Civil discourse on gun control

[Tsing Tao]

I don't understand why you disagree with the NRA's approach, even as you concede that the other side will never be satisfied with anything short of a total gun ban and confiscation. You can thank the NRA and their approach for your continued ability to be able to buy and own weapons of your choice.

You may recall that plenty of "conservative" republicans, eg the Bushes, were prepared to sell us out on guns just as they did on every other issue. I remember Bush senior babbling about gun ownership being linked to legitimate hunting and sporting uses. That is code for banning MSR's and semi-auto pistols.

Compromise and concessions are only reasonable when the compromise solution puts an end to the dispute. That will never be the situation with gun control. The left looks at every concession by gun owners as the floor for further concessions, all with the end clear end goal of a ban and confiscation.

This goes back to a philosophy you and I have had disagreements on before. Your belief (and please correct me if I misstate it) is that extreme measures should be used to combat extreme foes. While I agree with this in actual warfare, when it comes to political discourse, I do not agree with using tactics the left employs regularly. I believe that if the right focuses on calm presentation of the truth, it rises above the noise and hysterical behavior from the left.

The NRA should be ready to have balanced discussion on things that most people would say makes common sense. This would gain them credibility as a responsible organization. Instead, they come off as bloodthirsty to many who don't know better.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I suggest copying Canada's federal gun laws verbatim. Allowing 180 days for all existing guns to be brought into compliance or be declared illegal. Any guns that can not be brought into compliance should be purchased by the Federal Government and that a commission be appointed to establish a fair and equitable pricing mechanism.

Note that many guns now in private hands in the U.S. would fall under the restricted category in Canada. Many, if not most, could be brought into compliance within 180 days.

Without wasting my time looking up Canadian gun laws, can you tell me what you're talking about in bringing guns up to "compliance"? Additionally, please tell me what fair and equitable pricing mechanism you would suggest, and how this would be funded (keeping in mind the potential purchase of tens of millions of guns and the respective cost).

It would be of great advantage for all of North America to have uniform gun laws in place! In Canada you do not have to register, as of 2012, except in Quebec I believe, unrestricted guns. Unrestricted are those that, in the main, are suitable for sport. If you want to own a restricted semi-automatic, then you will have to comply with registration and additional restrictions, regulations and qualifications. That seems to me to be a very reasonable trade-off.

We should copy Canadian Law with respect to guns. Canadian law permits additional restrictions to be adopted locally. I favor that as well. There are lots of great sportsmen in Canada and lots of guns, but the rate per 100,000 population of mass shootings with semi-automatics is far lower. I'd like to see the Florida Teenagers start a National Movement to press for adoption of Canadian Gun Laws in the U.S.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html

Ok, I'm more interested in how you would accomplish this, not what you would like to see.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

The NRA should be ready to have balanced discussion on things that most people would say makes common sense. This would gain them credibility as a responsible organization. Instead, they come off as bloodthirsty to many who don't know better.

Well, which of your rights are you prepared to give away to placate the left? Concealed carry? Mag capacity? Semi-auto weapons? How about registration of all gun owners?

Unlike many advocacy groups, the NRA is not inventing threats to its members in an attempt to drive up paranoia. Their opponents are totally serious, well-funded and have the fervent backing of the media, entertainment industry, all of the democrat party and a good bit of the republican party. The only thing protecting your rights is the fear among republicans that they will lose their precious seats if they oppose the NRA.

 

[Tom B]

I don't understand why you disagree with the NRA's approach, even as you concede that the other side will never be satisfied with anything short of a total gun ban and confiscation. You can thank the NRA and their approach for your continued ability to be able to buy and own weapons of your choice.

You may recall that plenty of "conservative" republicans, eg the Bushes, were prepared to sell us out on guns just as they did on every other issue. I remember Bush senior babbling about gun ownership being linked to legitimate hunting and sporting uses. That is code for banning MSR's and semi-auto pistols.

Compromise and concessions are only reasonable when the compromise solution puts an end to the dispute. That will never be the situation with gun control. The left looks at every concession by gun owners as the floor for further concessions, all with the end clear end goal of a ban and confiscation.

I agree with you that many on the left will not be satisfied until there's a ban on guns. A sensible compromise on new gun control legislation could include national CCW reciprocity throughout the country.

 

[gwb-trading]

I agree with you that many on the left will not be satisfied until there's a ban on guns. A sensible compromise on new gun control legislation could include national CCW reciprocity throughout the country.

Coupled with consist nationally defined training which must be successfully completed to obtain a CCW permit.

 

[Tom B]

Coupled with consist nationally defined training which must be successfully completed to obtain a CCW permit.

I agree.

 

[Poindexter]

I suggest copying Canada's federal gun laws verbatim. Allowing 180 days for all existing guns to be brought into compliance or be declared illegal. Any guns that can not be brought into compliance should be purchased by the Federal Government and that a commission be appointed to establish a fair and equitable pricing mechanism.

Note that many guns now in private hands in the U.S. would fall under the restricted category in Canada. Many, if not most, could be brought into compliance within 180 days.

It would be of great advantage for all of North America to have uniform gun laws in place! In Canada you do not have to register, as of 2012, except in Quebec I believe, unrestricted guns. Unrestricted are those that, in the main, are suitable for sport. If you want to own a restricted semi-automatic, then you will have to comply with registration and additional restrictions, regulations and qualifications. That seems to me to be a very reasonable trade-off.

We should copy Canadian Law with respect to guns. Canadian law permits additional restrictions to be adopted locally. I favor that as well. There are lots of great sportsmen in Canada and lots of guns, but the rate per 100,000 population of mass shootings with semi-automatics is far lower. I'd like to see the Florida Teenagers start a National Movement to press for adoption of Canadian Gun Laws in the U.S.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html

Sorry Mr. piezoe but your premise is fatally flawed because gun ownership in Canada is a privilege. It's a Constitutional right in the United States; therefore our gun laws must be subordinate to the Constitution, not the other way around.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Well, which of your rights are you prepared to give away to placate the left? Concealed carry? Mag capacity? Semi-auto weapons? How about registration of all gun owners?

I'm not going to have to give away any of these rights because absolutely none of these actions will ever come to pass - they just aren't practical. So let the left rant, rave and shout at the rain.

Unlike many advocacy groups, the NRA is not inventing threats to its members in an attempt to drive up paranoia. Their opponents are totally serious, well-funded and have the fervent backing of the media, entertainment industry, all of the democrat party and a good bit of the republican party. The only thing protecting your rights is the fear among republicans that they will lose their precious seats if they oppose the NRA.

The one thing the left doesn't get when it goes after the NRA is that the NRA is funded by the people. It's not something that would exist without extensive support from millions.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Sorry Mr. piezoe but your premise is fatally flawed because gun ownership in Canada is a privilege. It's a Constitutional right in the United States; therefore our gun laws must be subordinate to the Constitution, not the other way around.

Excellent point. Still, I'd like to hear the practical argument on how any type of ban could actually be done. If he can make it.

 

[Cuddles]

I'm not going to have to give away any of these rights because absolutely none of these actions will ever come to pass - they just aren't practical. So let the left rant, rave and shout at the rain.



The one thing the left doesn't get when it goes after the NRA is that the NRA is funded by the people. It's not something that would exist without extensive support from millions.

You make it sound like they're a grass roots group living off charitable donations and not a lobbying group backed by weapons firms with a clear slant to scare people of the neo commies coming for their rights.