Common Sense Gun Control?

[Pigoutultra]

What is common sense gun control? I hear this thrown around a lot by people who try to say that gun control is popular. Even my own governor is in favor of "common sense" gun control laws. I have a strong feeling that what I consider common sense and what these people consider common sense is completely different. It just seems to me that they use this phrase to mean ANY gun control law. Someone who's never owned a gun before might think it's common sense to limit handgun purchases to once a month, but for someone who owns guns knows that it is completely ludicrous. If someone has 10 handguns in their ownership, why should they have to wait a month before they buy a new handgun every time? The fringe might even think that it's common sense that the 2nd Amendment is in reference to a Militia, I don't think I need to explain that one. Any thoughts?

 

[HGUNHNTR]

More importantly why do guns need controlling, they are inanimate. And why do gun rights advocates keep spouting off the words "gun control", like it's a real thing?

 

[jgiehl]

The only thing I can really think that would involve "common sense gun control" would not be "laws." To me common sense gun control would really be:
Don't point a firearm at people unless they are not wanted in your house.
Know what's behind your target.
DO NOT teach your kid it's a GD toy.
Really just things like that.

But I'd say if a politician says "common sense gun control," it's just their way of saying let's get rid of them. Kind of how I wrap my mind around that.

 

[ctbullseye]

If they would start enforcing the overwhelming amount of laws on the books already they would stifle a large percentage of illegal firearm purchases. Just remember, proper gun control starts with stance and breathing unless presented an aggressive situation.

 

[jaysouth]

"common sense" gun control is leftist code for registration and eventual confiscation.

They are afraid of us ordinary taxpayers and sheep who own a gun.

They should be.

 

[Southern Rebel]

"Common sense" is a feel-good phrase that has no real meaning, but it is hard to attack because it is so ambiguous. After all, how can anyone be against "common sense" or "protect the children" or "help the less-fortunate"?

Anytime I hear that expression used, I tend to think of a car salesman saying "have I got a deal for you!". I will listen to your proposed deal or your proposed common sense, but with a great deal of caution - because in each case, the other party has a vested interest and it generally has nothing to do with what is in my best interest!

(Common sense in the general population is really not that widespread. )

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Jaysouth-->^ No, it has nothing to do with leftists, or conservatives, and everything to do with those that value individual liberties. Those folks are both liberal, conservative and politically unaffiliated. Don't draw lines of distinction and alienate our allies based on political affiliation. I would definitely call myself a Liberal in my politics, and am a strong supporter of my second amendment rights, as are many of my Liberal friends. Don't toss me under the bus for that. Being a Liberal, and supporting the 2nd amendment is a natural as bread and butter my friend--unfortunately it is popular today to divide up groups of people into "teams" to make the news easier to understand, and more entertaining for the masses.

-lets also try to avoid the tired old cliche's about gun control and hitting your target---it's not new, or funny anymore.

 

[Pigoutultra]

I see it mostly as the politicians think they know what's best for us and can make decisions for us. That is not what liberty is. If I had a dime for every time a politician said "I'm looking out for the best interests of my constituents." when what the politician is doing is very unpopular, I'd me a billionaire.

 

[hso]

"Common sense gun control" is yet again another reasonable sounding term used by antis for introducing laws to restrict the rights of law abiding gun owners in the US while doing nothing to limit gun crime.

We already have more than sufficient laws in this country, but don't apply them reasonably.

 

[roguejesse]

The only "Common Sense Gun Control" would be keeping guns out of criminals hands. How do you do that you might say. Lock 'em up, no plea bargains, no reduced sentencing, no early parole. Why is it that we have criminals that are out on the streets after a long list of convictions for violent crimes?

Another Common Sense item, is why am I legal to carry in one State, and once I cross some arbitrary border, I'm automatically considered a criminal because I am armed. Let's use some common sense and have reciprocity. After all we don't need a driver's licence for each State we drive through.

 

[Pigoutultra]

The overwhelming majority of crime would be ended not by more/less gun control as people will say. Now I am a libertarian, I don't know how THR members will react to this but I'll say it anyway. The illegality of drugs and the thriving black market that creates is what causes the majority of crimes and the solution would be to legalize drugs in order to bring them out of the black market to make crime less profitable. I definitely agree that allowing guns to be carried anywhere would be a great deterrent to crime, but gun control doesn't kill nearly as many people as the war on drugs. Now the RKBA is protected by the constitution, but the right to do whatever you want to your own body is protected by natural law. I see any attempt to limit the freedoms of people who by their own actions aren't violating the rights of anyone else as the most evil thing to exist on this earth. RKBA is the final check and balance to insure the protection of liberty and any "common sense" law that restricts it is misguided at best, malicious at worst.

