If it were possible to simply outlaw guns, would you?

[BrentWil]

Simple question. No 2nd admendment. No problem getting passed congress. If you could simple outlaw guns and make being in possession of a gun a felony, would you?

This would mean any gun held by any private person.

[flvegan]

11. Why is hunting okay?

Be very specific.

[galileoreloaded]

43. Because he eats meat? (shrug)

[flvegan]

50. Thanks.

You just proved a point I'm not ready to make yet, considering.

[rl6214]

94. No one is using automatics for hunting

Semi autos on the other hand are used

[PavePusher]

106. Then why do police and government agent need them?

Anyway, semi-auto rifles are "ordinary" rifles and have been used in hunting for over 100 years.

[obamanut2012]

101. Nope, shouldn't be allowed for hunting then

A ban is a ban.

[FreeState]

2. 100% yes n/t

[flvegan]

3. No. What of our precious hunting rights?

This is so tongue-in-cheek, my face may burst.

[Kaleva]

4. No

[rrneck]

5. No. nt

[abelenkpe]

6. Yes nt

[we can do it]

7. Yes

[darkangel218]

8. No.

[Marrah_G]

9. No

[ellisonz]

10. No. But I would outlaw the gun scum from DU.

[rl6214]

95. And I would outlaw anyone wanting to restrict the rights of others

[Pholus]

105. Wow! A Brave Stand Indeed!

The right to keep....and protect.... THE MAN CARD

[SoonerPride]

12. yes

in a heartbeat.

which too many guns have silenced

[Kingofalldems]

13. Yep

[RB TexLa]

14. No

[Chorophyll]

15. Yes.

[Arugula Latte]

16. Absolutely.

[Berserker]

17. NEVER

And will protect my rights until my death.

[baldguy]

24. And how many innocent children have to die so you can pretend to have this "right"?

http://photos.sgvtribune.com/2012/12/15/connecticut-shooting-the-victims/#1

[rl6214]

97. You can post as many pictures as you want, it's still a right

[thucythucy]

33. It's not YOUR death I'm worried about.

[spanone]

79. oh, the irony.

[Major Nikon]

18. Very few, if any countries outlaw all guns outright

Anything is possible. I don't see it as all that practical.

[TygrBright]

19. No. n/t

[doc03]

20. No. If I was King I would ban all semi-automatic weopons and

limit the ammo capacity to 6. I would also require all guns transfered or sold to be registered, fingerprints taken and a background check on every buyer starting as of today.

[axetogrind]

21. No.

But there should be restrictions.

[baldguy]

22. Absolutly.

No question.

[Laurian]

23. Yes. n/t

[TheProgressive]

25. I think if you outlaw handguns - this would be a step in the right direction...

[Warpy]

26. Uh, nope

Semiautomatics, yep. Huge clips, oh, that should be first. Handguns, maybe.

However a lot of this country is still pretty wild. Folks who live in the sticks need their long guns.

[boxman15]

27. No.

Guns would still be available in a black market. See: everything ever made outright illegal. A war on drugs doesn't work, how would a war on guns?

What we need to do to solve gun violence is: 1.) Keep certain weapons that are especially deadly and have no place for hunting or protection purposes off the shelves. Will that make the guns disappear? No. But it will make it harder for someone in an unhealthy state of being from finding them and would make possession of one of these weapons very risky (ie, heavy jail time, not a slap on the wrist like so many of our current gun laws.).

2.) Invest in mental health care again. Far too many people who need help don't get it because it's either not available or ridiculously expensive.

3.) Invest in education. Much of the nation's gun violence is related to gangs or a gang mentality in our inner cities. Because education is not an emphasis anymore in most inner cities, the gang life is seen as the only way to succeed for many of our youth. Giving them an opportunity to succeed through education would eradicate much of the problems of our inner cities.

4.) Make possession of illegal guns/weapons and the use of gun violence severely punishable if caught. Right now, more often than not, possession of an illegal weapon results in a slap on the wrist more than anything. Pro-gun advocates like to point out that many nations, including Israel and Switzerland, have lower gun-related crime rates despite having higher rates of gun possession per capita. They ignore, however, their extremely strict gun laws that make gun violence severely punishable, resulting in years and years in prison. The U.S. needs laws like those, and it wouldn't hurt to heavily tax bullets, either.

Gun violence will never disappear, and neither will guns. ^These steps would help, though.

