Do you ever wonder if Gun Control Advocates lurk or even sign up on Gun Forums?

Rocketmedic40 said:
I’ll take the leap: I think there should absolutely be **some** gun controls imposed on the population of the United States, on a federal level, and in some cases with appropriate local restrictions.

For example, I think we should collectively ban fully-automatic firearms for anything other than novelty range toys. No carry, no use outside of a designated, approved range, and very restrictive accessibility to them. There’s no legitimate self-defense or hunting rationale for a FA firearm, and only very limited sporting ones. This also includes devices like Glock switches, binary triggers, etc…when we drop the rules-lawyering, these are functionally machine guns by different mechanisms.

I also think we as a nation should require a training class, to be hosted weekly by local law enforcement, for every firearm purchased, to be completed prior to taking possession. $50, ammunition, and a range managed by LEOs with a shall-issue (pending objective performance/safety reviews), possibly to include a licensure scheme a la CHL.

I think private sales of firearms are potentially controversial and would be OK with mandating use of a background-check system as a part of those transactions.

I think it is entirely reasonable for society to require people who want to carry a firearm in public to demonstrate functional proficiency with carrying, drawing, loading and firing that firearm accurately. I don’t think it’s a good thing to have ignorant people brandishing weapons because “muh rights!” And thinking every mild-to-moderate social problem should be solved with presentation of a weapon.

I think we should deny weapon ownership to the mentally ill, certain felons, illegal immigrants and minors (in most cases). I also think that we should functionally have some way to expeditiously remove firearms from someone demonstrating evidence of a mental-health crisis, subject to due process and the return of their property after they are no longer in crisis.

I think that particular places are not appropriate for carrying weapons and that CCW regulations should reflect that reality.

I think that there is a legitimate public-safety discussion for magazines in excess of 15-20 rounds; once again, why exactly does a user need more ammunition on board than dudes who literally fought through WW2? I’d honestly be OK if we treated 10+ round magazines like suppressors and required a tax stamp, NFA registration, etc.

Gun control ain’t a bad thing, y’all.

I also think that we should have a national concealed-carry infrastructure with mandatory reciprocity, that feature bans are silly and stupid, and that every American who wants it should be able to access free, high-quality training and live-fire training on a safe range managed by local law enforcement on an annual basis at a minimum. I also think that we should constitutionally enshrine protections against gun bans and confiscation and affirm a constitutional right to self-defense. I think that a lot of the Democrat gun control is stupidity enshrined and I think that a lot of the workarounds and adaptations of gun culture actually promote irresponsible, unsafe use of firearms instead of well-reasoned, respectful and safe use.

Not a hippy or a troll or anti-gun; I probably have a more-extensive collection than around a third of the board and I carry everywhere I can (legally and safely). I think almost everyone should be armed and I think firearms ownership by private persons is one of the factors that keeps America free and good and mostly honest. I think disarmament is a terrible idea that leads to tyranny. I think the 2A is fundamentally about maintaining the capability to effectively resist tyranny, not hunting or sports. I also think that we as a society need to adapt to the demonstrated and known threats posed by individuals with firearms that allow them to wield more “firepower” than an infantry platoon in a short period of time.
Click to expand...
"For example, I think we should collectively ban fully-automatic firearms for anything other than novelty range toys. No carry, no use outside of a designated, approved range, and very restrictive accessibility to them. "

You should up your situational awareness. That legal condition already exists. And "Glock switches" as well as drop-in conversion devices were and are illegal for civilians since 1986. And I posit that most mass shooters, like the little s**t in Newtown, being likely unfamiliar with controlling full auto fire, would be surrounded by empty cases with less casualties in a mass-shooting event.

Spend an extra $50 and precious time off kowtowing to local LE which likely knows 1/10th about guns as me? For every gun I buy? Eff that. As well as your posit about +10 round magazines. You do know there are an estimated 170M - that's "millyun" - of them out there. If they were a problem you'd know it.

The only thing I find interesting in your rant is national concealed carry reciprocity.