 

[Bubba613]

"Common sense" unfortunately means whatever someone wants it to mean.
I think it is common sense that with guns so commonly available and even easy to make it is pointless to enact numerous restrictions on individuals engaged in lawful transfer. It is also common sense to punish criminals in a manner that will deter future wrong doing.

 

[leadchucker]

Misuse of a gun is already a crime. That is common sense gun control.

If you have common sense crime control, you automatically have common sense gun control.

 

[jaysouth]

Jaysouth-->^ No, it has nothing to do with leftists, or conservatives, and everything to do with those that value individual liberties. Those folks are both liberal, conservative and politically unaffiliated. Don't draw lines of distinction and alienate our allies based on political affiliation. I would definitely call myself a Liberal in my politics, and am a strong supporter of my second amendment rights, as are many of my Liberal friends. Don't toss me under the bus for that. Being a Liberal, and supporting the 2nd amendment is a natural as bread and butter my friend--unfortunately it is popular today to divide up groups of people into "teams" to make the news easier to understand, and more entertaining for the masses.

-lets also try to avoid the tired old cliche's about gun control and hitting your target---it's not new, or funny anymore.

Well, that's an interesting perspective.

How many conservative gungrabbers are there? How many conservatives send money to sarah brady? Do 1% of NRA members describe themselves as liberals, I think not?

Help me out, what conservative senator has been in favor of sweeping gun controls? Which liberal has espoused gun control, registration, confiscation? Let me see, I can think of jean fraude kerrie, hillary, gillebrand, shumer, kennedy, both dodds(father was original gun grabber) both dems from NJ, dickturban, boxer, finestein, algore, murray, and on and on and on. Not to mention their organs, AFL-CIO, Nat council of chruches, PTA, Columbia BS, American BS, National BS, NEA, NOW and on and on and on.

If you are a pro 2A liberal, goodonya. But it is a liberal v. conservative thing.

 

[M ammo]

+1 on that

 

[merlinfire]

Common sense?

No firearms for violent felons or the mentally unfit.

I think 18 is still a pretty fair age for purchase, but for rifles AND handguns IMO.

Beyond that, I don't really see what else is necessary. All other laws and restrictions are attempts to curtail the actions of criminals by criminalizing criminality.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Help me out, what conservative senator has been in favor of sweeping gun controls? Which liberal has espoused gun control, registration, confiscation? Let me see, I can think of jean fraude kerrie, hillary, gillebrand, shumer, kennedy, both dodds(father was original gun grabber) both dems from NJ, dickturban, boxer, finestein, algore, murray, and on and on and on. Not to mention their organs, AFL-CIO, Nat council of chruches, PTA, Columbia BS, American BS, National BS, NEA, NOW and on and on and on.

You are totally missing the point my friend--step outside of your previous way of thinking about this issue and open your mind to a new one.

But it is a liberal v. conservative thing.

OK you've re-worded a phrase on a t-shirt.
Good for you, polarize the issue and distance yourself from the folks that can have a voice that is heard in the "liberal" community. Who do you think would be a more effective spokesperson for the 2nd amendment, a gay liberal african american male that can articulate his love for personal freedom that extends to firearms ownership for personal protection, and recreation, OR a typical conservative white male spouting cliche's about guns. Which camp does the conservative pro gun group need to do their best to integrate into the fold? Which group will be the most effective at turning the tide in favor of gun rights?
All I'm saying is that there is NO NEED to polarize this debate along political lines--it is pointless. Yes the majority of Liberals are anti gun, and the majority of conservatives are pro gun---THATS NOT THE POINT. The point is this: This issue is about civil liberties, and talking about gun rights in the framework of civil liberties does MUCH more to advance our cause than politicizing the issue. I know you want to feel like your on a team, -- that is not an effective way to approach this fight however.

Do 1% of NRA members describe themselves as liberals, I think not?

This is where the problem lies---imagine if more Liberals were on board. Many want to be, many are neutral to positive about gun ownership. The name calling and stereotyping does little to further their curiosity, or create a positive experience with firearms I can tell you that for sure. I've converted many a Liberal friend to a 2nd Amdmnt supporter by presenting the issue as an issue of personal liberty, and that beat the hell out of telling them they weren't welcome to go to the range since they were a bunch of gun grabbing tree hugging pansies thats for damned sure.

