I am a Democratic gun owner, hunter, and Army veteran, and I support reasonable gun control.

[LBM20]

The NRA is a radical propaganda mill that exists to enrich gun company CEO's. Years ago they were a reasonable organization just all about firearms safety and proper training. No more. They lost me in the 90's when they called our police "jack booted government thugs." They have just gotten worse ever since. They are sickening.

What NRA radical types don't want to see is that ALL rights also have limits and responsibilities. Freedom of speech does not give us the right to yell fire in a crowded theater for the fun of it. There can and should be reasonable limits on weapons too.

I was in the Army and carried a pistol, an M16, and an M60. Assault rifles are designed for offensive and efficient human killing, period. People like me can hunt, target shoot, and protect our homes without these weapons intended for the battlefield or be used by police to take down heavily armed violent criminals.

Hunting goes back in my family, and many others, hundreds of years. It is meat in the freezer, and many people need it. It is highly regulated. My grandfather, a staunch FDR Democrat, hunted sea ducks, deer, and other game to literally help feed his family. And he never needed an assault rifle to do it.

There is a lot we can do and many areas where we all agree. We need full background checks and to close all those loopholes. Reinstate the assault rifle ban with a buy back program. Make sure that there is no armor piercing ammunition out there at all. Improve red flag laws to get guns away from those who should not have them. Invest much more in mental health treatment. Invest in smart gun technology which can disable guns and make them inoperable to prevent accidental shootings and shootings by people who steal guns. There is so much we can do. My goodness, the large majority of gun owners support better background checks.

And the best thing we can do is to vote out politicians who have been bought and paid for by the NRA. That rotten outfit and its corrupt money grabbing politicians need to be taken down once and for all. Start by getting them at the voting booth.

[yardwork]

1. Sounds reasonable to me.

[LBM20]

6. Thanks.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. People who want to carry assault rifles should sign up for the military, and

leave them behind when they leave that career. The rest of us can't continue to use the company car or gym when we leave a job, and the same should be true of ex-military personnel. (And the wannabes who didn't qualify to serve sure as heck should never be able to get their hands on assault rifles!)

[LBM20]

4. Yup. The power of the NRA needs to be knocked down, and enough of the GI Joe fantasies.

The NRA propaganda with all the lies about "the government is coming to take your rights and guns away" goes hand in hand with people wanting to hoard assault rifles to live out their GI Joe fantasies.

I own a 4-shot 30-30 bush rifle which is just fine for deer hunting, and a 10-shot 9mm pistol. That's it. And I am trained and experienced and safe. I don't need an AR15 or an AK47, let alone stockpiles of them. I was in the Army, left those weapons there, and am doing just fine deer hunting and target shooting with what I have. Soldiers and police should have those, not everyone.

What the NRA does is they pump people full of fear so they will buy more and more and more of these guns, stockpiling them, so the gun companies and their spokespeople can make a lot of money. That is all they are about. Money. It is sickening!

[Marengo]

11. A ban and buy back program, presumably mandatory, is precisely the government taking guns away...

That would be proving the NRA correct, would it not?

[onetexan]

76. exactly, the GOP thrives on the politics of fear

knowing simpleminded people don't tend to rationalize and can't see through their deceptive ploys, therefore easily swayed and manipulated. Smart people don't watch Fox news or read Breitbart.

[Orsino]

87. Paradoxically, some of these are exactly the people no military would want.

They might enlist, but they will be severely disappointed that American troops aren't allowed to tote rifles around everywhere beyond training exercises and combat zones, in which places gun-toters aren't special snowflakes.

Those looking to impress people with the size of their weapons should look elsewhere for employment.

[MineralMan]

3. I support EFFECTIVE gun control.

Many will consider that to be unreasonable.

[LBM20]

5. So do I, and I think what I outlined is both effective and reasonable.

[Marengo]

12. What is your definition of effective?

[Squinch]

19. OH, for fuck's sake. Still at this bullshit?

[Marengo]

44. Asking someone to explain their definition of effective is bullshit? Thats an odd position to take,

Unless your objective is to shut down discussion.

[aikoaiko]

7. I can't support gun bans. And if you mean forced buy-backs (aka confiscation) I can't support them.

Are you advocating that we vote our Democrats who accept money from the NRA?

