not. Every person voting should have to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote, and ID at the polls to prove who they are.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.
Oh, no. I don't like that. Big brother is watching way too much on that one.

Yeah. On one hand, it would make tracking illegal sales and gun trafficking MUCH easier, on the other, does big brother reeaally need to know how many guns I have in .y house and what kind?

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I don't get the voter ID thing.
I have to remember to bring ID to vote, even in the silly town elections. It is not that big a deal.
No, it's not. Every person voting should have to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote, and ID at the polls to prove who they are.

Here, you just need a photo id. I use my passport, because it seems like my license is always expired around election time.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.
Oh, no. I don't like that. Big brother is watching way too much on that one.
Yeah. On one hand, it would make tracking illegal sales and gun trafficking MUCH easier, on the other, does big brother reeaally need to know how many guns I have in .y house and what kind?

That's really part of the issue. If you regulate soooo much, then big brother does know. Why should a law abiding, never arrested, mentally sound individual have their rights curtailed at all?

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.
Oh, no. I don't like that. Big brother is watching way too much on that one.
Yeah. On one hand, it would make tracking illegal sales and gun trafficking MUCH easier, on the other, does big brother reeaally need to know how many guns I have in .y house and what kind?
That's really part of the issue. If you regulate soooo much, then big brother does know. Why should a law abiding, never arrested, mentally sound individual have their rights curtailed at all?

Well, that is the crux of the matter. Balancing preventing crimes with privacy. Where do you draw the line?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
FNW wrote:
I got nothing. But I do believe that taking guns away from the victims is not the answer.
Who is suggesting that?

No one.

flan

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona - I'm not opposed to all your ideas, I'm not opposed to gun licenses per se, but they need to be inexpensive and not have excessive renewal fees. A gun license, if required, should be easy to obtain enough to obtain for any law abiding citizen, and with government involvement, I see that being a problem.

And just on principal, I'm against it unless voter ID is required everywhere. If I have to jump to hoops to exercise my constitution right to bear arms, others can get an ID to exercise that right.

Places that sell guns can already do background checks, make it so they can authorize the license.

And guns run in the Hu dress of dollors, and a box of ammo--which is not very big-- is virtually never cheaper than 20.

If you can afford the hundreds of dollars to buy and shoot your gun, you can afford a 20 or 30 dollar license.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I like the idea of microchipping guns with their serial number so it can't be removed, but that seems a bit invasive, and aren't microchips pretty easy to disable? That idea needs work.
Oh, no. I don't like that. Big brother is watching way too much on that one.
Yeah. On one hand, it would make tracking illegal sales and gun trafficking MUCH easier, on the other, does big brother reeaally need to know how many guns I have in .y house and what kind?
That's really part of the issue. If you regulate soooo much, then big brother does know. Why should a law abiding, never arrested, mentally sound individual have their rights curtailed at all?
Well, that is the crux of the matter. Balancing preventing crimes with privacy. Where do you draw the line?

Well, that's kind of the problem. We HAVE drawn the line. We say mentally ill people and criminals can't have guns, but the government is horribly bad at enforcing those restrictions. Instead of new laws that restrict everyone, why don't try to actually come up with a system that enforces the laws they have? Instead of using what they have more effectively and finding efficient ways to do that, they just want to make more laws that make it harder for everyone.

I want the government to prove it is capable of enforcing the laws they have before they make new ones. Is that so much to ask?

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Gun safety classes? Great. Yes. That's wonderful.

Maybe include it with the D.A.R.E. program.

Only the D.A.R.E. program had my kids so scared that my smoking cigarettes was not only going to immediately kill me, but that I was breaking the law and was going have all of us in prison.

So it might not be a good idea for a government entity to teach gun safety.

Gun laws?

Let's see.

It's my RIGHT to have firearms.

THAT is the law.

Regulations are not needed.

Stop making gun owners the bad guys.

Make crimes involving guns have heavier punishments.

The more law abiding citizens who have guns, the less likely criminals are to act.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.

I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.
I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.

Well, if your have guns to protect you from the government, you are being a gun to a drone war amd will loose regardless of if they see fit to 'raid' you or not.

The military has drones, tanks, and smart bombs.

Your handgun is irrelevant.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

But, keep in mind, I am not suggesting anything that as a gun owner, I would not be willing to do.
I need a license to drove a car, a photo id to vote and buy booze, a passport to leave the country, a ssn for EVERYTHING, why not a little card to shove in my wallet to buy ammo?

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.

Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.
Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.

Because HER rights are trump the safety of others, apparently.

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.
I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.
Well, if your have guns to protect you from the government, you are being a gun to a drone war amd will loose regardless of if they see fit to 'raid' you or not.
The military has drones, tanks, and smart bombs.
Your handgun is irrelevant.