[RKP5637]

56. Agree!!! Well thought out and well said!!!

[Puzzledtraveller]

73. Agree on all points

I think sometimes and I respect the position that advocates of complete gun bans invisions you and I, not the gangs in LA, Chicago, New York, Miama, heck anywhere, the police can't even go up against them, who is going to go knock on their doors and ask them to hand their guns over?

disclaimer. I am not a gun owner but I like to think I am armed with some common sense.

[geckosfeet]

28. Would you?

I wouldn't.

[BrentWil]

32. No.

Even if you pass the law, there are too many guns in the county. It becomes a huge black market, with much of the county protecting that black market. The gun culture is real and many think that it is a right. The law would be subverted and done so in dangerous way.

If the question was, if I had magic, would I wake all weapons in the world disappear? Absolutely.

[quakerboy]

74. Isnt that

a good description of exactly the situation that currently exists? What would be the big change?

[BrentWil]

85. I am for further regulation of the current system...

But I think it will be marginal improvement... But marginal improvements might be the difference between 10 people dying and 20 people next time, so I will take it

[quakerboy]

91. It wont be next time

The guns for the next massacre are already in the hands that will take them there, most likely. And the ones for the next few after that. The changes we start now will most likely have little effect in the short term. Its down the road that it will start to show. Its time to start thinking in generational terms on how to solve this, I think.

[BrentWil]

100. I agree with that

And of some hopeful note it isn't as fad as it seems. These mass killings are happing. But in all, the murder rate is as low as its been since the 1960s.

That said, if there was a case of one case overriding overall trends, this is it.

[Politicalboi]

29. I would if I could

Perhaps during hunting season guns could be rented and returned after the season. Although I despise hunting, but if it's for survival then so be it.

[jeff47]

30. Handguns, yes. Long arms, no.

[cantbeserious]

31. Yes

eom

[Lightbulb_on]

34. Nope

[riverwalker]

35. no n/t

[ComplimentarySwine]

36. No, I don't think so.

I think that banning guns would mean that the weak would then be at the mercy of the strong. If a 300 lb. man attacks my wife, I want her to have the option of defending herself, and a gun seems to go a long way towards equalizing that fight.

[Terra Alta]

37. No.

Not all guns, anyway. Assault weapons, yes. There should be certain restrictions on other guns.

[renie408]

38. Ye...No.

Because there is the odd person who actually does need a gun for protection. In RenieWorld I would restrict gun ownership severely. Fuck hunters. Seriously. Who enjoys killing stuff?? Exactly the kind of person you DON'T want to have a gun, that's who. And fuck the average Joe Schmoe with a tiny penis who needs a big gun to feel better about himself and the accountant who has a gun for 'protection' and all the other variations of gun nut out there.

But for the odd person who actually NEEDS a gun, guns should be available. Though severely regulated.

[mick063]

39. It must be done

Immediately destroy every gun that falls within the hands of police. Stiff penaltys for those that manufacture and/or distribute them.

[Bonhomme Richard]

40. No. n/t

[cynatnite]

41. No. n/t

[Dems to Win]

42. yes

[intheflow]

44. No. Just automatic and semi-automatic guns.

Simple rifles and six-shooter pistols I'm okay with. I would shoot a rattlesnake on my property, no problem, that's by far the safest way to engage a rattlesnake. But something that shoots hundreds of rounds a minute? No fucking reason in the world for a civilian to have that - nor even a soldier/police officer/national guardsman outside of an active war zone.

[Mr.Bill]

45. If I could wave a magic wand

and make every firearm on the planet vanish, yes, I would.

[WooWooWoo]

46. no

but I wouldn't cry if they were

[sasha031]

47. absolutely

Piers Morgan mentioned there was a similar tragedy in Scotland
not nearly as many children. They turned in all their hand guns, they didn't even have assault weapons.

[Chan790]

48. No, but I want Japan's gun-control laws.

The net result is that a violation nets you the kind of jail-time that even the yakuza won't carry them.

[Zoeisright]

49. Yes.

No need for them.

[Flabbergasted]

51. Absolutely not. Nt

[Kennah]

52. Tell me again that no one is interested in banning all guns.

[morningfog]

55. Be afraid! Grab you gun and hide it!

[renie408]

63. I am also interested in banning all new shows on TLC.

Odds are...ain't gonna happen.

What people are interested in when they could have anything they want and what they will reasonably settle for are two different things.

[Kennah]

75. I agree there is a difference between the two ...

... but a strong desire to ban makes even reasonable measures difficult to pursue.

