Will ask your local makers to push for new gun control?
All guns should be legal, its the only way we can use our rights to the fullest extent with out infringing on our natural God given rights. In order for that to happen we need to try to convince our law makers to push a bill with these various items and sue states with high regulations stating they violate the United States Constitution. A sheriff in Arizona fought against state regulation and won, if he can do it then we can too. America will remain a hypocrisy since our rights are already being infringed upon until the laws are changed.
1. Lower age to 18 to by a handgun
2. Stop all waiting periods in states like CA
3. Allow any legal citizen to purchase any firearms (long rifles, assault rifles, machine guns and handguns) in any state they want
4. Lift all weapon restrictions except for grenade launchers and rocket launchers.
5. Disband all ccw and open carry permits because legal gun owners don't need a piece of paper to carry
6. Allow all legal gun owners to conceal carry and open carry in any state they want.
7. Lift all ammo restrictions
8. Lift all firearm traveling restrictions
9. No state shall require a permit to purchase any firearm
10. All states become stand your ground states
11. Lift all magazine restrictions
12. Lift all firearm importation restrictions
Russ that is a good point I didn't think about it like that but stuff like rpgs are still a no go.
- Lime Green MedicLv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
1. I'm good with this -- if you're old enough to die for your country, you're old enough to defend yourself in it.
2. Agreed. Waiting periods are institutionalized discrimination.
3. Also agreed. It's not legal purchasers who are or ever have been the problem.
4. There are entire classes of weapons you've left out. Why not just make ALL "Title II" firearms into "Title I" firearms and leave everything else alone? Except of course, for re-categorizing shotguns as Title I firearms instead of "destructive devices" no matter how scary they seem.
5. The problem with this is that we'll have a cycle of open/concealed carry that will last about 20 years, and then the argument will start again about "unqualified cowboys carrying guns" -- Make a permit optional, not mandatory. Make open carry legal under all conditions, but concealed carry with a permit -- this will motivate those who want to carry 24/7 to get trained but will not unnecessarily infringe upon the right to bear arms directly.
6. See above. Make the permit federally reciprocated, like a driver's license. Open carry for all, concealed carry with the license.
7. This is actually a good idea -- considering "cop killer" bullets have never actually killed a cop, ever.
8. This is what FOPA tried to do, but Representative Jim Hughes put in the Hughes Amendment in an attempt to kill it. Which is why we have the travel freedom we do with firearms, at the cost of no new full autos. Someone really needs to get that guy out of office.
9. I'm good with this. This is how it used to be in the United States, long before we had all these "problems" with "gun violence" -- guns were actually MUCH easier to get and everyone had them.
10. Well, this gets into justifiable use of force issues, not necessarily a gun issue. It would be nice, but let's leave that one up to the States. That way, people can still vote with their feet. The trouble is, many states suck on self-defense. But federally mandating it oversteps Federal capabilities, as it's going to be a difficult argument to justify how self-defense is somehow related to interstate commerce.
11. Might as well, especially since now we can print our own magazines on a 3D printer.
12. THAT would be awesome and bring prices way down on a lot of common defensive firearms.
That's just my take on it. I disagree with a few of Andrew's points of view, which actually are indicative of his more restrictive mentality -- he may be from one of the other states like CA, NJ, NY, or IL, and is frightened by that much liberty. Like the whole "ban open carry" -- banning ANYTHING outright infringes upon the Second Amendment.
I like how he calls the armed citizenry a "legal citizen mafia" -- that's new york brainwashing right there. I could just as easily call the same people a "legal citizen militia", and since a well disciplined (well-regulated) militia is NECESSARY FOR THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, then we need exactly what he doesn't want: Unfettered, undelayed access to arms.
Also, notice that Andrew is for a "background and mental check" without explaining his understanding that mental health is an inexact science, and that any psychologist's OPINION on someone's mental state could prevent them from exercising a RIGHT? Mental health is one of those really scary areas, where people directly have power over other people's rights and freedoms, if all they do is articulate a certain ailment properly to the authorities, based upon nothing more than "their professional opinion" -- the potential for abuse is FAR too high to put that kind of power in the hands of other people, even well-meaning ones. This is not conjecture as, having been on scene firsthand when it has happened, I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED THIS AS AN INSTITIUTIONAL PATTERN.
