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

As to the original question, I have no doubt several posters on this forum are gun control advocates. Furthermore, I believe at least one of the posters in this thread are using AI to generate their responses. There is just something "off" about their writing that seems to be a bit mechanical, with complex sentence structures and a lack of things that humans do (misspellings, inappropriate selections of words, colloquialisms, etc.). In other words, it is too good, kind of like the computer has read an English grammar textbook.

I could be wrong, as I have so many times before.
 
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.
Well said sir. Well said. Obviously you are a gun user/enthusiast. So am I. Therefore by simple logic you cannot be anti-gun. Neither am I. You believe in common sense gun control. Ditto; as do many, many other shooters. Common sense gun control is NOT anti-gun. I think the debate is what constitutes gun control. As with most things, people have differering opinions on the breadth and scope.

Unfortunately some folks here are intent on demonizing any mention of common sense gun control with anti-gun sentiment. Not so.
 
Lately, I'm beginning to wonder if certain gun forums have been infiltrated by Gun Control Advocates based on observation of users with strangely pro-Gun Control statements …

I don't know about the rest of you, but that doesn't strike me as the sort of way that a Firearms Enthusiast speaks, but rather that of a Gun Control Advocate who is going out of their way to discourage people from exercising their rights by owning, carrying, and using their firearms for self-defense.
The 2A Community varies greatly.

Remember when the NRA gave grades to the candidates and even some Democrats got “A” in the 1970s? Remember when Gun Enthusiasts were upset with Duck Hunters?

Everyone has different POVs. Everyone has a different ideal of what is a trained firearm owner is.
 
… using AI to generate their responses. There is just something "off" about their writing that seems to be a bit mechanical, with complex sentence structures and a lack of things that humans do (misspellings, inappropriate selections of words, colloquialisms, etc.). In other words, it is too good, kind of like the computer has read an English grammar textbook.

I could be wrong, as I have so many times before.
Instead of AI I think it’s just “cut and paste”.

For example if we are talking about the history of the S&W .357 Magnum why not cut and paste the correct answer from Wikipedia instead of going by our memory of a Guns and Ammo magazine article from July 1965 that we read then.
 
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.
Loosely worded? “…shall not be infringed…” is not loosely worded.
 
The world most us here, 55+ geezers and geezerettes, grew up in is gone. Kids don't as much grow up hunting. Parents don't as much teach safe gun handling, and don't as much take and accompany kids weekly to anywhere social rules are taught formally and reinforced ar home by teaching until adulthood.

Our beliefs and expectations are less relevant daily....I accept that because I can't change it.
 
As to the original question, I have no doubt several posters on this forum are gun control advocates. Furthermore, I believe at least one of the posters in this thread are using AI to generate their responses. There is just something "off" about their writing that seems to be a bit mechanical, with complex sentence structures and a lack of things that humans do (misspellings, inappropriate selections of words, colloquialisms, etc.). In other words, it is too good, kind of like the computer has read an English grammar textbook.

I could be wrong, as I have so many times before.
I like to use speech to text, it’s getting a lot better.
 
There are already laws and societal rules covering the use and owning of deadly items. Thou shall not murder. Thou shall not steal. Thou…etc etc. not to go all religious on it but the 10 commandments covers it. And the age old ‘do unto others as you would have done unto yourself’. Simple. Concise. No need for 20,000+ ridiculous legislative BS statutes ever added to every legislative session.

If you harm someone with your .22 or your full auto .50 you made a choice and you will receive the consequences.

Hence why the founders wrote the BOR in the fashion they did. They were scholars, engineers, business people, brilliant. They understood technology would advance and didn’t write ‘muskets’ they wrote arms. In their day arms included cannon, muskets, rifles and even auto and semi auto firearms. Their reason for the 2nd (and read in detail the Declaration of Independence) was to allow the citizens to be equally armed as the government in the event the government again goes tyrant. They just fought and won against the mightiest military and government on the planet. Many lost everything. All lost something including family and fortune.

Freedom/security…there’s a quote about this…

Those who believe otherwise are ignorant of history and weak in wishing government to protect them.
 
@goldenboy
So, hypothetically, if someone were to put together a drone, with an autonomous-movement protocol and a pair of fully-automatic ARs with extended magazines programmed to be aimed and fired at movement, would that be acceptable to set as a “guard dog” around one’s house?

“Shall not be infringed” and “equal to the state of the military art” gets us there. 2A legal! Also completely insane when you think about it, but hey…2A!


Or the barracks. A lot of us have been there, where testosterone is ample, alcohol is easy and maturity is rare. Many of us were leaders, in some capacity. I guarantee you had at least one soldier complaining how he couldn’t keep a gun in the barracks…and because you knew better than Joe, you said “no”, and avoided the whole issue of consequences, because good order and discipline are the underpinnings of the little society that is the military. You know what you just did? A gun control. An infringement on Joey’s 2A rights. Now, we all know it’s for Joe’s own good, but he’s still pissed. Guess what…that’s why the rules exist!

Look, I’m all for the 2A, and self-defense, and ownership of a lot of cool guns (and more importantly the right to carry them and use them in public if necessary, and protections from gun confiscation and outright bans), and I’m for hunting and shooting sports and the like. In my lifetime, the gun community has grown, gone from CCW being a rarity to one accessible to almost anyone across the nation (and we’re working on those!). I’d like that trend to continue, but we won’t move that ball forward if public opinion turns back against us because we do stupid things.
 
I doubt there are many anti-gun folks on this forum. They'd quickly become bored with all the worrisome, obsessive, and "what if" imaginary Internet gunfighters/ hobbyists that post here. That certainly doesn't include everyone...
 