What guns do you own that you think is fine and dandy?

[LBM20]

9. We have already had the assault weapons ban under Democrat Bill Clinton. Begin at least with a

voluntary buy back, making it worth their while, coupled with eliminating high capacity magazines and bump stocks. And yes, primary out ANYONE taking that blood money. That organization is a radical menace. A Democrat can strongly advocate for hunting and target shooting while also backing reasonable gun safety measures, at the very least full background checks, better red flag laws, and mental health treatment.

I said what guns I own in another reply. I have a four shot 30-30 for hunting rifle for deer hunting and a 10 shot 9mm pistol. That is it and fine for hunting, target shooting, and home protection. I don't need an AR15 with a bump stock and a 30 round magazine. I am also trained and experienced.

I support the rights of safe legal gun owners to hunt, target shoot, and protect themselves. But I also support some reasonable limits on weapons and ammunition and other measures to reduce gun violence, gun crime, accidental shootings, and mass shootings. This is by no means a zero sum game.

[aikoaiko]

15. I remember the 1994 AWB well. IT was a disaster politically (as Bill Clinton discussed in his book)

...and it didn't really save any lives.

Thank you for saying what you own.

Your 9mm is fully capable of being used in a mass shooting/killing. The VATech shooter used a 10-round 22 lr and a 15-round 9mm and that massacre still ranks as the largest school school shooting in the 21st century. Add to the facts, that handguns are used in more homicides in the general public than AR15s its hard to justify keeping your 9mm based on your premise.

And here is my point. I'm not for gun bans because they lead to firearms that are commonly used for hunting, recreation, and, most importantly, self-defense.

[Hangingon]

18. I remember gun shows after the AWB

It certainly didn’t stop “assault weapon” sales.

[EL34x4]

26. The '94 AWB turned the AR-15 into the most popular rifle in America.

Tell Americans they can't have something and they go out and buy a whole bunch of them!

Turned out they were kinda fun to shoot and you could bolt all kinds of cool "tactical" stuff on them!

And here we are today. 80% finished unserialized "ghost receivers" can be had for under fifty bucks, there's no real count of how many are in civilian hands, but they're in the millions.

AR-15s aren't going anywhere unless other men armed with AR-15s take them away.

[Straw Man]

35. Reasonable limits.

I have a four shot 30-30 for hunting rifle for deer hunting and a 10 shot 9mm pistol. That is it and fine for hunting, target shooting, and home protection.

[...]

I support the rights of safe legal gun owners to hunt, target shoot, and protect themselves. But I also support some reasonable limits on weapons and ammunition and other measures to reduce gun violence, gun crime, accidental shootings, and mass shootings.

New York governor Andrew Cuomo would have outlawed that 10-round pistol in 2013 with the SAFE Act, which specified a 7-round limit. Fortunately that provision was amended out, but I hope you can see that "reasonable" is a very slippery word.

[Kirk Lover]

8. When you buy a weapon you should own it for life and it is registered to you and you alone.

There can be a buy back program if you want to sell it and then it can be resold in the same fashion. People should be put through training and get certified to own a gun.

IT IS FUCKING INSANE that we have to take a road test but there is no requirement for fire arms.
We changed the culture and mentality with drunk driving and we can do it with this.
All responsible gun owners should have no issue with having a database of gun owners and what guns they own. etc etc etc.

Please someone explain how these guns get in the hands of criminals?? I'm pretty sure "law abiding" gun owners and other citizens are helping them out directly and indirectly. #Enough #Basta.

[LBM20]

13. It would be government buy back program, and the guns would be dismantled.

I think Australia did it this way. I don't have a problem with registering all firearms at the time of purchase, along with the background check. The one thing we do need to consider is when close friends or family members swap guns. It is fair to have some exemptions around those kinds of circumstances. If I have been through a background check once and my uncle with whom I have hunted for decades is now too old to hunt and wants to give me his hunting rifle, I should not have to go through another background check to the tune of at least fifty bucks.

I hear you. Gotta have ways to be reasonable around certain gun exchanges while also making sure guns don't get into the hands of criminals and dangerous people, and we can certainly have rules around knowingly giving guns to such people.

