Are you in favor of private firearms ownership?

[wsd 0]

If so please state if you are in favor of any restrictions to ownership, other than being a felon or adjudicated as mentally unstable or incompetent.

If you are in favor are there any firearms you think should be bannned?


If you are in favor of the complete removal of private gun ownership please opine why.

If you are in favor of restricting firearms ownership more than what is federally required please state why.


The rules are no waffling, no off topic discussion and or strawman arguments.


Be forthright and state exactly what you mean.

This is a challenge to anyone who tries to evade answering a direct question with a direct and on topic response.


I have my doubts about the ability of some to actually tell the truth about their beliefs.

[wsd 0]

My belief is that we should not have any restrictions other than being a criminal convicted and precluded of owning a firearm due to a record of violent offense.

I also think anyone adjudicated as mentally incompetent by means of mental illness or other reason should be precluded, unless they can show in a court of law they have been cured of what precluded them in the first place.

Other than that I do not think there should be any restrictions on firearms being owned or possessed by a US Citizen, regardless of the type of firearms, to include anything that is man portable and fires a bullet or other projectile that is not explosive in nature.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

If so please state if you are in favor of any restrictions to ownership, other than being a felon or adjudicated as mentally unstable or incompetent.

None.

No restrictions on concealed carry, private sales, or mail order sales. I'd be happy with repealing all firearms laws back through the National Firearms Act of 1934 and passing a national preemption law which disallows local laws that are more restrictive than federal.

Quote

If you are in favor are there any firearms you think should be bannned?

None.

[nbblood 0]

Quote

Yes
If so please state if you are in favor of any restrictions to ownership, other than being a felon or adjudicated as mentally unstable or incompetent. No


If you are in favor are there any firearms you think should be bannned? No



If you are in favor of the complete removal of private gun ownership please opine why. N/A


If you are in favor of restricting firearms ownership more than what is federally required please state why. N/A




The rules are no waffling, no off topic discussion and or strawman arguments.


Be forthright and state exactly what you mean.

This is a challenge to anyone who tries to evade answering a direct question with a direct and on topic response.


I have my doubts about the ability of some to actually tell the truth about their beliefs. So you think people would lie about their beliefs? Why would they do that? I think it's more likely that you don't believe their beliefs are justified, whatever they may be, so you construe that as "lying about their beliefs." I can't imagine someone trying to justify their beliefs by lying about them.

Blues,
Nathan

If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

[wsd 0]

Thank you for your honesty and straight forward response.

I agree with your beliefs

[wsd 0]

I have been doing some reading on here and there were a number of people who were asked directly their beliefs on this issue and they evaded answering in a forthright manner.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

My question is why do people who believe so fervently in the 2nd amendment accept the modification of it as beyond question. If you believe that this right is not to be infringed, how can congress infringe upon it for those American citizens who have completed their punishment for their felonies. Isn't this just the thin edge of the wedge, banning gun ownership for those convicted of securities fraud or selling moonshine or tax fraud (bringing up other constitutional issues)? Why not ban firearms for those convicted of misdemeanors? Where is the justification within the amendment as written?

[wsd 0]

As I stated, unless convicted of a violent felony offense I would not preclude them from getting their rights restored.

[wmw999 2,439]

Maybe because not everyone thinks it's all that simple a question.

I'm in favor of easy private ownership of hunting weapons. I'd be interested in additional education being required for handguns (simply because they're so disproportionately used in person-on-person violence).

Anyone should be able to rent any gun that any gun club or gun range has available for target shooting.

For most any guns, I'd like to see some sort of evidence required that the person has an appropriate place selected for storage -- i.e. it's not going to be stolen by the first burglar who gets in. That might protect some children as well (we do have to think of the children )

For the more sophisticated weapons (like fully automatic), I think that additional restrictions, including regular education (i.e. yearly or something as long as you own the weapon) should be required.

Of course, it's impossible to prove that anyone has any weapon as long as private sales are allowed. But I'm not against private sales.

Holes can be poked in any stance, including these. You asked for forthright statements, this is as forthright as I can get. And it might still change, based on new evidence.

So I don't think we should be able to just go to Wal-Mart and buy a tank or an Uzi.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

As I stated, unless convicted of a violent felony offense I would not preclude them from getting their rights restored.

There you go rewriting the constitution again.

[wsd 0]

Thanks for your response, I did state a man portable firearm.

Tanks really don't apply here, nor would a howitzer or MLRS.

[wmw999 2,439]

That's your belief -- others have placed no such restriction. I used to have a jumping friend who had several Claymore mines in his weapon collection.

Do you think they should be allowed? They sure did.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wsd 0]

I am not wanting to rewrite the constitution, the fact remains that is someone is convicted of gunning down others for no just cause, it would make it very likely that they may do so again if returned to the populace and allowed to own firearms.