One thing you failed to mention, the stratagem in most Commonwealth nations that our local libs drool over - moving the goalposts. You may actually believe in 2A, but the cultural Marxists and their useful idiots who lust for UK-style gun control do not, and every occasion where one psycho slips through the hoops and cracks of incremental control, is occasion to renege on the previous deal. The ultimate goal of these people is your guns melted down into origami sculptures and park benches. Or if you want to confine yourself to 19th century manually operated long guns, obtained and kept only after performing an obscene act on the local constabulary, and parting with a considerable amount of $$, that's your choice. Flights to London every day.

That's the truth...y'all.....
 
Last edited:
Bozz10mm said:
Just curious if you feel the same way about the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments? Or is the 2nd some sort of second hand right?
Click to expand...
Great point. I think the right to vote w should be tempered by a poll test of American jurisprudence and history, 3 hours should do it. And a tax to pay for the proctors time. Maybe even revert to a property-ownership qualification. Skin in the game required to play.

"But oh, muh disenfranchisement!"
 
AlHunt said:
To wit:

R

Post in thread 'Do you ever wonder if Gun Control Advocates lurk or even sign up on Gun Forums?'

I’ll take the leap: I think there should absolutely be **some** gun controls imposed on the population of the United States, on a federal level, and in some cases with appropriate local restrictions.

For example, I think we should collectively ban fully-automatic firearms for anything other than novelty range toys. No carry, no use outside of a designated, approved range, and very restrictive accessibility to them. There’s no legitimate self-defense or hunting rationale for a FA firearm, and only very limited sporting ones. This also includes devices like Glock switches, binary triggers...
  • Like
Click to expand...
Well, thanks for making yourself known. I do respect your opinions. I, myself don't have any use for full auto anything and I despise gimmicks like bump stocks and binary triggers. It wouldn't bother me if features like this were banned and there could be 'common sense gun controls', but there's no such thing. The BATF is constantly trying to extend their power and control with strong encouragement from gun grabbers.
 
rwsmith said:
Well, thanks for making yourself known. I do respect your opinions. I, myself don't have any use for full auto anything and I despise gimmicks like bump stocks and binary triggers. It wouldn't bother me if features like this were banned and there could be 'common sense gun controls', but there's no such thing. The BATF is constantly trying to extend their power and control with strong encouragement from gun grabbers.
Click to expand...
Which is why we should have these things spelled out in law as supported by the Constitution, not subject to the opinions of a regulatory agency or government (either elected or appointed).

Someone pointed out that full-auto is already illegal for most, I agree with the caveat that some 2A absolutists want to make it common and legal (some on this very board). not saying that’s illegitimate as an opinion, but pointing out the obvious that there are absolutely fringe interests that want to push the goalposts away from what we currently enjoy.

With regards to restrictions vs tyranny- it is also a form of tyranny for one person to wield immense power, the literal power to end lives with absolutely minimal effort, over another. We balance that out for the most part with responsibility, education, respect for social norms and adherence to the law, good ethics and good behavior. Even then, sometimes, it goes wrong. But when you combine someone actively intent on evil with a weapon designed for high-intensity infantry combat in the modern era? That person has near-absolute power over his would-be victims until someone can fight back or luck intervenes. That is a flavor of tyranny over the public every bit as real as the excesses of an unpopular President or a corrupt Congress…at least King George’s men weren’t randomly shooting up churches, theaters, schools and groceries.
 
oldcorps76 said:
"For example, I think we should collectively ban fully-automatic firearms for anything other than novelty range toys. No carry, no use outside of a designated, approved range, and very restrictive accessibility to them. "

You should up your situational awareness. That legal condition already exists. And "Glock switches" as well as drop-in conversion devices were and are illegal for civilians since 1986. And I posit that most mass shooters, like the little s**t in Newtown, being likely unfamiliar with controlling full auto fire, would be surrounded by empty cases with less casualties in a mass-shooting event.

Spend an extra $50 and precious time off kowtowing to local LE which likely knows 1/10th about guns as me? For every gun I buy? Eff that. As well as your posit about +10 round magazines. You do know there are an estimated 170M - that's "millyun" - of them out there. If they were a problem you'd know it.

The only thing I find interesting in your rant is national concealed carry reciprocity.