[Kirk Lover]

16. Yes exemptions and perhaps there could be a transfer of ownership in certain circumstances.

There has to be a time limit I would think where you would have to get another background check run. Things do change and crop up. Perhaps with more background checks being run they should be more affordable..no scratch that....you should not be charged for a firearm background check so there would be no impediment to running one each time a firearm is acquired.

[RockCreek]

77. The cost of a background check should be packaged in with the cost of the gun

And not even visible as a separate item. It wouldn't be needed for all buys, when done within avspwvufued period of time. But that would just bring down the price added to each gun for background checks. And decrease the incentive to "stock up" when within the clearance period after a background check

[Marengo]

10. What is your definition of armor piercing ammunition?

[LBM20]

14. Rounds with a hardened coating designed to penetrated thicker metals and body armor.

I do realize we can get into linguistic gymnastics and the fine points on these definitions, and go around and around and around. But I am sure we can come to some reasonable consensus around this, as well as "assault rifle" since some people will say that any gun with a pistol handle is an assault rifle, etc.

Are there going to be arguments around the fine points on these issues? Sure. But that's life. Gotta draw the lines somewhere. Just do it. If some people aren't happy, then that's life. Can't please everyone all the time. Gotta take some action, start somewhere, and get something done. Few laws and regulations are perfectly worded or perfect at all.

[Marengo]

17. Coating? I thought the penetrator core was the principle armor-defeating element in small arms...

Ammunition.

[Hangingon]

21. Let it go.

This is why most gun legislation fails. It’s that old linguistic gymnastics.

[Marengo]

42. Right, I forgot...legislating from a position of ignorance and emotion is perfectly acceptable for..

Firearms. How about we apply that standard to reproductive rights?

[Old Vet]

23. Come on Marengo, You and I know exactly what was meant by armor pierceing ammo.....

[Marengo]

33. The 30-30 round from his supposedly harmless deer rifle can defeat many types of body armor...

Up to level IIIA IIRC, so no, I don’t know what exactly he means.

[LBM20]

39. Fine. Weaken the round and strengthen the body armor. I think we've heard enough.

[Marengo]

43. Weaken to what point? So that its no longer effective as a hunting round?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

85. re: Weaken to what point?

Far enough so that it's a .223? Not effective for hunting deer but weaker than a .30-30 and much weaker than a .30-06.

[madville]

24. This is why gun legislation has had so many loopholes in the past

People want to ban/outlaw things they have no knowledge or understanding of, like when they banned bayonet lugs in the 1994 AWB, when was the last time someone was bayonetted to death?

[Hoyt]

29. Fine, just say "semi-automatic" or firearms with detachable magazines . . . . . .

We need to stop coddling gunners. These people don't deserve it.

[oneshooter]

48. I have one of these in my collection, It was built in 1917. Would you make this rifle illegal?

[Hoyt]

49. OneShooter, sorry, but I dont care about your collection nor the fact the

5th Amendment won’t net you a penny when it is prohibited to own these weapons unless you weld the magazine in place and fill it where it will only hold 5 cartridges. Time gunners start paying for what they’ve done to society and attempts to circumvent reasonable laws.

[oneshooter]

67. Why don't you answer the question, instead of crying.

[Hoyt]

72. The answer was obvious.

[oneshooter]

81. So come out and say it. Or are you afraid of the truth coming out?

[Squinch]

32. "It's not a clip, it's a magazine." That's space i-3 on the bingo board.

[LBM20]

38. Please. Enough of the hair splitting. The issue is too important. Not interested in games.

[Marengo]

46. Hair splitting? I find it odd that an Army veteran would describe the construction of AP ammo in..

Such an apparently inaccurate manner. I handled a fair amount of small ams AP in the USMC, and all of it used a penetrator core.

[Hoyt]

50. Maybe not everyone was that interested in the lethal aspects of everything.

[Marengo]

56. LOL! Thats one of your lamest yet. Someone who claims to be former mil with oh-so-much...

Experience with service small arms and munitions would know the composition of small arms API ammo.

[Hoyt]

57. Id concentrate on which was best for what use, etc., not composition. Some people just

find lethal stuff fascinating.

