How easy should it be to buy a gun?

[Monte1076]

26 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

The mentally ill situation is the same as the criminals

Again, what counts as "the mentally ill"? And who's to say the government won't somehow try to expand that? Some people argue that trans people are "mentally ill". Should they be able to own guns?

Needs clarification.

[DB2point0]

1 minute ago, Monte1076 said:

Again, what counts as "the mentally ill"? And who's to say the government won't somehow try to expand that? Some people argue that trans people are "mentally ill". Should they be able to own guns?

Needs clarification.

Mentally ill, that’s how you define it.  Don’t take a “mental day” and you’ll be fine.

[Monte1076]

Just now, DB2point0 said:

Mentally ill, that’s how you define it.  Don’t take a “mental day” and you’ll be fine.

That's circular, though. "You're mentally ill because you're mentally ill."

And you're going to have people arguing over who's mentally ill and who isn't. Do you go by the DSM? Who's to say political pressure wouldn't change that, too?

[DB2point0]

14 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

That's circular, though. "You're mentally ill because you're mentally ill."

And you're going to have people arguing over who's mentally ill and who isn't. Do you go by the DSM? Who's to say political pressure wouldn't change that, too?

Mental illness, not anxiety and such.  True mental illness

[HearEmaGrowlin]

@JBizzle, I’d be in support of only violent felons being unable to buy guns.

I wasn’t clear on that point.

On the 18 year old deal, I’d have zero problem not allowing people under 21 to buy cigarettes or tobacco of any kind.  It may reduce the amount of people who die from cancer by a large percentage.

For the young girls defending themselves, I understand where you’re coming from.

The age of 18 to legally buy a gun may be worth it to stay there for the sole purpose of young people being able to defend themselves.

Self defense is the main thing I’m concerned about in keeping our guns.

My whole purpose in this conversation would be in reducing gun deaths annually and denying the wrong people from being able to purchase guns.

We all know who the wrong people are, but the Democrats would abuse the laws and attempt to take away and deny access to as many people as possible.

I understand that and that’d be my concern with opening this can of worms as far as passing new laws.

All this has come from a place of concern, while also wanting to protect the rights of good Americans.

I am definitely open to other opinions as I’ve already shown in this thread and in this very post.

Very difficult topic we’re discussing here.

[HearEmaGrowlin]

27 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

Again, what counts as "the mentally ill"? And who's to say the government won't somehow try to expand that? Some people argue that trans people are "mentally ill". Should they be able to own guns?

Needs clarification.

Monte, you’re right, the Dems would try to abuse that clause and say as many people as possible are mentally ill so that can’t buy or have guns.

That’s why earlier in this thread I told DB it’d really just be best to cancel that off the original list I posted.

[Monte1076]

1 hour ago, DB2point0 said:

True mental illness

Which is?

[DaveTV1]

8 hours ago, DannyZuco said:

I would be in favor of making 21 an adult. Even 25, because the younger generation is so weak minded. JMO. But on the other hand, I would also be in favor of having a conscription of every 18 year old into the military for 2 years of active duty and 4 years of reserves at minimum. Meaning I couldn't have it both ways. 

Personally, I think conscription for every 18 year old--does not matter their gender--would be the best way to go. And have Clint Eastwood be their drill instructor from one of his movies--Heartbreak ridge. LOL. 

But there is so much politics to get either changed. A repeal of the amendment that made 18 the legal age, when we have other amendments that need to be repealed be for that one. Such as the 16th. 

If they are conscripted at 18 then they should have all rights as an adult.  I assure you in basic they are taught every aspect on the safety of  using a weapon that can fire far more quickly than any AR-15 could.  

[DaveTV1]

2 hours ago, JBizzle said:

If someone can join the military or move out on their own at 18, they should be able to buy a gun. They should be able to buy cigarettes, alcohol, spray paint, super glue, fireworks, etc.  One purpose for owning a firearm is self-defense.  You want your 18 year-old daughter to be living on her own without the ability to properly protect herself?  I don't.  I'm training my kids now on safe handling of firearms, how to use them, care for them, store them, because I won't be the one who denies them the right to protect themselves from someone who is trying to hurt them.

I don't even agree with the felony being a reason to ban someone from owning a gun.  Was it a violent crime??  You telling me that someone who commits a non-violent felony (look at the law, there's lots of ways to do so) should be barred from ever being able to own a firearm...something that is guaranteed to him under the constitution?  I can get behind violent criminals losing their right to carry a gun.

It's all an overarching attempt to confiscate our guns.

I agree with you on non-violent felons.  The way I see it only those that have used guns to rob, assault (pistol whip), or murder someone with a gun should not be allowed to own them.  That is my only exception to the 2A.  I also don't see an age restriction so to speak, but if they are under 18 have them take a test on gun safety so they know the damages inflicted from errant use, how to properly store and clean a gun, take it apart and put it back together, and they should be able to buy a gun.  

[trashyhound]

9 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said:

The way I see it only those that have used guns to rob, assault (pistol whip), or murder someone with a gun should not be allowed to own them

I would add anyone convicted of rape regardless if a firearm was used.  

[BoyzNdaHood]

And just like that "shall not be infringed" is being moved by the right... SMH, hypocrites 

[DB2point0]

1 hour ago, Monte1076 said:

Which is?

When they don’t have the mental capacity to understand what I’m saying…..

[Monte1076]

1 minute ago, DB2point0 said:

When they don’t have the mental capacity to understand what I’m saying…..

