SultanOfSwing

1-3. No, I'm not interested in a blanket ban and I have not said anything to imply that I was, so these three can be dismissed off the bat.
4. Is ammunition exempt from sales tax? I don't think levying some random tax like they do with fags would have any effect though, so no.
5. Not necessarily, but I think it's a bit hypocritical that someone can buy a gun at 18 but they can't buy a drink. Consistency would be nice here.
6. I'm down with that, actually.
7. Can be dismissed with points 1-3, I'm not saying this should happen at all.

A while back I mentioned Japan's approach, and I would like to see (emphasis on that phrase, I'm not saying this is the answer) something along those lines, without the restriction on the type of guns that can be bought.

So, a written exam, proficiency test with a high passing score, psych evaluations and a limit in the number of gun shops operating in a given area would be a great start. Some kind of liability insurance as well would make sense, especially if tied into a register for all guns where if a person's gun is stolen or otherwise used in a crime by someone else, they are in some way liable for it and will incur a punishment of some variety, likely fines, up to and including forfeiting their right to ownership if the crime is severe enough.

I've never heard of that meme, and quite frankly as soon as something is distilled to an image macro and Impact font I will usually tend to dismiss it as not worth wasting my time over.

I don't know yet, that's why I pose the questions. Furthermore, it's not up to me. I don't have a gun, I have no horse in the race. However, I'm trying to play devil's advocate with the pro-gun voice in this thread. That's my middle ground.

I've already pointed that out. I'm mostly apathetic when it comes to gun ownership. I don't buy into the myths that they make you safe, but I'm happy enough for people to have them as long as we have a well thought out legal framework to manage that ownership.

'Middle ground' isn't something I can really define, nor is it something I should have to either, since I'm not a lawmaker. If, however, the net end result is that all gun owners

I was not aware of any of that, thanks.

kimilseung

It should be no surprise that libertarians are pro gun as they are from a social group that has enough stuff to, in part, separate itself from social and economic interaction, other than in the limited spectrum of what it considers acceptable, and this stuff that they have, needs protecting. But It's still odd how the ideology of libertarianism leads to such a paranoid, insular and self created prison of isolationism.

Former Lancastrian

Probably high on smoking that now legal product available in Colorado. Studies have shown that it impacts brain cells.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Libertarianism isn't very complex.

It can be summarized as follows: "I take pride in the fact that I don't give a f**k about what happens to you."

Oakvillian

An eloquent summary of Ayn Rand's objectivist libertarian principles. Go to the top of the class!

Octang Frye

Sultan,

I don't agree with limiting gun shops in a certain area. Government shouldn't/couldn't do that. The market dictates the number.

So, I'm on board with your more rigorous background checks. That helps going forward. But what about the 94 million gun owners out there and their hundreds of millions of firearms? Could you retroactively test them? It's quite a task.

Octang Frye

Rand was quite happy to take welfare at the end of her life.

RoadWarriorFromLP

American political science -

Establishment conservative: "I don't give a f**k about what happens to you."

Libertarian: "I take pride in the fact that I don't give a f**k about what happens to you."

Social conservative: "I don't give a f**k about what happens to you because Jesus told me not to."

Compassionate conservative: "I do give a f**k about what happens to you. Which is why I'm going to make you believe in Jesus."

Neo-conservative: "I do give a f**k about what happens to you. Which is why I'm going to invade your country."

SultanOfSwing

It's not like we're talking about something important like food or water. Guns are just a hobby, I really don't care about the manufacturers' bottom line, nor do I care if it's a little harder for someone to buy something that can kill.

Bottom line is, if the end result is people get to still have guns, something like limiting the number of places to buy them shouldn't be an issue.

How many of those aren't already registered though and aren't all gun owners licensed? It would be more a case of tightening up regulations and making sure existing gun owners are compliant. Refuse to comply - get a fine and possibly face jail time. Nobody said owning a gun had to be easy. Again, if they get to keep their guns, it's not like there's a net negative for them, just a minor pain in the arse.

Octang Frye

I don't think gun store saturation is a problem.

Unless you live in a place like New Joisey, or D.C., virtually none of them are registered.
And no - gun owners are not licensed. You typically need a license for concealed carry permits.
That's what I'm saying. The toothpaste is out of the tube.

Making it a pain in the arse is basically what California and New Jersey are trying to do. Make it so onerous and expensive.

anotherlimey

Its a small minority with most of the guns. Most "gun owners" own hand-me-down relics like grandpa's shotgun, hunting rifles, or a handgun for self defense that never leaves their bedside table.

chawkins99

Depends what you mean by licensed.

I bought my first gun in Alabama several years ago. Went through the background check but nothing more. I applied and obtained a concealed carry permit a couple of years later. They MAY have done another background check. It took about a week to get the permit in the mail.

When we moved to Florida, I had to do a firearm safety course before obtaining a carry permit. You could class the CCW as a license but no license is required to buy and own a gun.

ETA: I bought my first gun while still on a non-immigrant visa.

scrubbedexpat099

I was a LPR, I passed my Concealed Carry, it was a pass or fail, I did get 100% in my Hunter's Ed, 19 out of 20 at the DMV but had not studied and did not realise I was actually going to be tested at that time.

Not quite sure what this has to do with the issue.

The problem is with nutters, nobody has suggested they are stupid nutters.

Pretty sure CCP in my State can not be centrally accessed.

You need to pass a background check but that seems to be a fresh one every time, CCP gives you no advantage, not sure it is an acceptable ID.

Lion in Winter

Absolutely the correct response, Oakvillian.

And quibbling about which kind of gun does what is really immaterial in this situation.

Lion in Winter

Speaking as the presumed whatsherface, it isn't going to happen but I agree that at this point it's the only way to stop the mass annual slaughter. Take away only some guns, and the people will turn to others. Having said that, a gradual approach to disarmament within the culture with a view to changing the underpinning idea that violence is the way we settle things is certainly much better than nothing.

I have had a loaded gun pointed at me in my own house by a very-much-former relative (and no, I have no idea what sort of gun it was) because he thought it was impressive and intimidating, I have hopped behind a tree outside in the street because two teenagers started shooting at each other, I was in a hardware store when it was held up at gunpoint, and two former classmates of my high-school-age son have just been arrested for shooting and killing another young man. 18 years old and now done.

There is no way to rationalize not taking action.