Political Crossfire Forums

britboy · Joined: 02 Jun 2006 Posts: 3559 Location: London

Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

Also Anti-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy what concessions would you give? Would you allow anyone, in any circumstances to own a gun? Are the police allowed them? Are off duty soldiers? Which is your most 'Pro-gun' policy would you say?

Just a thread to see how extreme we all are. Also if people say 'All gun control s*cks' it means they haven't bothered thinking about the issue very hard and I can skip over their posts from then on :wink: ...

Difficult to think about concessions to the other side at all for such a heated argument. Are you really absolutely extreme in your views? Can you think beyond 'ban all guns' or 'everyone gets an AK47 at birth'? Your most close to 'the other side' policy please .... whether its currently law or not should be irrelevent in your answer, it's where you want us to be ..?

Winchester · Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 7557 Location: Montana

britboy wrote: Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

No restrictions of any kind on the type of firearms available to law abiding US citizens (i.e. no felons).

Minors would be able to possess a firearm given as a gift from a family member, but not be allowed to purchase them on their own till 18.

RooK · Joined: 16 Jul 2004 Posts: 2006 Location: SE Kentucky

Instant background checks with no waiting period. They're a very mild incovienence, but keep the stupid criminals from getting a gun.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 10208

The only... only only concession I'd ever make... is requiring all "new" gun owners to go through the basic pistol/rifle/shotgun NRA course, and have to pay the fee... of which 75% goes to further training and 20% goes to the NRA, 5% goes back to the government as a "tax".

Winchester · Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 7557 Location: Montana

RooK wrote: Instant background checks with no waiting period. They're a very mild incovienence, but keep the stupid criminals from getting a gun.

Yep, and they're even less of an inconvience if you got a CCW.

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

I don't understand the question... The way I read it, it made me think along the lines of "What is the one argument on the other side that you will concede is a pretty good argument?" Is that correct?

Winchester · Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 7557 Location: Montana

CrossEyedMary wrote: I don't understand the question... The way I read it, it made me think along the lines of "What is the one argument on the other side that you will concede is a pretty good argument?" Is that correct?

Nah, I think he is just trying to find if there is any middle ground between the two camps. Based on the posters here, he's not going to have much luck.

mattman42 · Joined: 26 Apr 2005 Posts: 661 Location: Maine

I can live with instant background checks and an age 18 requirement (except when parents buy their children guns). However, that doesn't mean I will actively support them because I think we'd be just as well off without them.

Also, it is possible to be against all restrictions, yet not be for murderers, rapists, etc. having guns. They'll always find ways around the laws, and they do. Supporting more restrictions due to a fear of guns falling into the wrong hands is a bit naive because as I said, the laws are fairly easy to avoid (stealing guns, having someone else buy them, and so on).

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

Winchester wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: I don't understand the question... The way I read it, it made me think along the lines of "What is the one argument on the other side that you will concede is a pretty good argument?" Is that correct?

Nah, I think he is just trying to find if there is any middle ground between the two camps. Based on the posters here, he's not going to have much luck.
Oh, I get it. Thanks.

leftneckredwing · Joined: 13 Nov 2004 Posts: 32350 Location: North America

The only concession I can make is to talk to them a bit.

Beyond that, there is no middle ground on Rights. There is only concession.

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

britboy wrote: Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

You have to be 18 to buy a gun (you can own them as long as you didn't walk into the gun store by yourself and by it at like 13), no guns on schools by students, felons stay in jail for life, all others keep their guns when they get out.

Thrilla · Joined: 23 May 2005 Posts: 22263 Location: Sin City

leftneckredwing wrote: The only concession I can make is to talk to them a bit.

Beyond that, there is no middle ground on Rights. There is only concession. agreed... its not that far of a trip from concession to capitulation

Ragnar Danneskjold · Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 2628 Location: Mulligan's Valley

britboy wrote: Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

Also Anti-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy what concessions would you give? Would you allow anyone, in any circumstances to own a gun? Are the police allowed them? Are off duty soldiers? Which is your most 'Pro-gun' policy would you say?