The fact that Andrew admits several times that he didn't know laws existed makes him a less-than-qualified candidate to really voice an informed opinion on them.
But hey, this is Yahoo Answers, so, whatever, right?
"Locked in the backseat"? -- more socialist anti-gun mentality. I carry mine on my hip in my car. Why locked in the back seat, pray tell? How does that help in the event of a carjacking or attack at a rest area?
It is amazing how living in a more restrictive socialist state affects perception on rights, liberty, and freedom. With all the "what if a criminal did this" mentality, justifying the restrictions for all.
This is the reason why we have gun control in the first place. It started as racist, elitist law, and turned into a counterculture of forced non-entitlement.
Which is why it must go.
- ChrisLv 77 years ago
Do you realize that doing away with all restrictions (which is your reading of the 2nd amendment) means that prisoners and people in mental hospitals can carry guns. If you say that only the guards in prison should have guns then you are allowing for "infringement". There are no exceptions in the 2nd amendment. If though, you interpret the 2nd amendment the same way as the rest of the constitution, then some restrictions are allowed as long as the overall restriction is mild. I actually agree with most of your points. I think that guns should be restricted in prison, mental hospitals, and on aircraft.
By the way, why 18. A 16 year old can open carry or concealed carry a handgun in Vermont. the second amendment does not allow for any age restriction.
- ErikaLv 44 years ago
It is a thriller to me what these folks need. If it were only a historical past verify for private sales, they'd determine how you can make it easy and free. And why is it that no person in the media has used that in a pointed query? This might even be a just right time to introduce legislation authorizing a subsidy utilizing public tax greenbacks to FFL holders, say $forty per gun sale, to atone for their fee of doing history exams and retaining records. It's also ordinary to look close to the entire Democrats in Congress supporting a flat tax that disproportionately burdens the bad and minorities. Nobody appears to be making that factor, both. And "universal historical past checks" undoubtedly fit into the category of a regressive tax the way in which it can be been proposed.
- AndrewLv 67 years ago
1. Your not fully developed at 18. 18 is straight out of school if anything I say...I will leave that one to others not sure.
2.Lawlz your laws arnt even that bad compared to these states. Their is already a AWB in effect for my state. Whatever though because I was a PA resident once with unstrict laws. Actually your ol red ryder is a firearm in this state.
3.Whoa whoa I support you but NO WAY JOSE on that one. Would you want a legal citizen mafia to be purchasing those legally? Na skip that one. Let good citizens who pass a background and Mental check get them. If they fail keep them on strict watch from a special group of some sort.
4.Ehhh still no sorry I mean I am pro gun because people should have rights but your getting a bit to crazy here.
5.Ummm ya I guess thats a pretty good idea. Open carry should be banned and concelead should be legal for legal owners.
6.Ya why not?
7.I didnt even know any existed but not whatevers out their now is fine.
8.No no no no no. Locked in the backseat.
10.Whats that mean? Never heard it.
11.I guess I could agree with that. No crazy 500 round mags though.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Russ in NOVALv 77 years ago
4. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a grenade launcher. I have one for my SKS. It's the live grenades that should be (and are) banned.
- 7 years ago
* Amen Fellow Patriot.* This is long overdue.* If they would have only lived up to and practiced the 2nd Amendment we would not be where we are today debating this issue.*Source(s): * No Man can Escape his Destiny with Death.*...
- Turned ZombieLv 47 years ago
These ppl that are pushing for banning guns are going to get jumped and the ppl that jumped them are going to have ar-15's ak-47's and fully auto Glocks and crap and there going to with they hadn't banned guns so someone could have saved them :p
- Dana HLv 57 years ago
"God given rights"? You mean there's a section in the bible that covers gun laws? Or maybe that's the Koran.... the Kama Sutra?!! Shiva's own edicts! Yes!! (Its about time...)
- 7 years ago
They're your rights, but please thank the founding fathers for them, not Mr. God.