Hello... Moderate Gun Owners. Where ARE You?

[SecularMotion]

I used to own two guns like these when I was younger. I know how gun owners feel about their guns because I've known a lot of them, and most have been rational, educated and caring people, many with school-aged kids. So, why haven't these gun owners been moved enough by the killings of school children to join efforts to stop the carnage?

Ultra right-wing gun owners who toe the NRA party line will take no action to stop the shootings, yet we keep expecting they'll eventually come around and become sensible. Each time there is a school shooting, the NRA circles their wagons and prepares their routine second amendment press materials to respond to the outrage. What they're saying, and not so indirectly, is that these deaths are the unfortunate cost of doing business for an America that must defend itself, that their guns have an important role in keeping citizens safe.

The reality is that gun lovers just love playing with their guns and see the killings as something that doesn't involve them. Guns are their recreation, their hobby, and they're not killing anyone. The NRA is simply the defender of the toys, not the nation.

Some of what hardliners say is true. Guns in and of themselves don't kill and the majority of gun owners would never kill anyone, just as cars don't kill people, drunks do. But guns are involved in these school shootings just as automobiles are when a drunk driver mows down a sidewalk full of people. The difference is that there are rules about drunks driving cars to keep Americans safer, but there are few rules regulating guns thanks to the NRA's hard-line policy of "give em an inch and they'll take a mile." Tough luck about those kids...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karl-gude/hellomoderate-gun-owners-_b_8235474.html

[jack_krass]

1. ...

So, why haven't these gun owners been moved enough by the killings of school children to join efforts to stop the carnage

I think they are, it's just that they're realizing that more and more methods of gun control isn't the answer:

In other words, we're sick of seeing the same cycle in response to these mass killings:

-mass shooting occurs
-politicians get on TV or radio and blow a bunch of hot air
-politicians pass some half-ass, re-hatched (usually useless) legislation
-politicians pat themselves on the back, feeling very "useful" that they've "solved the problem"
-rinse, lather, repeat

Luckily, I'm seeing more and more people catch on to this pattern, and I'm seeing and hearing some real "outside the box" thinking (ie ideas other than gun control)

[SecularMotion]

2. I like Hillary's proposals

Hillary Clinton called Monday for substantial new limits on the availability and distribution of firearms, stepping aggressively into the debate over gun control in the wake of last week's mass shooting at a community college in Oregon.

The former secretary of state outlined four specific proposals during a pair of town hall events in New Hampshire, all of which are sure to inspire intense opposition from gun rights advocates.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-gun-control_5611d70ae4b0dd85030c6b3b?9lpojemi

[aikoaiko]

9. Her administrative action is strange because it is already existing law.

Clinton called for lawmakers to address the issue. But if they don't, she would require that anyone “attempting to sell a significant number of guns be deemed ‘in the business of selling firearms,’” which would “ensure that high-volume gun sellers are covered by the same common sense rules that apply to gun stores -- including requiring background checks on gun sales.” Asked what would constitute “a significant number of guns,” a Clinton aide responded, “There are a number of studies being conducted currently regarding illegal gun sales that could inform an eventual rulemaking.”

From the Gun Control Act of 1968

**§922. Unlawful acts
&quot a) It shall be unlawful—
" (1) for any person, except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms or ammunition, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm or ammunition in interstate or foreign commerce;

Its like HRC (and this reporter) doesn't even know the existing law.

[Kang Colby]

14. I like HRC..

But you are correct. She could simply have ATF clarify the number of transactions allowed per year, and call it a "victory for gun control." I wouldn't mind that, and the controllers would be duped into thinking it was a victory. As the law is written, ATF could potentially arrest anyone who purchases a table at a gun show to sell off their personal collection. A specific number of exempted transactions would be a win for pro gun folks, IMO.

[daleanime]

26. Pass what legislation?

Useless or otherwise they talk about it, but they never seem to pass anything. Not that that stops folks like you from complaining about it. Oh well, enjoy knowing full well that you are part of the problem. Have a lovely evening.

