The limits of Gun Control or DD control..

[mr hanky]

In my frequent conversations with my fellow man, one question has come up repeatedly that I am wondering the opinion of my fellow gun enthusiasts.

Lets say that I am talking with someone about how gun control doesn't work at all and they say something along the lines of "So you want all civilians having RPG's and children should have access to guns at school etc also?"

Usually my response is that we shouldn't have gun vendors selling Uzi's in front of elementary's to children but that we should have reasonable options for the defense of everyone. The quesiton of RPG's...my response is it that there should be some prudence with weapons (DD's?) that are more powerful than firearms, such as RPG's. The 2nd allows for the citizens of this country to have weapons equal to government in order for a check to exist against tyrrany.

So, my question (my apologies if it seems dumb) ultimately is, where exactly should we draw the lines so that we aren't selling Uzi's to kids left and right and not just anyone can pick up something uber destuctive like missles, RPG's etc?

I also acknowledge that the more important issue is not focusing on limiting anything, and that BG's already have access to everything mentioned as well, but I have pondered this over the years.

 

[PTK]

18 years of age, everything legal to own, use, and carry. There you go.

Misuse? Jailtime.

 

[Japle]

My opinion: A civilian should be able to buy anything an ordinary infantryman might be issued to carry into battle.

Exceptions would be made for crew-served weapons and grenade/rocket launchers. Such items could still be manufactured and sold, but with the kind of background check and storage requirements that exist today for NFA weapons.

If you want a mortar or a cannon or a tank and can afford one, you should be able to buy one.

John
Cape Canaveral

 

[Standing Wolf]

Why don't we try the Second Amendment for awhile? It's the one law pertaining to firearms that's never actually been tried.

If that doesn't work out, maybe we'll have to start thinking about special exceptions.

 

[rocinante]

PTK solution sounds about right. I guess it all comes down to your view of citizen. In one corner we the people are really dumb, irresponsible, wicked beings that can't wipe our buts with both hands. We need a king or dictator or enlightened 'comrade' to herd us and tell us what to do. On the other the citizen is the hero of society, the one engaged in his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness while remaining thoughtful of his fellow and their same sacred rights. Don't thread on me.

I am new in having interest in guns and gun control. One of the things I was unaware of was the concept the 2nd amendment is a check on government. The concept framers of government would put arms in the hands of citizens to keep the government from becoming too tyrannical is truly astonishing. Yet if you read the authors words it is really clear to any sane person with an IQ over 70 that is exactly what they intended. Guns are civilization and an important part of their concept of checks and balances. I truly admire those radicals. I don't think since Jesus and his twelve had a more astonishing group walked the earth and I severely doubt we will see their likes in the future. VISIONARIES. The natural tendency of government is to maintain a monopoly on the use of force. We as citizens so far have faith and trust in our appointed government agents to exercise that force for the greater good while asserting our rights to be armed for self defense and hunting and recreational purposes with the behind the scenes threat we have the right to use our arms to preserve our rights to keep government in check if need be. That is kind of annoying to governments don't you think? The over riding trend in modern government is to control every single aspect of society and think socialism. Time and time again when the citizen is unarmed you find government slaughters them like sheep. Germany, Russia, China, Cambodia, a legion of nations in Africa, etc. etc. etc. Americans should say no thank you to that. But the question is where is the line drawn on possession of arms? What level of arms control is reasonable and acceptable. Can I, a 49 year old suburban dad with no criminal history, have a right to have a modern military weapon like a RPG, Ma Duece, grenade launcher, a boutique of grenades? Do you gauge it by the level of damage that could be caused if used irresponsibly? Do you regulate by the individuals ability to use and secure his arms? Thorny stuff huh when taking the concept of a free people in account? Much easier to deal with sheeple.

 

[mr hanky]

Standing Wolf, I totally agree. The more important issue should be securing our fundamental rights in the second which the government is using to wipe the lower portion of their intestines with...ahem.

rocinante, have you seen the t-shirts, posters etc that has the swastica, china and the soviet union symbols, reading below it says "The Experts Agree, Gun Control Works!" - Your post reminded me of that.

 

[BuntlineSpecial]

Big +1 Standing Wolf.
I point out, when presented with the "RPG's, Uzi's" argument that taking any issue to extremes does not facilitate debates, and follow up with "to use your question to the opposite extreme, I would need a permit to obtain a steak knife to cut my evening meal."

 

[StuckInMA]

...exactly should we draw the lines so that we aren't selling Uzi's to kids left and right...

I think the term "kids" needs to be better defined.

 

[rocinante]

The United States tried the 2nd until the 1930s and it worked. Fact is it was so clear and so understood and worked so well that even after the civil war the confederate veterans were allowed to take their arms home. So clear that it did not occur to ANY politician to suggest otherwise. Seems they were fully aware of the framers' thoughts and will. Not until "modern" times did our political system warp enough that the cock and bull interpretation of militia only could exist. IIRC the national guard didn't exist until the early 1900s. The concept of gun control has always had a place but traditionally it never went so far as suggesting the citizen does not have the right to bear arms. No one questioned the right of the responsible citizen. INSANE.

mr hanky i have seen that shirt and 100% agree with it. I have hope 2008 is the year the citizen sobers up and makes hard choices about their lives and America. On the issue of gun control I am highly optimistic that the SC and the people will find wisdom and keep the 2nd.

 

[jerkface11]

I can has RPG7?

 

[PTK]

jerkface11, yes. Pay a $200 tax for the launcher, $200 for the warhead, wait for the transfer, and there you are. I seem to recall one place online actually had two or three for sale a few months back.