[Marengo]

69. In the profession of arms so to speak, its not a matter of finding it fascinating, its a matter...

Of knowing what it is, how it works, and how most effectively to use it. When someone claims extensive knowledge and make such a fundamental error when it’s his JOB to know the details, I’m left to wonder what’s really going on here.

[Hoyt]

71. One doesn't need extensive knowledge to know what the damn slugs do. Ask an ER doc or nurse.

That knowledge is just not necessary in a non-war zone. And, America is a non-war zone, no matter how hard gunners try to say it is.

[Marengo]

73. As I said upthread, the round from his 30-30 deer rifle can penetrate certain levels of body armor..

Up to lllA IIRC. Does that make it armor piercing?

[Hoyt]

74. Don't care. If your favorite round gets outlawed or has to be modified, tough. EOM

[Marengo]

75. Modified for what purpose?

[Squinch]

20. What is your definition of "NRA troll script?"

[Eliot Rosewater]

30. LOL

[Marengo]

34. Is that all you have?

[Squinch]

37. Why struggle? Some things are so obvious they don't need a lot of effort. Is that all YOU have?

[Marengo]

45. How about a link or a cite to where Ive claimed to be an NRA member.

[Squinch]

47. LOL! So transparent! Always directly from the script!

[Marengo]

52. So, nothing to back up your NRA accusation?

[Squinch]

53. Every post you post. You aren't very good at it.

[Marengo]

55. Ill ask you again to back that up with a link or cite to where Ive claimed to be an NRA member.

Or maybe a retraction if you can’t. If you have the integrity, that is.

[Squinch]

83. Will you hold your breath till I do? Or till I "retract?" Though I guess not. That isn't part of

the script.

[Marengo]

84. No, Ill just consider your integrity as limited as your knowledge of the subject.

[Squinch]

88. Oh, how horrifying! The NRA script thinks I lack integrity!

Can you spell "irony?"

[Marengo]

89. Yes, your integrity is as limited as your knowledge on this subject. As you cant debate from...

An informed position, your only recourse is to resort to the simplistic tactic of NRA troll accusation.

[Squinch]

90. Oh, no. The script called me uninformed!

Which, of course, is an item from the script.

It's getting quite meta now!

[Marengo]

91. Its obvious that you clearly are uninformed. Why else would you persist in repeating a clealy...

Ineffective tactic? Your playbook is amusingly thin.

[Squinch]

92. But it isn't a script. That everyone has seen a million times before. And everyone knows

where it comes from.

[Marengo]

94. You are robotically repeating a substanceless accusation as a smoke screen. You obviously cant...

Discuss the subject from an informed position. On the subject of scripting, where does it come from? Can you provide any cites or links? If everyone knows as you claim, there should be some kind of evidence.

[Squinch]

95. Do you understand the meaning of irony? Do you understand the meaning of projection?

I get that you don't need to, as all you need to do is follow your script, but seriously, you should try and make it a little less obvious.

[Marengo]

96. Ill ask you again to provide some kind of cite to...

This script you claim everyone knows to exist.

[Squinch]

98. Oh, Merengue, this has been fun, but unlike all those NRA trolls, I don't get paid to post.

So I'll leave you here - no doubt you will finish this up with some pearl from the script, so have at it.

I'm sure we will see you again - and the script - the next time a bunch of children are slaughtered.

Bye, now.

[Marengo]

99. In other words, you have nothing. No evidence whatsoever to validate your accusation, and no...

Apparent knowledge on the subject.

[JI7]

41. Yup

[Blue_true]

22. Well thought out post. nt

[sl8]

25. Why not a handgun ban?

According to the FBI, handguns are used in about 20 times as many homicides as rifles. What is the rationale for banning (some) rifles, but not handguns?

[Iggo]

28. What about pointed sticks?

Eh?

Eh?

[Humanist_Activist]

31. Pointed sticks don't kill 10s of thousands of people a year.

Are you seriously being this disingenuous?

At the very least they should be federally licensed, tracked and restricted.

[ginny skinny]

59. Remember Rawanda?

Many thousands killed with hand tools. Pointed sticks? Maybe. Machetes and clubs? For sure.

[Humanist_Activist]

70. That was literally state sanctioned genocide where thousands participated in it.

Would you like to make a comparison with a country with similar crime rates, political stability and economic development as the United States?