[jack_krass]

37. There

are thousands, probably tens of thousands of gun control laws on the books now. Passing more gun control laws will do nothing except allow politicians to pat themselves on the back and look useful..

At this point, the only useful gun control measures would be a ban coupled with 100% confiscation. This won't happen unless we accept living in a police state.

Fresh ideas are needed. Ideas that don't involve gun control.

[mmonk]

3. Right here. I own a rifle and a shotgun.

Haven't used either in years but was trained as a sniper by the US Army Rangers. I am for some gun control. Many guns out there are simply weapons that have no reason to be in unrestricted abundance among the population. I am for the 2nd amendment as originally written for its time. Not for the NRA or rightwing court interpretation. Have a great day.

[11 Bravo]

4. I'm not a moderate gun owner. I'm a LIBERAL gun owner.

And I'm right here.
My 30.06, my 22 rifle, and my 12 gauge shotgun are locked in my gun safe along with my 9mm handgun and my Dad's service .45 that he carried into aerial combat during WWII. All of them have trigger locks, and the ammo for them is kept in a separate safe. The only things that any of them have ever been pointed at are numerous deer, turkeys, ducks, paper targets, and tin cans.

[CTyankee]

25. I'm curious. What willyou do with your stash of guns when you write your will?

Your dad's gun is important (how did you get it? wasn't it government property?)

So your guns are under lock and key. How much game do you get for your family when you hunt?

[11 Bravo]

27. In order: 1. Leave them to my sons who will probably sell them.

Neither of them is a particularly avid hunter. (Although my oldest will hang on to my Dad's sidearm.)
2. He served in the US Navy for 30 years. He was allowed to keep his sidearm upon retirement, and he passed it on to his eldest son. I will do the same.
3. I filled my deer tag every year for almost 30 years. I always have the animal butchered into loins, ground venison, chops, and sausage. Depending on the size of the deer, I usually am able to freeze 50 or more pounds of meat. I'm in my middle sixties now, and don't go out every season.
(I did this year, and bagged a nice doe. We actually had venison enchiladas for dinner this past weekend.)

[maxrandb]

5. They are so brow beaten

by the NRA, that even a modicum of support for "sensible" gun restrictions would ostracize them.

It's the proverbial "With us, or ag'in us"! writ large.

[NickB79]

7. We're brow beaten from both sides, frankly

Try to discuss sensible gun control with NRA supporters, and you're called a gun-grabbing liberal.

Try to discuss responsible gun ownership with a lot of DU'ers, and you're called an NRA supporter.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[NickB79]

6. I consider myself one

I own a bolt-action .22 rifle, a semi-auto .22 rifle, an AR-15, a 12-gauge shotgun, and a few high-end pellet rifles.

My guns and ammo are kept locked up and unloaded when not in use. I don't worry about home invasions, or mysterious strangers attacking me.

I use them primarily for target practice, with occasional hunting trips to the woods.

My 5-yr old daughter and I often shoot pellet guns in the backyard, plinking soda cans. That pellet rifle is the ONLY gun she will shoot until she's old enough to join FFA (Future Farmers of America) and shoot a single-shot .22 rifle at a gun range (around 9-10 yr old). She is never allowed to handle said pellet gun without me right there with her. I find the trend of gun makers manufacturing miniature, almost toy-like "kid's guns" like these disgusting:

I don't have the need or desire to purchase a handgun, or get a carry permit. I'm generally skeptical of people who feel the need to be armed 24/7.

I have no problem going through a background check to purchase a gun, and support universal background checks for all gun sales.

[maxrandb]

11. Sounds like the "leadership" at the NRA

is what needs to change, or maybe, common sense gun owners could start their own national organization.

I served 28.5 years in the Military. Navy, so the only time I ever carried a gun was while standing Quarterdeck Watches, or the occasional manning of the .50 Cal Gun Mount while at sea.