I have said this SEVERAL times. There are posters here who feel safe stockpiling guns...

flan

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Come on, flan, don't snark.
What can you come up with? What will help? What won't?
Snarking at Lily is not a helpful gun control idea.
I don't remember for sure, but I seem to remember that you don't have a gun in the house, but one of your sons does, right?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Come on, flan, don't snark.
What can you come up with? What will help? What won't?
Snarking at Lily is not a helpful gun control idea.
I don't remember for sure, but I seem to remember that you don't have a gun in the house, but one of your sons does, right?

I have already posted that I agree with several of your suggestions. Lily wants NO changes & I disagree with that.

Yes DS2 has guns. I cannot see myself ever owning one.

flan

FNW · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
FNW wrote:
I got nothing. But I do believe that taking guns away from the victims is not the answer.
Who is suggesting that?
No one.
flan

Obama.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

FNW wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
FNW wrote:
I got nothing. But I do believe that taking guns away from the victims is not the answer.
Who is suggesting that?
No one.
flan
Obama.

I don't listen to everything the president has to say, but I do not recall him saying we need to go in and take away guns from people.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.
Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.

Tell me how an ammo license stops these things, please? If a mass shooter has not been declared mentally ill or had any criminal record, how does this prevent it from happening? How does the government knowing how much ammo someone buys prevent accidents?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.
I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.
Well, if your have guns to protect you from the government, you are being a gun to a drone war amd will loose regardless of if they see fit to 'raid' you or not.
The military has drones, tanks, and smart bombs.
Your handgun is irrelevant.

Then they don't need to know about it.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.
I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.
Well, if your have guns to protect you from the government, you are being a gun to a drone war amd will loose regardless of if they see fit to 'raid' you or not.
The military has drones, tanks, and smart bombs.
Your handgun is irrelevant.
Then they don't need to know about it.

Know about what? Your handgun?

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.
Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.
Tell me how an ammo license stops these things, please? If a mass shooter has not been declared mentally ill or had any criminal record, how does this prevent it from happening? How does the government knowing how much ammo someone buys prevent accidents?

Because it places reasonable limits on what gun owners can buy. Just like certain cold medicine.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I imagine a license to buy ammo being not unlike a drivers license, with a Barcode that can be scanned.
I don't think it's the government's business how much each person buys. You forget that the main purpose's of the 2nd amendment is to protect against a tyrannical government. That kind of registry just tells the government who to raid in the event of a rebellion or civil war. And that is not as silly a notion as some people think. Our last civil war was only 150 years ago, and the federal government is once again excessively trying to preempt state laws.
Well, if your have guns to protect you from the government, you are being a gun to a drone war amd will loose regardless of if they see fit to 'raid' you or not.
The military has drones, tanks, and smart bombs.
Your handgun is irrelevant.
Then they don't need to know about it.
Know about what? Your handgun?
flan

Yep. The government does not need to know how many bullets I own, or how many guns I have. I am not a criminal and I am not mentally ill. After all, if my handgun is irrelevant, what is the point?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.
Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.
Tell me how an ammo license stops these things, please? If a mass shooter has not been declared mentally ill or had any criminal record, how does this prevent it from happening? How does the government knowing how much ammo someone buys prevent accidents?
Because it places reasonable limits on what gun owners can buy. Just like certain cold medicine.
flan

Why do law abiding citizens need limits? And who are you to determine what is reasonable for me to own?

This is why people fight against gun control so strongly. THIS attitude.

Domestic Engineer · Guru

Why do we need gun control? What other Ammendments that we need to control?

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
The government can't keep track of who is coming in and out of our country with passports.

The government needs to worry about things like, I don't know, running the country.

Not policing my rights.
Than what steps should be taken to prevent both gun accidents and mass shootings? Roll over and accept it is not something we as a country should do. Arming everyone is hardly a good answer either. I have a gun to shoot paper targets with. I would be COMPLETELY useless in a dangerous situation, and would probably make it worse, honestly. Not everyone should own a gun, and certainly not everyone should carry it in public. Law abiding people who want them already have them. Saying 'oh, we just need MORE people with guns!' doesn't solve anything.

Accidents, those happen. I don't see how a license to buy ammo would stop accidents.

Mass shootings, show me a mass shooting where the majority of the victims were armed.

Soft targets. You don't see people shooting up police stations.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

I just want to know who it is you think should decide whether my DH or I should be able to carry one in public?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Domestic Engineer wrote:
Why do we need gun control? What other Ammendments that we need to control?

Because it was ratified in 1791, when our nation was still brand new.

The exact text:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

At that time, the sophisticated killing machines did not exist. There were no mass shootings on innocent people.

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
I just want to know who it is you think should decide whether my DH or I should be able to carry one in public?

Who said anything about not letting you carry in public?

flan