One thing you failed to mention, the stratagem in most Commonwealth nations that our local libs drool over - moving the goalposts. You may actually believe in 2A, but the cultural Marxists and their useful idiots who lust for UK-style gun control do not, and every occasion where one psycho slips through the hoops and cracks of incremental control, is occasion to renege on the previous deal. The ultimate goal of these people is your guns melted down into origami sculptures and park benches. Or if you want to confine yourself to 19th century manually operated long guns, obtained and kept only after performing an obscene act on the local constabulary, and parting with a considerable amount of $$, that's your choice. Flights to London every day.

That's the truth...y'all.....
Click to expand...
Which is why we need a constitutional protection specifically against confiscation efforts like those that occurred in the UK and Australia. The 2A is loosely-worded enough that quite a bit of onerous legislation can be slipped through with a different Congressional makeup or judicial alignment, both of which are quite likely to occur as MAGA’s influence wanes.
 
Rocketmedic40 said:
Which is why we should have these things spelled out in law as supported by the Constitution
Click to expand...
The protection against infringements exists. It's the second item in the Bill of Rights. Which you said was worded too loosely with the simple phrasing of "shall not be infringed"...

You do like spinning tall tales amidst your obvious desire to end that right. Typical gun grabbing liar. Too dumb to realize that once those of us who hate tyranny are gone, you will be gone with the first wave of people culled because you have shown to be a potential problem for the tyrants.

Such was the order of things in Russia once the Bolsheviks took power, in Germany with the Nazis, and with the CCP takeover in China as well. There are many other such examples.

The only question I have is this. Are you telling lies to yourself, or to everyone else? An answer I would know immediately if I ever met you.
 
Rocketmedic40 said:
Someone pointed out that full-auto is already illegal for most,
Click to expand...
This statement has been repeated several times in this thread and is untrue.

FA is legal for anyone not prohibited to own any firearm.

There are approx 170K registered (NFA) FA firearms in the hands of average everyday citizens. Perfectly legal to own.

Since there has been no transferable FA produced since 1986 there is a finite number available to purchase.

What FA is, for most of us, is unaffordable.
 
Last edited:
LSMurphy said:
This statement has been repeated several times in this thread and is untrue.

FA is legal for anyone not prohibited to own any firearm.

There are approx 170K registered (NFA) FA firearms in the hands of average everyday citizens. Perfectly legal to own.

Since there has been no has been no transferable FA produced since 1986 there is a finite number available to purchase.

What FA is, for most of us, is unaffordable.
Click to expand...
FA also requires a federal tax stamp, expanded background check and an authorization to possess, along with local/state LE approval in some states. I’d argue that raises the barrier to entry considerably higher than a 4473 at Academy.
 
LSMurphy said:
This statement has been repeated several times in this thread and is untrue.

FA is legal for anyone not prohibited to own any firearm.

There are approx 170K registered (NFA) FA firearms in the hands of average everyday citizens. Perfectly legal to own.

Since there has been no transferable FA produced since 1986 there is a finite number available to purchase.

What FA is, for most of us, is unaffordable.
Click to expand...
No. CT, HI, IA, IL, DC, NY, RI, and WA prohibiit private possession of full auto firearms. https://www.nationalguntrusts.com/b...on-database-blog/nfa-items-permitted-by-state
 
There are probably a handful of designated "spies" or some that just want to hear the latest views from real gun "NUTZ". Maybe a few LE agents looking for violations, threats etc. You know the old saying.......... "keep your friends close - but keep your enemies closer".
 
There are no doubt multiple tiers, the trolls, the intel gatherers, the mild mannered influencers, and more. Maybe some are paid, maybe some are True Believers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

chief38
Loctite and guns - do they mix? This subject keeps coming up - hence another thread for those who wonder.
2 3
Replies
43
Views
2K
Petrov
P
Doug M.
A hard lesson from John Farnam
2 3
Replies
43
Views
3K
TaxPhd
T
Echo40
  • Locked
Has Concealed Carry/Self-Defense ever made you feel alienated?
Replies
13
Views
1K
s&wchad
s&wchad
T
  • Locked
Our Founding Fathers' perspective on private gun ownership.
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
s&wchad
s&wchad
RM Vivas
NYPD - M&P #S812894 - How I Research The NYPD Guns
Replies
19
Views
2K
MajorD
M

Latest posts

Back
Top