Gun Control Poll

[+DieChecker]

Here is a nonscientific poll on what UMers believe we should go forward with regarding gun control in the USA.

Please vote. Vote is not public.

[bubblykiss]

I don't own a gun and may just never do so.

However.

All 'mericans that want 'em can have 'em.

Would I like more responsibility around gun ownership? Yes.

But guns are in our hands to protect us from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

If they do so...well, that is another argument.

[andy4]

Voted for the 2nd one. I've been convinced, mosly from being on here, that an all out ban will not happen any time soon. Stronger regulations should be put in place however, that's what I believe.

[Mikko-kun]

I voted for my country too. We ain't gonna do any more harm to animals with more guns than we already do, so it's a win-win. Not that I support nihilism and such, but I'd rather everyone have them than a selected few.

[questionmark]

Sorry, but if you want a poll you should not ask leading questions like: Pass stronger gun regulations. More is better because many feel that different regulations are needed, not more regulation

[aztek]

you have played enough with regulations , for us to see that no matter what your new regulation say, they fail, each and every time, so no, you've done enough already, we let you experemnt enough at our "dime" to see you that can not acheave anything.

[Rafterman]

I don't think the issues are as black/white as you're portraying them in the poll. If it was simply a case of having more regulations, then there would be no gun crime in the US - after all, everything is already illegal, right? The key is SMART regulations that try to keep firearms out of the hands of those that shouldn't have them, while respecting the rights of law abiding gun owners to have the firearms they want.

As a gun owner, I don't have a problem with mandatory background checks for all firearms purchases (yes, even traditional hunting firearms like shotguns). All private sales should go through a firearms dealer to ensure the right checks are conducted. I also think a mental health check should be incorporated into the system in some way. I also don't have an issue with having to pass a safety course and be licensed to own firearms. And those licenses should expire and have to be renewed at some periodic time. I also think there should be some kind of required secure storage law in place. There should also be a formalized appeal process for those denied any licenses or who have been subject to forfeiture for any reason. And it goes without saying that the penalties for breaking any of these regulations should be severe. And these laws should be nationwide, not on a state by state or county by county as we have here in New York. The same goes for concealed carry.

[aztek]

we already have background check, everytime you buy a gun from a dealer, anywhere , even gunshows. gunhatters are spreading a myth that we do not, but go to any gun store, and see for yourself.

as for private sales, you just can't do it, there is no possible way you can eforce it, no one will report a sale of a gun no one knows about, it is like asking people to go to dmv and turn themselves in if they drove too fast. if one turns on sense of reality, he'll understand you just can not accomplish it, not to mention no one that has a gun that cops do not know about will tell them he has one, it is simply unrealistic, but fortunatly, very few guns used in crimes were reported to come from that source. if someone pushes legestlation (for humans that live in real world) that completly ignores reality, and human nature, is an idiot. and nothing good obviously will come out of any legeslation he pushes, and proof is everywhere, all those strict gun laws, have not done a single thing to trim down crime.

as far as medical mental issue, good luck with that, multitrillion medical cartel wont even let this issue move from standstill, or even acnowlege it exists, and there are some idiots that blame NRA.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[Sweetpumper]

I've been convinced, mosly from being on here, that an all out ban will not happen any time soon.

And it never will.

[questionmark]

we already have background check, everytime you buy a gun from a dealer, gunhatters are spreading a myth that we do not, but go to any gun store, and see for yourself.

as for private sales, you just can't do it, there is no possible way you can eforce it, no one will report a sale of a gun no one knows about, it is like asking people to go to dmv and turn themselves in if they drove too fast. if one turns on sense of reality, he'll understand you just can not accomplish it, not to mention no one that has a gun that cops do not know about will tell them he has one, it is simply unrealistic, but fortunatly, very few guns used in crimes were reported to come from that source. if someone pushes legestlation (for humans that live in real world) that completly ignores reality, and human nature, is an idiot. and nothing good obviously will come out of any legeslation he pushes, and proof is everywhere, all those strict gun laws, have not done a single thing to trim down crime.

as far as medical mental issue, good luck with that, multitrillion medical cartel wont even let this issue move from standstill, or even acnowlege it exists, and there are some idiots that blame NRA.