Nice shot at me. Try again. And try not to use circular logic this time.

[DB2point0]

7 minutes ago, BoyzNdaHood said:

And just like that "shall not be infringed" is being moved by the right... SMH, hypocrites 

We sure don’t need you lefties telling us what we need.  We’ve got the worst inflation in 50 years, rolling blackouts across America and a bunch of lefties burning cities.  You’ve got kangaroo courts trying everybody on the right while leftists go free.  Just recently a guy tried to kill a sitting congressman, he was arrested and released within 3 hours.

[DB2point0]

Just now, Monte1076 said:

Nice shot at me. Try again. And try not to use circular logic this time.

I’m done with your baiting

[Doomer]

It should be as easy for law abidders to buy guns as it is for crooks to buy illegal drugs. Truestorie

[Monte1076]

39 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

I’m done with your baiting

How's it "baiting"? It's a straightforward question.

[HearEmaGrowlin]

59 minutes ago, BoyzNdaHood said:

And just like that "shall not be infringed" is being moved by the right... SMH, hypocrites 

I’m not being a hypocrite and am just thinking of common sense updates that could help our society, and the things I was thinking about wouldn’t infringe on anything.

[DB2point0]

2 hours ago, Monte1076 said:

How's it "baiting"? It's a straightforward question.

How do you not understand what I said?  Mentally illness is mental illness.    Not much more straightforward than that. 

[KirtFalcon]

7 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

Mental illness, not anxiety and such.  True mental illness

Liberals are mentally ill .... they should all be disarmed and prevented from holding public office ....

[DB2point0]

1 hour ago, KirtFalcon said:

Liberals are mentally ill .... they should all be disarmed and prevented from holding public office ....

They don’t like guns (most of them anyway) which is a reason why the next civil war shouldn’t last too long

[DannyZuco]

19 hours ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

My whole purpose in this conversation would be in reducing gun deaths annually and denying the wrong people from being able to purchase guns.

 

Not to be rude, but you might want to research some of you beliefs a little deeper, to understand what you are saying. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

In 2020--54% of all gun deaths were suicide. And I understand it is a mental health problem. And there is NO way to determine who is mentally ill, especially in many of these cases, but politics will play a part in each and every case, especially when someone wants to deny others their Constitutional rights. 

 

How many people are killed in mass shootings in the U.S. every year?

This is a difficult question to answer because there is no single, agreed-upon definition of the term “mass shooting.” Definitions can vary depending on factors including the number of victims and the circumstances of the shooting.

The FBI collects data on “active shooter incidents,” which it defines as “one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.” Using the FBI’s definition, 38 people – excluding the shooters – died in such incidents in 2020.

The Gun Violence Archive, an online database of gun violence incidents in the U.S., defines mass shootings as incidents in which four or more people are shot, even if no one was killed (again excluding the shooters). Using this definition, 513 people died in these incidents in 2020.

Regardless of the definition being used, fatalities in mass shooting incidents in the U.S. account for a small fraction of all gun murders that occur nationwide each year.

While each and every mass shooting is bad, what you want is to take away a "Right" of the people, so that you can think you are more secure, again leaving ONLY the bad guys with the extreme weapons--such as the government. 

In reality, NO gun or arm should be banned from ownership. No where in the Constitution does it say you can't own a cannon, a tank, a machine gun or other things. But I understand that some of you liberals want to control people and every time you provide yourself with a "security" law, you are just losing another right, and they will then come for the next one. And that is why we have such terrible government throughout history. 

[Monte1076]

16 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

 Mentally illness is mental illness.

That's circular, though. you understand circular reasoning, right?

In computer science, this is called "recursion". basically, when a function calls itself.

Another possible construct is the "infinite loop".

[HearEmaGrowlin]

5 hours ago, DannyZuco said:

Not to be rude, but you might want to research some of you beliefs a little deeper, to understand what you are saying. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

In 2020--54% of all gun deaths were suicide. And I understand it is a mental health problem. And there is NO way to determine who is mentally ill, especially in many of these cases, but politics will play a part in each and every case, especially when someone wants to deny others their Constitutional rights. 

 

How many people are killed in mass shootings in the U.S. every year?

This is a difficult question to answer because there is no single, agreed-upon definition of the term “mass shooting.” Definitions can vary depending on factors including the number of victims and the circumstances of the shooting.

The FBI collects data on “active shooter incidents,” which it defines as “one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.” Using the FBI’s definition, 38 people – excluding the shooters – died in such incidents in 2020.

The Gun Violence Archive, an online database of gun violence incidents in the U.S., defines mass shootings as incidents in which four or more people are shot, even if no one was killed (again excluding the shooters). Using this definition, 513 people died in these incidents in 2020.

Regardless of the definition being used, fatalities in mass shooting incidents in the U.S. account for a small fraction of all gun murders that occur nationwide each year.

While each and every mass shooting is bad, what you want is to take away a "Right" of the people, so that you can think you are more secure, again leaving ONLY the bad guys with the extreme weapons--such as the government. 

In reality, NO gun or arm should be banned from ownership. No where in the Constitution does it say you can't own a cannon, a tank, a machine gun or other things. But I understand that some of you liberals want to control people and every time you provide yourself with a "security" law, you are just losing another right, and they will then come for the next one. And that is why we have such terrible government throughout history. 

You weren’t rude, but please do not lump me in with liberals by saying, “you liberals”.

I am not a liberal.

[RETIREDFAN1]

1970s distraction from bad economy......serial killers

2020s distraction from bad economy.....mass shootings