Sorry for the language, but I feel it is appropriate.

 

[ball3006]

Common sense gun control allows you to keep all your shots in the black. The best gun control puts all your shots in the X ring. Any other meaning of the term gun control is so much liberal spew. It sounds to me like there is a lurking DU here trying to drum up positive views on their agenda on this topic. chris3

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Common sense gun control allows you to keep all your shots in the black. The best gun control puts all your shots in the X ring. Any other meaning of the term gun control is so much liberal spew. It sounds to me like there is a lurking DU here trying to drum up positive views on their agenda on this topic. chris3

Ugh

 

[Manco]

There aren't many gun laws that I would describe as common sense, although it seems that disallowing felons and the mentally ill from purchasing a handgun at a licensed dealer fits the bill well enough (yeah, they could always buy one off the street, but let's keep the focus narrow for now). The problem is the way that such laws are enforced, causing much inconvenience and frustration for those who are falsely flagged for some weird reason, while allowing people--including some who have committed heinous atrocities such as the Virginia Tech massacre--who do have a history of mental illness walk right out of the store with the murder weapon. The other problem is that the poor enforcement of such laws practically always works to the advantage of anti-gunners and gun-grabbers, since being "common sense" they're virtually unassailable, and whenever an avoidable tragedy happens to result, there is a renewed outcry for even more anti-gun legislation. This is yet another example (of many) of politicians and criminals working together to corral and control law-abiding citizens--the "sheep" if you will (see the attached image ).

Common sense is merely an excuse for placing more restrictions on our liberty--another step toward the ultimate goal of taking it away completely. After all, that is the ultimate goal of every governing body, comprising mere mortals who are given something as dangerous and corrupting as power, which is why the Founding Fathers of this country wisely decided that the citizens should be armed. Common sense is never a good reason to make laws or keep them around in the absence of positive results--against crime--to show for it. By this standard, virtually all gun legislation should be abolished, in my opinion.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Yessir Manco--agreed.

 

[rustedangel]

Hopefully everyone got the platitudes out of their systems, because I don't know how many more poor attempts at humor I can take!

HGUNHNTR, I completely agree with your thoughts regarding aligning the message for the target audience. I'm personally very guilty of maligning my own beliefs by spouting alienating and inflammatory rhetoric at people instead of reasoning with them, which becomes an excercise in frustration for both parties and accomplishes nothing. I have had some limited success in introducing my liberal friends to shooting, and a good percentage of them actually have a lot of fun once they forget their own bias against guns and just engage in the activity.

Pigoutultra, as an econ nerd I agree with your (off topic) point regarding drug prohibition causing more damage and crime than it prevents. Whenever there is demand for a service or good, markets, whether legal or illicit, will find a way to deliver that good. Attempts at supply restriction only increase the market clearing price, thus providing greater incentives for new suppliers to enter the illicit market.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I don't know.... according to some of these "pro-2A" and "pro-Constitution" people, common sense gun laws are whatever the government claims is common sense at any point in time.....

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/conc...6-common-sense-reasonable-regulation-etc.html

 

[Sky]

I remember a phrase that went something like, " There are some people a lot smarter than you and me that has figured this stuff out".

I used to believe that orders issued or laws written were made for the betterment of the individual and society. I guess many, when older, begin to wonder where are these smart men and women especially after reviewing some of the inane corrupt things that get written into law for the few and not the many.

The Journal of the American Medical Association recently reported that As many as 106,000 deaths occur annually in US hospitals due to adverse reactions to prescription drugs that are properly prescribed by physicians that use them as directed by the drug companies.

http://www.newswithviews.com/health_care/health_care4.htm

 

[Pigoutultra]

Rusted, it is on topic. I was just hoping someone would disagree so it could explain to them that the motivations for the drug war are very similar to those of gun control. Some people feel that they drugs can't be used responsibly and some people think that guns can't be used responsibly. The motivation is the fear that if given drugs or guns people will do stupid things and commit crimes. I will admit that they are different and most certainly guns can be used responsibly, but denying someone the right to own a gun because of the POSSIBILITY they will do something illegal is just wrong. Just as denying somebody the right to consume any substance they want because of the POSSIBILITY of them doing something illegal is wrong. I am adamantly opposed to anyone telling me how to live my life and what I can and can't do. If your neighbor owns a gun, he is not violating your rights. If your neighbor smokes weed, he is again not violating your rights. There is no justifiable reason to restrict freedom for a false sense of security, no matter how illegal either is they will still be used by bad people for bad things.