Seems to work quite well in Iowa, California and New York: Without a purchase permit no sale. And just to make sure that even the last hillbilly understands it in Iowa you get 5 years in the penn if you do it anyway.

[aztek]

Seems to work quite well in Iowa, California and New York: Without a purchase permit no sale. And just to make sure that even the last hillbilly understands it in Iowa you get 5 years in the penn if you do it anyway.

no it did not, it is when you buy from a dealer, it is NOT ABOUT PRIVATE SALE. i know exactly what you talking about, a purchse authorisation, you need it in some cases, but it requires dealers ffl number , my guess you never seen it, well i have, and you are as usual , way off, to say politely.

btw, in even in nyc PA only needed for hanguns, rifles can be bought any time you wish, with no PA.

btw you get more for murder, yet people still do it, so you think jailtime for gun violation gonna do anything???? lol, see above, you fall under category i was talking above.

actually the more i read your post, the more i see how dumb it is.

person A has a gun that no one knows about, he wants to sell it to a person b, he does, there is no way to prove gun even belonged to person A, and no way to prove person B ever bought it. so you mean, person A will got to cops to get a sale permit for unregestered gun, and person b will go to do backgroud check to buy a gun no one knows about??? how dumb do you think those people are, prbly they are not the ones who is dumb.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[Thorvir]

I've been convinced, mosly from being on here, that an all out ban will not happen any time soon.

And it never will.

Which is only a good thing.

I voted for the "Remove some, or many, of the current gun laws. See 2nd Amendment" of course. But, if it doesn't get any worse, I won't be too upset. I can still get any kind of gun I want anytime, it just costs more money and a lot of time (see automatic weapons). Background checks don't really bug me, since I have done nothing wrong. I'm just not sure if having every gun I purchase in some sort of government database that can be used to confiscate my guns sometime in the future is a good idea though. I'd prefer it to be none of the government's business. If I pass the background check, that should be good enough, they don't need to know what it was for.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Hida Akechi

[questionmark]

no it did not, it is when you buy from a dealer, it is NOT ABOUT PRIVATE SALE.

http://coolice.legis.iowa.gov/cool-ice/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=iowacode&ga=83&input=724.15

[danielost]

I voted remove laws. After every shooting we add more laws. These new laws would not have stopped the shooting that inspired them. Assuming that the laws would be inforced.

[Rafterman]

we already have background check, everytime you buy a gun from a dealer, anywhere , even gunshows. gunhatters are spreading a myth that we do not, but go to any gun store, and see for yourself.

as for private sales, you just can't do it, there is no possible way you can eforce it, no one will report a sale of a gun no one knows about, it is like asking people to go to dmv and turn themselves in if they drove too fast. if one turns on sense of reality, he'll understand you just can not accomplish it, not to mention no one that has a gun that cops do not know about will tell them he has one, it is simply unrealistic, but fortunatly, very few guns used in crimes were reported to come from that source. if someone pushes legestlation (for humans that live in real world) that completly ignores reality, and human nature, is an idiot. and nothing good obviously will come out of any legeslation he pushes, and proof is everywhere, all those strict gun laws, have not done a single thing to trim down crime.

as far as medical mental issue, good luck with that, multitrillion medical cartel wont even let this issue move from standstill, or even acnowlege it exists, and there are some idiots that blame NRA.

But the background check system is not as robust as it should be and that's the problem. For example, I just bought a new .22 rifle for target shooting. The guy at the gun shop whipped out his IPad and the background check was performed in less than 5 minutes. Every gun sale should include that and unfortunately they don't. Again, the idea is keeping firearms out of the hands of those that shouldn't have them.

And while I know the mental health piece may seem unworkable, I would much rather time be spent on developing a framework and making a good system than all of the m********ory arguments about what a damned firearm looks like and why this one is illegal and this one isn't because some guy hung some kind of doohickey off of it. Considering that well over 60% of gun deaths in the US are a result of suicide, making a big dent in this number should be a top priority. Granted, while I'm a firm believer that a suicidal person will use whatever means necessary to carry out the act, at least by limiting their firearms access they won't be using a firearm to do it.

