Dangers of “Common sense legislation to end gun violence”

[Phineas Dregg]

I was recently referred to a political website www.popvox.com, which allows users to participate in a poll on bills going before congress and will submit a letter to your representatives on your behalf indicating your position on the issue. Most of the bills regarding gun control are opposed by a large majority. However, Bloomberg’s group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), has introduced a proposition/petition to congress called “Common sense legislation to end gun violence.” It has overwhelming support. I think people are just looking at the title and thinking “Hey, common sense measures make sense. I support that.” When you actually read what it is calling for you see it is an assault weapons ban, just like the one Feinstein is pushing, which is overwhelmingly opposed.

I have always hated the term “common sense gun control.” It is very non-specific and implies anyone who disagrees lacks common sense. In fact, when I clicked my voice of opposition, it indicated my letter would say “I oppose common sense legislation to end gun violence.” I don’t think anybody actually opposes ending gun violence that is not of a self defensive nature, but MAIG seems to want to make us feel bad about voting against them.

Please help us all by contacting your representatives and tell them how you really feel about MAIG’s plan. You can do so at www.popvox.com. You can also send a letter through Ruger’s website at http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html, or you can try to look up your representatives contact information from government websites and contact them directly, or better yet, do all three.

Things are getting tense. We need to stand up together.

Phin

 

[Phineas Dregg]

I really think everyone who opposes and assault weapons ban and magazine limits needs to write to their congressmen. If you agree please post a similar thread on other firearm forums you may participate in. I already posted this on glocktalk, calguns, perfectunion, and survivalistboards.

 

[bigdipper]

i voted but more people need to get on and do the same i think that is the only one were losing

 

[Phineas Dregg]

thanks bigdipper

 

[Ryanxia]

I think it's pretty clear to the majority of Congress critters how we feel, many of us have been writing letters on a weekly basis. If any of the Bills get enough votes to go through the Senate and the House it will be because of the willful disregard of the people on the part of the politicians.

Have to register to vote. There's hundreds of these websites out there so not going to bother. I will however contact my representatives to specifically voice my opposition for this Bill.

 

[KTXdm9]

Usually when someone puts "common sense" in front of legislation or spending proposals, it was created with anything but common sense. It's important we debunk the idea that these proposals are "common sense" wherever possible.

 

[velojym]

Just because something is "common" doesn't mean it's worth a dang. It was commonly held that ships that sailed too far would fall off the edge of the world. This reeks of the same lack of logic... just mindsoak the public until they'll believe whatever you tell 'em, including the idea that adding the words "common sense" to anything automagically makes it a good idea.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Emotive labels like "common sense" are chosen to cut off rational debate.

Is your amygdala wired so that you think your way out of a stressful situation or does yours short circuit into fear and panick?

 

[armedwalleye]

From my experience...

When it comes to politicians and common sense, I've found common sense ain't all that common.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I find it remarkable how people who support the human right to keep and bear arms are "extreme" yet those who want to oppress human rights, make criminals out of law abiding citizens, and use military and police power to confiscate the lawful property of citizens are the ones who are "reasonable".

 

[alsaqr]

Strange that many of the same blissninnies who talk about "common sense measures to end gun violence" are opposed to long sentences for violent criminals who use guns.

Every year thousands of convicted felons are arrested for possession of firearms: Few are ever prosecuted for that offense.

 

[beatledog7]

The problem with measures the average anti sees as "common sense" is that in his perception the only things that make sense are those which take us closer to an outright ban.

It's understandable why intractable antis think this way; it's the same as a rational traveler recognizing that it makes no sense to follow a path that leads away from his destination.

All of this stems from pervasive but misplaced trust in government solutions to problems and from legislators thinking that all problems can be solved by taking whatever action will help convince those with misplaced trust in government to vote for them again.

 

[hso]

The term "common sense" isn't common sense if you think about how different we all are and the difference in circumstances we all live in.

Shoot off your back porch is common sense for folks living in hill country with low population density, but it is insane if you live in even a suburban community much less the city. "Common sense" says you need a law completely prohibiting that if you're in the city of suburbs, but that wouldn't be a common sense law in the middle of nowhere because some folks just don't have the "common sense" to figure it out. We have Cooper's rules, but they're all "common sense" yet we have to train people to them and we have to post them at our ranges because some folks don't have the "common sense" to figure them out.

But we know that "Common Sense Gun Laws" are far more than looking for logical rules to formulate laws for firearms use and that it is more than a misunderstood term. Instead it is misdirection and mislabeling of a plan to legislate a one size fits no one approach to banning firearms in every community.

We need to reply to the use of the term by saying that the shooting sports have had common sense rules for firearms all along to prevent accidents and that we know the difference between a common sense idea based on a specific circumstance and situation and a "one size fits all badly" approach to restricting firearms wholesale across the nation. Common sense in NYC isn't the same for the great breadth of the nation. The voters in the urban centers are being lied to and manipulated into thinking what is applicable to them is applicable for every situation and circumstance and community when we know that the U.S. isn't just one coast to coast urban center.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Good point. "Common sense" says a person has no need of a magazine over 10 rounds but they think you are insane if you imply the police don't need it either. This weekend at the Guns Across America Rally they made a major point of the fact most people leave a long way away from police response and being hamstrung to a magazine limit to defend their homes and loved ones is insanity at its finest.

 

[Shadow 7D]

You can control guns and gun violence
it's VERY 'common sense'

you make ALL guns illegal
institute DRACONIAN measures to find and seize guns
and come down with full force of the law on EVERY violation to make the point to those who would resist.

only one minor problem
that place, that did that, wouldn't be the USA (anymore)

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books in this country. I'm pretty sure "common sense" laws have been covered. Adding more laws to try and control those who don't obey the existing tens of thousands of laws is the opposite of common sense. It's foolish.