[Marengo]

97. Cutting instruments kill more people in the USA...

Than long arms. Wouldn’t that be a case for them to be federally licensed,tracked, and restricted?

[LBM20]

36. The courts have ruled people can have guns. Let's get the assault rifles and do other things. You

can't have it all.

[sl8]

40. OK, thanks . n/t

[Hoyt]

27. +1. I see no reason to offer a buyback program. Why reward bad behavior and bad investments.

Gunners argument about the "Taking Clause" do not apply either.

Let's do just like Session's plan (Christ, I'm giving him credit) for bumpstocks -- it's illegal to possess one.

[ginny skinny]

51. I'm a proud Democrat and a 2nd Amendment supporter.

That's it.

[ginny skinny]

54. One thing that's really been bothering me...

The lack of knowledge about guns that many talking heads on TV display.
Here's one that really bugs me;
The .223/5.56 round fired by the vast majority of AR-15s is not really all that powerful. It is considered by many to be insufficient for a humane kill on a whitetail deer. I believe it is actually prohibited for hunting deer in some places. It is not a bazooka, it does not blow animals or people into smithereens. Yes, obviously it is quite capable of killing a human but so is a .22LR or a .410 shotgun or grand-dad's deer rifle if that is the shooter's intent. An AR may accept a 30 round mag but that does not mean that you have to put 30 rounds in it when using it for hunting or varmint shooting. There are 5 or 10 round magazines available for ARs in locales where there are maximum allowable capacities while hunting. Yes, despite what you have been lead to believe, ARs are commonly used for hunting, target, varmint shooting. I do not support the NRA at all. I'm just a shooting enthusiast that enjoys my ARs and other firearms and get p.o'd by all the misinformation out there.

[Hoyt]

58. Seems to do just fine in massacres and gunners sure get excited about these rifles and ammo.

I doubt most 3%ers, oathkeepers, confederate flag and gun toters, etc, are NRA members, but they are a threat to society.

Since you are new, I assume you’ve stumbled upon the Gungeon. If not, check it out.

[ginny skinny]

60. Huh?

"Seems to just fine in massacres and gunners sure get excited about it."

?

[Hoyt]

61. AR15s, and their so-called underpowered ammo. Does that help?

[ginny skinny]

62. My point is that as rifle ammo goes, .223 is not anywhere near the top tier.

It is a fact that .223 is sub-optimal for humanely killing deer that range between 100-200 pounds. Coyotes, ground hogs, prairie dogs...223 totally up to the job. Yes, .223 will kill humans. .223/5.56 is not like a grenade that decimates the human body. That's my point, much disinformation being spread about what ARs do and are capable of.

[Hoyt]

64. I get your point, heard it from hundreds of gunners. Fact is, that ammo does a good enough

job of killing people, that millions of white wing racists buy several to protect themselves against irrational fears.

They kill, whether in civilian, semi-auto form, or military. The media sees that, and calls them powerful, deadly, decimating, etc. Gunners get upset. But media is right, the AR15 did decimate kids at Parkland, Sandy Hook, and elsewhere.

Maybe, you are wrong on this.

[ginny skinny]

65. I was wrong once...

Could happen again, however unlikely.

[ginny skinny]

63. "Since you are new, I assume youve stumbled upon the Gungeon. If not, check it out."

Link me up.

[JI7]

66. Mark Warner has Come Out in Support of More Gun Control which is a change from previous Position

the pro gun control side is winning .

i know it's disappointing to those who think white male gun nuts should be the center of attention.

[pnwmom]

68. Thank you for such a well reasoned post.

A couple weeks ago I was talking to a relative in a red state who keeps a gun for protection. (They've had actual threats from a known person and the police have been involved.)

She and I found that there were a number of reasonable gun control measures we could agree on right now, like fixing the database, raising the age to 21, reinstating the assault rifle ban that expired in 2004, etc. We should be reaching across the divide and figuring out where we can agree, and start with that.

You're also right about the NRA. They're profiteering on death. No legislators should be involved with them.