And while it may not reduce crime (which has been going down on its own even as firearm ownership has skyrocketed), gun owners can't simply sit back and scream "shall not be infringed" and walk into the local Panera with a rifle slung on their back simply because they can legally do so. That's simply not responsible behavior - that's "**** you" behavior. And in this day and age when a well-worded tweet or internet meme is more convincing than a PhD dissertation on gun violence, it's up to us responsible gun owners to present ourselves well to the public and show that we are as committed to gun safety as anyone else.

[questionmark]

But the background check system is not as robust as it should be and that's the problem. For example, I just bought a new .22 rifle for target shooting. The guy at the gun shop whipped out his IPad and the background check was performed in less than 5 minutes. Every gun sale should include that and unfortunately they don't. Again, the idea is keeping firearms out of the hands of those that shouldn't have them.

And while I know the mental health piece may seem unworkable, I would much rather time be spent on developing a framework and making a good system than all of the m********ory arguments about what a damned firearm looks like and why this one is illegal and this one isn't because some guy hung some kind of doohickey off of it. Considering that well over 60% of gun deaths in the US are a result of suicide, making a big dent in this number should be a top priority. Granted, while I'm a firm believer that a suicidal person will use whatever means necessary to carry out the act, at least by limiting their firearms access they won't be using a firearm to do it.

And while it may not reduce crime (which has been going down on its own even as firearm ownership has skyrocketed), gun owners can't simply sit back and scream "shall not be infringed" and walk into the local Panera with a rifle slung on their back simply because they can legally do so. That's simply not responsible behavior - that's "**** you" behavior. And in this day and age when a well-worded tweet or internet meme is more convincing than a PhD dissertation on gun violence, it's up to us responsible gun owners to present ourselves well to the public and show that we are as committed to gun safety as anyone else.

seeing headlines like:

Study: 80 percent of adults with serious mental illness out of work

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2014/07/10/Study-80-percent-of-adults-with-serious-mental-illness-out-of-work/4941405021251/#ixzz37Shzsx8x

seems to tell me that it is not so unworkable.

[aztek]

But the background check system is not as robust as it should be and that's the problem. For example, I just bought a new .22 rifle for target shooting. The guy at the gun shop whipped out his IPad and the background check was performed in less than 5 minutes. Every gun sale should include that and unfortunately they don't.

how much more robust do you think it sould be, it already includes everyting, exsept mental status, unless was institutionalised, you want more data there, no problem, add data, but we already have working, efficient system.

so what if it olny took 5 min, it only takes 1 phone call, it's called instant for a reason. it is robust enough to regect lots of people (it does regect, really, including one serial shooter, in resent shooting). and yes every gun dealer runs it, they have to. if you can find a dealer that did not do a check, call atf. in my experience, every dealer i ever bought a gun from, at any time, ran my bacgkround check.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[Rafterman]

how much more robust do you think it sould be, it already includes everyting, exsept mental status, unless was institutionalised, you want more data there, no problem, add data, but we already have working, efficient system.

so what if it olny took 5 min, it only takes 1 phone call, it's called instant for a reason. it is robust enough to regect lots of people (it does regect, really, including one serial shooter, in resent shooting). and yes every gun dealer runs it, they have to. if you can find a dealer that did not do a check, call atf. in my experience, every dealer i ever bought a gun from, at any time, ran my bacgkround check.

That's my point - it needs to include mental health data. Some states do and some states don't. And for those that do, it's spotty at best as to what gets reported and what doesn't. Here's an article that talks a bit about that (note it's from the Washington Times):

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/13/despite-calls-for-more-gun-restrictions-current-ba/?page=all

And perhaps it's not a prohibition from buying a firearm if you're flagged for a mental health issue. Perhaps it's simply "we need more information" before approving this purchase. And it should be standardized across the country. I shouldn't have to put up with a county judge denying my handgun purchase permit simply because he "doesn't like guns" when if I had simply lived in a different county it would have been approved. Welcome to gun ownership in New York State.

The system should be tight, it should be fair, it should have a system of redress if necessary, and it should be nationwide. Pretty simple really.