Just a thread to see how extreme we all are. Also if people say 'All gun control s*cks' it means they haven't bothered thinking about the issue very hard and I can skip over their posts from then on :wink: ...

Difficult to think about concessions to the other side at all for such a heated argument. Are you really absolutely extreme in your views? Can you think beyond 'ban all guns' or 'everyone gets an AK47 at birth'? Your most close to 'the other side' policy please .... whether its currently law or not should be irrelevent in your answer, it's where you want us to be ..?

The only gun control i support that prisoners who are currently in prison, or have just escaped can not buy guns.

Gremlin · Joined: 20 Dec 2005 Posts: 7869 Location: On the Run.

Violent felons ... murders, rapist and such... but i also believe if they are murders and rapist... what the hell are they doing free?

Wolverine · Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 10983 Location: Podunk, Colorado

Gremlin wrote: Violent felons ... but murders, rapist and such... but i also believe if they are murders and rapist... what the hell are they doing free?

Demonic Spoon · Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Posts: 6942 Location: Ohio

When a criminal gets out of prison, they get their full rights restored, that includes gun rights. If they are not trustworthy, then instead of restricting access to guns, we need to work on our prison system.

The only one I could concede would be WMDs, simply because it is physically impossible to use them without harming someone else.

airo · Joined: 31 Jul 2004 Posts: 2583 Location: Tampa, Florida

Instant background checks paid for by the state.

Minors should be allowed to own firearms (Not buy.), and legally purchase ammunition.

ALL firearms should be available for purchase. (Get rid of the various "Machine gun bans" and the NFA.)

Firearms should be able to be purchased at 18.

A CCW license should be available to all 18 year olds.

All states should be "Shall Issue."

No waiting periods on guns.

Non-violent felons should be allowed to own firearms.

I believe that if a person was a CCW license, they should have to pass a qualification, much as police officers do.

Furthermore, they should be require to requalify once a year.

Restrictions that apply to your drivers license should also apply to your CCW. (If you have 20/200 vision, and are carrying without your glasses on, you should get a ticket, same as if you were driving.)

The qualifying and restrictions on the CCW are for one simple reason: Too many people have a CCW license, but don't even know how to draw their gun, much less shoot. If they're supposed to be carrying a firearm to protect themselves and others, how exactly do they plan on doing that? This way, owners are required to at least learn how to be a responsible gun carrying member of society. Will it restrict people from carrying? Yes. That's the point.

thefranzkafkafront

Winchester wrote: britboy wrote: Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

No restrictions of any kind on the type of firearms available to law abiding US citizens (i.e. no felons).

Exaclty people fail to realise the entire point of a justice system.

Once you've committed a crime and been convicted, then your rights can be justly suppressed.

Shockingly simply concept.

Quote:
Minors would be able to possess a firearm given as a gift from a family member, but not be allowed to purchase them on their own till 18.
Age limits can allways be a bit arbitary but in essence yes.

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

Gremlin wrote: Violent felons ... murders, rapist and such... but i also believe if they are murders and rapist... what the hell are they doing free?

:tu:

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15424 Location: Florida

britboy wrote: Pro-gunners .. if you were deciding gun control policy, what would be your biggest concession to the 'Anti-gun' line of thinking. If you say 'no control, no concession whatsoever' it means you think kids should get guns, murderers, rapists etc. Whats your, personal, single most 'Anti-gun' policy? Basically, where do you draw the line?

Well, I don't believe that disallowing kids, convicted felons and those that have been involuntarily commited to a mental hospital to be a concession. We already have common law/precedents that in the case of convicted felons and mental patients, they have had due process to lose rights. In the case of kids, we already recognize that they can have their rights limited--compulsory school attendance, no right to vote, have to obey their parents, etc. I would say the major concession I grant is that I don't think Vermont-style carry is a good idea (Vermont style carry means that anyone legally allowed to own a gun is allowed to carry it concealed). I do agree with "shall issue" concealed carry. Another concession is that I think the right to bear arms should only include small arms (those carryable and usable by a single person). I can also concede to the current NICS instant check.