Gun owners - follow up to the poll on safes being required

[pr_capone]

The banning of "assault" weapons is right out. The banning of large capacity magazines is out. Registration of guns is out. Judging by the response in the poll... mandatory securing of a weapon when not in use is out.

I firmly believe that curbing gun violence in the US begins with education and the enforcement of existing laws. That said... is there any compromise to be had on the gun owner side of the argument?

If you are a gun owner... what would you be willing to compromise to find middle ground on this debate?

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by pr_capone

The banning of "assault" weapons is right out. The banning of large capacity magazines is out. Registration of guns is out. Judging by the response in the poll... mandatory securing of a weapon when not in use is out.

I firmly believe that curbing gun violence in the US begins with education and the enforcement of existing laws. That said... is there any compromise to be had on the gun owner side of the argument?

If you are a gun owner... what would you be willing to compromise to find middle ground on this debate?

In before everyone says "nothing."

[Dayze]

Nope.
simply because of the assault weapon description. I would be worried that down the line they would classify more and more weapons as 'assault' weapons.

[CoMoChief]

No.

This is getting to be really ****ing stupid.

And people seem to be completely missing the point here.

[A Salt Weapon]

We've been compromising for 100 years and it's never enough for the left.

**** them, you want my guns come try and take them.

MOLON LABE
Posted via Mobile Device

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

We've been compromising for 100 years and it's never enough for the left.

**** them, you want my guns come try and take them.

MOLON LABE
Posted via Mobile Device

Who is trying to take them?

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Who is trying to take them?

Midgets you idiot

& dnt tell me that you dnt recognize this **** either

[2bikemike]

Personally I don't want to see any further restrictions on law abiding citizens. I would prefer all the focus be on the causes of crime and mental illness. Simply put Guns don't cause crime, violence or mental illness.

Lets enforce the laws we have, strengthen the punishment for committing a crime. And lets figure out what the hell to do with mental illness.

[pr_capone]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

No.

This is getting to be really ****ing stupid.

And people seem to be completely missing the point here.

What is getting to be stupid and what point am I missing? Also, there is really zero room for discussion on the subject?

[Dayze]

Originally Posted by 2bikemike

Personally I don't want to see any further restrictions on law abiding citizens. I would prefer all the focus be on the causes of crime and mental illness. Simply put Guns don't cause crime, violence or mental illness.

Lets enforce the laws we have, strengthen the punishment for committing a crime. And lets figure out what the hell to do with mental illness.

I agree. I'm also in factor of throwing the hammer down on people caught commiting a crime with an illegal firearm. enough to get the message across that if you do it, you're life is pretty much over.

[pr_capone]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Who is trying to take them?

Senator Feinstein and the state of NY.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by pr_capone

Senator Feinstein .

[WV]

Its not compromise when all they want to do is restrict or ban something. Compromise should result in give and take.

[pr_capone]

Originally Posted by WV

Its not compromise when all they want to do is restrict or ban something. Compromise should result in give and take.

Which is the type of discussion I am attempting to foster but people are simply too content to cross their arms and say no until they are out of breath. On both sides.

[BigChiefTablet]

I'm content to cross my arms and say no until I am out of breath.

Why did this need a follow-up thread again?