[aztek]

http://coolice.legis...83&input=724.15

exasctly what i said, it has nothign to do with private sales. it requires guns to be regestered afterwards, but it in no way enforces guns that are not regesterd. again i know what PA means, and you obvuosly do not, so why talk about thing you do not know?????

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[aztek]

The system should be tight, it should be fair, it should have a system of redress if necessary, and it should be nationwide. Pretty simple really.

such system already exists. NICB. it turned down 700.000 people. i have nothing against other data there to be included, you do not need to change anything, mandate states metal clinics to submit more, it has nothing to do with gun owners. and afaik most if not all gunowners, including nra, has nothing against it.

btw , can't really take that article serious, (even thou it makes some good points for current system), entire article is noting but "what if" argument.

i keep asking gun control fans, how are you going to control guns in someones hands, no one gave me an answer, thus it turns out, they have no clue what gun control even is. yet they keep screaming they want it.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[questionmark]

exasctly what i said, it has nothign to do with private sales.

If you sell a gun without the buyer having a permit permit your in the can, in Iowa they went even as far as to raid pawn shops for illegal guns in 2008.

Yes, they don't have all illegal guns yet, but sooner or later they will. And exactly the same thing happens with states with similar laws, now there is place for improvement? Yes, and that would be a registry to know who was the last person to legally own the gun and have that person explain why it got into illegal hands.

Just forbidding this type or that type of gun leads nowhere. Having the irresponsible held accountable does.

[aztek]

If you sell a gun without the buyer having a permit permit your in the can, in Iowa they went even as far as to raid pawn shops for illegal guns in 2008.

Yes, they don't have all illegal guns yet, but sooner or later they will. And exactly the same thing happens with states with similar laws, now there is place for improvement? Yes, and that would be a registry to know who was the last person to legally own the gun and have that person explain why it got into illegal hands.

Just forbidding this type or that type of gun leads nowhere. Having the irresponsible held accountable does.

pawm shops are not private sale. do you think cops should bust every door in every house looking if there is a firearm there????

you still do not get it do you? you can't enfoce it. there is no way you can prove the gun was ever sold, or given, or changed owners in any other way, if you have no record of it, anywhere, and do not expect anyone to regester it. they will not, have you noticed how good nys program of regestering previosly unregestered assault rifle do? lol, it failed big time. and so did bullet print program.

same as if a law prohibited sex after 3am. people would stiil do it, and you can neither contorl it, nor enforce it.

you keep ignoring reality and human factor.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[questionmark]

pawm shops are not private sale. do you think cops should bust every door in every house looking if there is a firearm there????

you still do not get it do you? you can't enfoce it. there is no way you can prove the gun was ever sold, or given, or changed owners in any other way, if you have no record of it, anywhere, and do not expect anyone to regester it. they will not, have you noticed how good nys program of regestering previosly unregestered assault rifle do? lol, it failed big time. and so did bullet print program.

same as if a law prohibited sex after 3am. people would stiil do it, and you can neither contorl it, nor enforce it.

you keep ignoring reality and human factor.

No, you seem to try to do nothing using the human factor as excuse, which is not quite the same. Just ask yourself: where do you find more robberies, there where it is socially condoned or there where it is socially ostracized?

[aztek]

No, you seem to try to do nothing using the human factor as excuse, which is not quite the same. Just ask yourself: where do you find more robberies, there where it is socially condoned or there where it is socially ostracized?

not really nothing, i contribute to pro 2nd activists, aka nra. what do you do????, i'm all for people being armed, i'm strong beliver in, "do not be a victim, arm yourself" theory, or more like it is a fact, while your attemps to disarm law abiding citizens did absolutely nothing good.

i find less robberies where people are armed, and i have plenty of data to back it up, and it has been posted here numeros times.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aztek

[+DieChecker]

The poll so far seems to show, interestingly, that a majority (especially for a forum with a good international mix) favor no new laws, or actually removing some laws, with 22 votes.

Whereas those favoring more legislation or a ban are in the minority with 9 votes.

Seems to me, that the people favoring a ban are simply a extremely vocal minority.

Also seems to show that no one favors an outright ban of all guns. Which was the question that spawned this poll.