[beachbum bob]

78. totally agree with you 100%

reasonable gun laws and prohibition of weapons designed for military use being available in civilian hands

[Tribalceltic]

79. The point is Children are being murdered

Unless more gun advocates come out with ideas like this, I will be advocating for a total ban on all guns and a repeal of the second amendment.

As long as advocates are playing games with semantics, definitions, distractions and other games they need to realize that they are the problem.

[Calculating]

80. Our police ARE jack booted thugs though

That part is actually correct. The only way I'd ever support any kind of bans is if they include the police.

[peggysue2]

82. My husband and I are gun owners

I fully support your post and suggestions. We can turn this around. We must.

For those who are persuadable, perhaps the rising number of avoidable deaths and injury should be broadcast. The body count is horrifying, mounting each and every year. We should be leading the advanced world in gun regulation and unnecessary death and maiming, not dragging our feet while the numbers spiral out of control.

I live in a state where gun ownership is generational in nature, where a lot of the hunting really is about putting food on the table. That being said, I've also read a good number of the young are stepping back from the tradition. We seem to be witnessing a true shift in attitudes. Even Fox News is reporting 91% of the public wants universal background checks and 60% are calling for a ban on assault weapons. These numbers are in the same range as after the Sandy Hook massacre.

I think we need to follow the Parkland Students on this one: The Voters Are Coming. Vote USA over the NRA. Or we will vote you out.

[hack89]

86. Some good ideas

Don't support the AWB. Smart gun technology is good as long as you don't turn it into a back door gun ban like New Jersey tried to do. Armor piercing ammo is already illegal - you should know that with your background.

[Calista241]

93. Armor piercing ammo is less lethal than hollow point or frangible rounds

This is what happens when people argue about concepts they don’t know shit about.

I feel like we’re looking forward to the dumbest, most incompently written, totally ineffective gun restriction laws being passed, and costing us a once in a lifetime blue wave election cycle.

[sammythecat]

102. I get your point about a neat vs. messy hole but,

as far as I know, only the heaviest and costliest body armor and glass will defeat a rifle fired AP round. I'd imagine AP rounds will penetrate block or brick walls, all areas of a vehicle other than the engine block. All sorts of common cover that would protect someone from ordinary ammo will not protect against AP rounds. They are dangerous and banned for very good reason.

[Calista241]

103. How many people that are wearing bullet proof vests

Are killed each year? And how many of those people are killed due to the round penetrating their armor, and not some area of their body not protected by armor?

The ballistics involved with piercing armor or some type of cover are impossible to predict, and literally anything can happen to a bullet fired at a solid object. Even soft ammunition like hollow points and frangible rounds are capable of penetrating concrete walls, cars, and other objects of cover.

Is full metal jacketed ammo considered “armor piercing?” It’s both the cheapest and most common type of ammo produced. Or will only types of ammo with a certain grain or material be considered “armor piercing?”

My opinion is that if you’re going to fight this battle and perhaps sacrifice the midterms or 2020, do something that makes a difference. Don’t fight the war over peanuts like “armor piercing” ammunition.

[IronLionZion]

100. Responsible gun owners should support sensible gun laws

Since you'd pass the background checks and stop being lumped in with the mass shooters.

The problem is that no one can agree on what to put in the laws. Responsible gun owners on our side should be working with the lawmakers to make sure something effective is put together that tackles important issues.

Personally, I'd like to see better background checks for stuff like domestic violence, drug/alcohol abuse, and a mental health screening should be part of applying for a permit. Also mandatory training for gun safety before one could get a permit to avoid accidental discharges. Gun safes and trigger locks when there are kids in the home.

And I haven't mentioned anything about types of weapons yet. Getting these things in place could help ease the paranoia of some gun nuts that tyrants are coming to oppress their freedoms.

[samnsara]

101. im a gun owner as well and i want all gun owners to be as responsible as....

...my Grandpa was! He was a motorcycle cop in Ardmore Ok and Chief of Police in a small Washington town. He was a Dem...but would be called a Dixiecrat nowadays....not a racist, mean bone in his body. Think Matt Dillon.. he was exactly like that. He belonged to the NRA and proudly sponsored my hubby ( as he was a hunter). After Grandpa passed we realized the NRA for what it was and hubby tore up his card. But Grandpa would want and argue for responsible gun ownership if he were still alive.