I am not however in favor of removing this right if they have not harmed someone in manner such as I have stated.

I am talking about serious crimes of violence, not a punch or two or any other non violent offense.

[wsd 0]

That is not a firearm, it is an explosive device, not in the same category.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

I am not wanting to rewrite the constitution, the fact remains that is someone is convicted of gunning down others for no just cause, it would make it very likely that they may do so again if returned to the populace and allowed to own firearms.

I am not however in favor of removing this right if they have not harmed someone in manner such as I have stated.

I am talking about serious crimes of violence, not a punch or two or any other non violent offense.

While I do not disagree with your analysis, it remains that nowhere in the constitution are you or your representatives permitted to make said exception to the rights endowed by God (sic). If you believe that, you should push for an amendment, and another one for tanks.

[billvon 2,990]

I think that here in the US, any sane, law abiding adult has a right to own personal weapons. (i.e. handguns and hunting weapons.)

[nbblood 0]

Quote

As I stated, unless convicted of a violent felony offense I would not preclude them from getting their rights restored.

So you don't think a person could be undecided on a particular subject, seeing pros and cons on both sides of a particular issue? Rather you would demand that every person take a stand on one side of the line or the other?

I have a lot of issues with which I "straddle the line". This just isn't one of them for me. For others though, I could certainly understand an individual being conflicted and not have a straight-forward opinion. That's ok. That doesn't mean they're lying about their beliefs. They just weigh pros and cons or consider circumstances. Those are good things if you ask me. Not all issues are black and white. In most there's significantly more gray area. I wouldn't penalize somebody for being thoughtful, even if they didn't agree with my opinion. Just my .02.

Blues,
Nathan

If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

If so please state if you are in favor of any restrictions to ownership, other than being a felon or adjudicated as mentally unstable or incompetent.

If you are in favor are there any firearms you think should be bannned?

I agree with your first statement. I am uncertain about the second statement. I am in a quandary about full auto weapons.

I am almost 69YO. I am too old to run or fight. I feel uncertain about my safety and the safety of my loved ones in public places. A great number of the guys I hang with, military veterans like me, have concealed carry permits, as do I. I believe in continued training and practice.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Yes
If so please state if you are in favor of any restrictions to ownership, other than being a felon or adjudicated as mentally unstable or incompetent. No


If you are in favor are there any firearms you think should be bannned? No



If you are in favor of the complete removal of private gun ownership please opine why. N/A


If you are in favor of restricting firearms ownership more than what is federally required please state why. N/A




The rules are no waffling, no off topic discussion and or strawman arguments.


Be forthright and state exactly what you mean.

This is a challenge to anyone who tries to evade answering a direct question with a direct and on topic response.


I have my doubts about the ability of some to actually tell the truth about their beliefs. So you think people would lie about their beliefs? Why would they do that? I think it's more likely that you don't believe their beliefs are justified, whatever they may be, so you construe that as "lying about their beliefs." I can't imagine someone trying to justify their beliefs by lying about them.

huge +1

I am sure there are some of the usual suspects that think I am lying... and they can go buy themselves a new larger BUTT PLUG.


Now.. THIS ONE....

Quote

I also think anyone adjudicated as mentally incompetent by means of mental illness or other reason should be precluded, unless they can show in a court of law they have been cured of what precluded them in the first place.

People KNOW a long time before one of these mentally defective idiots goes off they do not just shit happens one day like Cho or Loughner or a string of others. There needs to be a FAR faster and better system to "adjudicate" them right onto a NO BUY list.
IF they can prove that they are cured of the mental defect later... then fine.. let them off the list ...

[JohnRich 4]

Yes, especially this kind (attached).
That's not off-topic.

Edited to add - NSFW image.

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Yes, especially this kind (attached).
That's not off-topic.

Hot S#!+, Season 3, Top Shot.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[christelsabine 1]

You entered this site just few days ago.

Why did you start with a weapon question?

Isn't it a skydiving site, first of all?



In fact, I really don't mind - but, I'm an alien, and seen from a far distance ......

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

This is a challenge to anyone who tries to evade answering a direct question with a direct and on topic response.

I have my doubts about the ability of some to actually tell the truth about their beliefs.

If so, what is their answer here going to accomplish? Sounds like a waste of time.

Esp when the question comes from a newly created account with no information. Who are you really?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Yes, especially this kind (attached).
That's not off-topic.

uh, this sort of thing calls for a NSFW tag, John. There are potentially serious consequences for this popping up.

[wsd 0]

Quote

I think that here in the US, any sane, law abiding adult has a right to own personal weapons. (i.e. handguns and hunting weapons.)

Please explain "hunting weapons"