Most of them don’t want to live in a police state either, because police states have the bad habit of eating their retirees.

This one hit home. Three decades OTJ, 18 of those years certified by the State Police Training Commission as a firearms instructor, then rangemaster. On the day of my retirement I was no longer allowed to carry "cop killer bullets". Had to get a carry permit through the State Police. The Colonel jerked retirees around with some B/S rules that by year two I didn't bother with. I took my pension and spent the money in a much better state. Ah, Commonwealth.

I understand the need for reasonable regulation. But there are a few states forever run by idiots. And some of those idiots think they should run for President and do to America what they did to their state. Thus the vitriol. Beware the Californian.
 
The world most us here, 55+ geezers and geezerettes, grew up in is gone. Kids don't as much grow up hunting. Parents don't as much teach safe gun handling, and don't as much take and accompany kids weekly to anywhere social rules are taught formally and reinforced ar home by teaching until adulthood.

Our beliefs and expectations are less relevant daily....I accept that because I can't change it.
Well said...and said better than I usually do. I just say were circling the drain.
 
Unfortunately some folks here are intent on demonizing any mention of common sense gun control with anti-gun sentiment. Not so.
There's no such thing as "common sense restrictions". "Common sense restrictions" make things illegal. It's a path to controlling people that leads to tyranny.

The founders understood that and set things up in a manner that punished people for their poor choices. While still allowing the people to have a wide variety of freedoms. The freedoms they viewed as necessary for a well-functioning society.
 
I call Bravo Sierra. All over Europe and Scandanavia are well-functioning societies with as many freedoms as we have and more, as well as prospertity on a par with or above ours. They mostly do restrict private gun ownership.

I am an American because I choose to be, and we are a wonderful country, one I've served most of my adult life and on 5 continents. But I am not blind to what others have elsewhere and to how they got there.
 
Last edited:
There's no such thing as "common sense restrictions". "Common sense restrictions" make things illegal. It's a path to controlling people that leads to tyranny.

The founders understood that and set things up in a manner that punished people for their poor choices. While still allowing the people to have a wide variety of freedoms. The freedoms they viewed as necessary for a well-functioning society.

The Founders also didn’t have to worry about someone bringing an infantry battalion’s worth of firepower into a church or school to kill as many people as possible.
 
There's no such thing as "common sense restrictions". "Common sense restrictions" make things illegal. It's a path to controlling people that leads to tyranny.

The founders understood that and set things up in a manner that punished people for their poor choices. While still allowing the people to have a wide variety of freedoms. The freedoms they viewed as necessary for a well-functioning society.
Cannot disagree more. Of course there are common sense laws. Do not get your assertion that sensibility leads to illegality and tyranny. Are you a law abiding citizen adhering to 'sensible' laws? If so then you are controlled, as we all are. Do you think you are existing in a state of tyranny? Hope not Sensible/equitable laws are necessary 'controls' for ... as you say, a well-functioning society.

Laws you personally so not like do not necessarily equate to tyranny. There are some laws I do not like, but I do not subscribe that to tyrannical state of affairs. I still have faith in our executive, judicial, and legislative structure of governance. That is what elections are about. Now when elements of our structure get compromised and corrupted and made ineffective - then that is what truly leads to tyranny.
 
I have hunted and shot since I was old enough to walk. I am a RVn Vet, my dad WW2 Vet. Our circle of people tend to be of the same stock. The last thing on anyone’s mind was or is to shoot someone. It necessary things could revert to knuckles but not often. Pulling a gun or knife was considered the act of a coward. Fast forward to today’s mentality. A lot of these Gun People are not to my liking. The dipsticks doing open carry in public places such as malls and stores and causing concern from the general public are not helping the real gun people. Even worse is the self appointed 2nd Amendment nuts. Causing panic and baiting the cops, just because they can. These people are not helping the real gun community. There are gun people and people with guns. Two completely different animals. One hoping never to be in a situation needing a gun. The other can’t wait to have an excuse to pull his pistol and shoot.
 
Last time a checked, “the right to drive” didn’t make it into the Bill of Rights. So, comparing the regulations associated with driving to regulating arms is not a valid comparison.

Also, Pops always commented that “common sense isn’t that good, and good sense isn’t that common.” One man’s common sense gun law is another man’s tyranny.

Last, the NFA tax structure was put in place to get around “banning” those arms. And, it was pointed at handguns. The intent was to tax them so high folks could not afford them. The $200 tax in 1934 would be close to $5K today. It’s one of the FEW taxes that has not been increased. If you have never looked into how the NFA came to be, and how the weapons in question made the list (and handguns fell off.) it makes for some interesting reading. At a minimum, it’s a great example of an attempt to ban something via the tax code.

Bottom line, all government is about control. And if you desire to influence government to control other people to act in a way you prefer, at what point does that stop? I guess you know best?

See “The man who wanted to be left alone” for further reading.
 
I have hunted and shot since I was old enough to walk. I am a RVn Vet, my dad WW2 Vet. Our circle of people tend to be of the same stock. The last thing on anyone’s mind was or is to shoot someone. It necessary things could revert to knuckles but not often. Pulling a gun or knife was considered the act of a coward. Fast forward to today’s mentality. A lot of these Gun People are not to my liking. The dipsticks doing open carry in public places such as malls and stores and causing concern from the general public are not helping the real gun people. Even worse is the self appointed 2nd Amendment nuts. Causing panic and baiting the cops, just because they can. These people are not helping the real gun community. There are gun people and people with guns. Two completely different animals. One hoping never to be in a situation needing a gun. The other can’t wait to have an excuse to pull his pistol and shoot.
Certainly a good, meaningful post. Few of us could have covered so many valid points so concisely.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top