Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Here's a firearms compromise I've often thought of (involves a lot of give from both sides) [View all]clffrdjk
(905 posts)11. Let me sum up your post.
Agree with me or sit the fuck down and shut up.
I am a duck hunter I know all about the federal ban on hunting migratory birds with more than three shells.
Here is my compromise, if you want extream magazine restrictions, because there is no reason to ever need more than 5 rounds, it must apply to everyone the only exemption being deployed military. No exemptions for anyone else.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Here's a firearms compromise I've often thought of (involves a lot of give from both sides) [View all]
sir pball
Dec 2012
OP
I'd prefer limit of two non-semi-autos, little public carrying, regular psychological evaluation,.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#27
I think that is what society is trying to do with respect to guns, along with preventing massacres,
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#51
I disagree. If one wants/needs one of those things, it's evidence they have some issue.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#57
You would have to hire another 100,000 BATF clerks or investigators , what ever you want to call
former-republican
Dec 2012
#29
Fine with me except that everybody you want to stop will just ignore it. n/t
Egalitarian Thug
Dec 2012
#32
None of this will stop a criminal but it creates an investigate tool for after the fact
former-republican
Dec 2012
#33