[RKP5637]

53. No, because in the big picture it would simply exacerbate the initial problem. n/t

[Common Sense Party]

54. No.

Any other questions?

[Lizzie Poppet]

57. Absolutely not.

Even leaving aside the overwhelming likelihood that aggressive enforcement would lead to the violent dissolution of our society, I don't like the idea of having to rely on far less effective means of self defense. I'm a small person, a 110lb female. There is no "tool" better than a firearm by which I can overcome the size and strength discrepancy between me and the statistically-likely attacker (a relatively young, fit male).

[Llewlladdwr]

58. No.

Didn't work with alcohol, isn't working with drugs, won't work with guns.

[jimlup]

59. Yes though I would prefer legislation that allowed musket type weapons for hunting...

A single shot rifle with reload taking significant time. This type of weapon for hunting only.

[frank380]

60. No.

Nt.

[ohheckyeah]

61. No. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

62. You mean the bad guys don't have them? Not even smuggled them in? Not possible. nt

[RC]

64. Ban any weapon that can be made into auto fire, including using pump stocks.

Ban large clips/magazines. If you can't do your target in with a few rounds, you need to stay at the shooting range longer. No way do you need a drum to go hunting for anything humans.

There is no need for hunting rifles to resemble military issue. None. That alone will cut down on the masochism.
Maybe color any military looking weapon in bright Pink camouflage. That would also cut down on the masochism.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

65. yes. if by simple you mean it wasn't in any way referenced in the constitution

if you mean declaring a dictatorship & removing people's guns, then no.

[rDigital]

66. NO. nt

[ThePhilosopher04]

67. Yes ... guns have zero place in society and serve zero purpose except to kill or mame ...

You can hunt, fish and protect yourself without guns. Repeal 2nd Amendment and ban all weapons of any kind. Period.

[BrentWil]

68. You can't protect yourself as well..

Fund are a great equalizer

[Abq_Sarah]

70. Ban all weapons of any kind?

Should be ban all knives?

[reformist2]

71. What might work in heaven doesn't always work here on earth.

But in an ideal world (i.e., heaven), yes, there would be no guns.

[idwiyo]

72. In a heart beat. And no armed police, please.

[Recursion]

77. Depends. Do you mean "outlaw" or do you mean "actually get rid of"?

The latter, probably. The first, no.

[Union Scribe]

88. Good distinction.

My thinking is, if I could be sure of making them all go away it would be worth it; if an action could make everyone on equal terms. But I'm afraid I'd need a wand for that one.

[spanone]

78. yes.

[ZombieHorde]

80. I would be tempted, but as of now, I wouldn't ban guns.

I have a bias against outlawing things, and I would want more data before doing so.

[KarenS]

81. Yes. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

82. Nnnnnnnope.

[RKP5637]

83. If I were to have that much power, I would first outlaw the people that make guns a

problem. And then see where we went from there. Of course, that's impractical. And if guns were outlawed totally, it would be like the war on drugs. The black market would grow and grow. We need to address why we have such a problem with guns in this culture. There is a far larger problem than guns going on IMO. And gun violence is a symptom of this underlying problem. That said, I'm not a gun fan, I would just as soon see them gone, but I question the practicality of that and if it's a really solution or just a ban-aid on an unchecked cancer growing in this culture.

[Poll_Blind]

84. No. nt

PB

[RegieRocker]

86. No

[forestpath]

87. In a heartbeat.

[Marinedem]

89. No.

I prefer to not leave self defense to being nothing more than a contest of strength between victims and attackers.

[BainsBane]

90. mainly

A single hunting rifle, non-semi automatic, per owner would be fine in rural areas. No guns allowed in cities. It can't happen though. Gun reform will have to revolve around compromises to curb the worst excesses of proliferation.

[rl6214]

92. No

Knee jerk reaction

[Paper Roses]

93. Yes!

[madokie]

96. No doubt about it

[The Time is Now]

99. YES n/t

[obamanut2012]

102. Nope

[Pholus]

103. Why I love gunloons is their absolutism. Black and white EVERYTHING.

You GRAB GUNS or PROTECT RIGHTS.

None of that namby-pamby middle ground kind of stuff.

And then they cry about how nobody wants to have a "reasonable discussion."

[Comrade_McKenzie]

104. Anything that shot more than three rounds at a time, yes. nt

[PavePusher]

107. Prohibition III? Beacuse Prohibition I & II have worked out so well?

Ummm, Hell NO.

[ohheckyeah]

108. No. n/t