In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Let's settle the gun thing....

niklasalniklasal Member Posts: 776 ✭✭✭✭
edited April 2002 in General Discussion
Just a thought....

How about this for compromise between liberals and gun owners... Any new or used gun buyer must undergo a thorough mental and criminal screening before buying a gun. In addition, would have to take a 2-part class on gun safety EACH AND EVERY time you buy a gun. All this would be at your expense, let's say $300 EAC TIME, and you get your gun in a week. All current owners must complete the same process.

In exchange, you may buy whatever gun you want, with no restrictions, no strings attached, and an assurance (hypothetically of course) that you will never have your guns taken, EVER. No lists, no loopholes, no new legislature...nothing.

Who would be for it?



NIKLASAL@hotmail.com
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • idsman75idsman75 Member Posts: 13,398 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    First of all, I won't stoop to this level due to the fact that I grown a bit weary of capitulation. Secondly, you have to grasp an understaning of "shrinks". It's a subjective science that they practice. If you go to see a shrink, just for the heck of it, you absolutely WILL NOT come out with a perfect clean bill of health. There are two reasons for this and the first one is not as significant as the second one. First you have to take into consideration the drive for self-preservation. If you receive a clean bill of health, you may not feel the need to return (with your checkbook in hand). Secondly (and most importantly), you have a liability issue at stake. If you receive a clean bill of health and go shoot up the local McDonald's the shrink is at risk of being sued and being held criminally liable for your actions. Trust me, someone somewhere would find a way to hold the shrink criminally liable and civil suits on behalf of the victims' families would ensue shortly thereafter.

    I will not capitulate and I will not sit in front of a shrink just knowing that, in the back of this typically liberal "professional's" mind, he/she is attempting to weed out some sort of imperfection or latent psychological issue that must be resolved before I am qualified to exercise my freedoms.

    From my professional experience, no shrink will ever give a clean bill of health no matter how healthy the patient is.

    SSG idsman75, U.S. ARMY
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • njretcopnjretcop Member Posts: 7,975
    edited November -1
    I assume that this is a "tongue in cheek" post and is not serious.

    If you are serious, then I suggest that if anyone needs their heads examined, it's the anti's and their paranoid fear of guns!

    -Charlie the "gun nut"

    "It's the stuff dreams are made of Angel"NRA Certified Firearms InstructorMember: GOA, RKBA, NJSPBA, NJ area rep for the 2ndAMPD. njretcop@copmail.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    niklasal, what part of "... shall not be infringed." don't you understand??

    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RugerNinerRugerNiner Member Posts: 12,636 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think anyone who sees a Psychiatrist ought to have his Head examined!

    Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!
    Keep your Powder dry and your Musket well oiled.
    NRA Lifetime Benefactor Member.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    Just as a thought, I have a solution also. What if there was NO background check, NO waiting period, NOrestrictions on mail-order guns, NO such thing as an 'assault weapon' ban or magazine size restriction. In addition to all the NO's above, there were some things you could do. You could walk into almost any hardware store, any Sears, any pawn shop and buy a gun and take it home with you. You could find an anti-tank gun advertised on the back of COMIC BOOKS and buy one for $47.50. You could buy ammo at many filling stations.

    How does that sound as a way to "settle the gun thing"?

    BTW, all of these could be done (and were done routinely) prior to the 1968 GCA.

    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    No, I think the liberal(read socialist) must first take an intelligence test. After flunking it the * would have no right to an opinion on Constitutional Rights.

    PC=BS

    Edited by - badboybob on 04/22/2002 19:14:05
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Wild TurkeyWild Turkey Member Posts: 2,425 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    read Tom Clancy "The Bear and The Dragon" -- treat cars and guns exactly the same.

    Keep files on every time you fill up.
    Keep copies of tire prints on file.
    No cars capable of exceeding 65 mph
    State funded shooting ranges.

    Wild Turkey"if your only tool is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • varmit huntervarmit hunter Member Posts: 1,674 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If the minute men would have had to undergo a back ground check, wont to guess what we would be called now?.

    A unarmed man is a subject.A armed man is a citizen.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • niklasalniklasal Member Posts: 776 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thank you, njretcop. Glad to see at least one realizes that

    THIS IS TONGUE IN CHEEK.

    I am not trying to be serious, nor do i agree. I just wanted your views on the extrema of both sides. Liberals get all the scrutiny they can handle, and we get all the guns we want.


    NIKLASAL@hotmail.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kimberkidkimberkid Member Posts: 8,858 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    niklasal
    Once again the point is to control people ... that is only making law abididng citizens jump through hoops ... not the criminal; the effect on violent crime would be ZERO



    =================================
    Sometimes the most obvious, is the most elusive!kimberkid@gunbroker.zzn.com
    If you really desire something, you'll find a way ?
    ? otherwise, you'll find an excuse.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Why should I voluntarily give away rights and pay exhorbitant monies to own guns which I believe I should be able to own anyway? Hope I get enough together for a .50 bmg Grizzly before they go on somebody's idiot ban list.

    -- Life NRA Member
    "If dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.