I support peoples right to have a gun at home for protection, hunting, etc., but also think that we should do the following:

- Background Checks and licensing for ALL purchases and Transfers (family member to family member, friend to friend) with strict penalties for violations

- Mandatory operators test for license

- Semi-Automatic, Assault Weapons ban

- Remove litigation protections from gun manufacturers and dealers

- Kevlar/Bulletproof Vest only available after extensive screening, or if your job requires

- Maximum 10 Round Magazine, and absolutely NO 100 Round Drum Magazines like the shooter in Newtown had

- Any violent offense, Domestic Violence, Simple Assault, Harassment conviction, you lose your privilege to own a gun permanently, and must petition local court for reinstatement

Those are some things that I think would help. Will we ever be able to prevent 100% of these from happening? NO!!!!, But that's not the point or the goal. The goal is that we make it much harder for mass murderers to do their deed. America really is number 1 in one area...we have the most well-equipped mass murderers in the world. That needs to change.

And to those that think you need an AR-15 with 500, 100-Round Drum Magazines with armor piercing shells, because you think you are going to have to "fight the government"...well, all I can say is, "you've obviously never seen a Marine Expeditionary Unit in action, or have seen what a drone equipped with Hellfire Missiles can do. You could have 1,000 AR-15 and a couple hundred RPGs, but you'd still be turned into pink-vapor if that MEU ever came after you.

[sarisataka]

8. As I said before

Right in front of you
You know, we're the folks you are calling gun humpers, ammosexuals and pre-criminals.

When we speak you tell us to stop repeating NRA talking points.

While you dream of a world filled with dancing unicorns, we are getting effective laws passed, such as removing guns from DV offenders.

So far it has done us no good to try to work with gun control because the first time we question the least facet of a gun control proposal we are back to being ammosexuals who want no restrictions on guns at all.

[Paladin]

12. Fair enough. How about your side ending the death threats against control advocates?

I know I've gotten several over the years; most of the control advocates I stay in contact with have similar tales to tell.

And how about foregoing the "dancing unicorns" jibes? Do that, and quit steering conversations into the gutter with rants about the difference between "clips" and "magazines," and who knows? Maybe moderate gun owners might start talking to one another in a meaningful way.....

[sarisataka]

13. I have never threatened

Anyone with death but I am willing to speak against anyone who does.

My request is much less drastic. Simply drop the pejoratives and penis references; converse like an adult.

I'll drop unicorn jibes and all others if the "murder enabler" jibes stop. It would also be nice to see an end to wishes of gun owners children being murdered.

Gun owners do talk to each other. This is an invitation to be included. Just to let you know in advance, 'repeal the Second Amendment' and 'ban them all' will not be considered. OTH no one will demand guns be sold without any regulations. If the person says that you are not dealing with a moderate.

We may also suggest non-gun solutions like major social programs and reforms to combat crime. They are hard to achieve and expensive long term goals but will ultimately attack root causes of all crime. It will take a long time and isn't helped when Democratic seats are surrendered in the cause of dogmatic purity. Of course gun control become more remote as those seats are taken by Republicans.

[NickB79]

18. The moderate gun owners aren't the ones making death threats; those people aren't on our "side"

And you know that.

But by making that claim, you just lumped moderate gun owners in with the NRA nutjobs, thereby reaffirming sarisataka's point: that moderate gun owners are not taken seriously when they offer their input.

[beevul]

10. Moderate relative to what?

Moderate relative to your desires is nowhere near moderate on an objective scale.

[TipTok]

15. Any proposal...

... has to

a) clearly show how it would prevent mass shooting incidents

and

b) not infringe on the rights of the 99.999% of ethical and law abiding gun owners

Most proposals I've seen don't meet either condition and these tragic events are treated as an opportunity by the control crowd to get rid of something they personally disagree with.

[Lee-Lee]

16. How is this for moderate

I am a non-white, liberal gun owner and I even teach CCW classes.

I am for universal background checks- as long as they are done in a way that isn't onerous or expensive for gun owners. What I say is open NICS to everyone, mandate records be kept with the seller, and if a trace finds dead ends or sales that didn't use NICS prosecute to the full extent. Don't make a gun owner drive to a gun shop during business hours and pay a fee and spend an hour to loan a gun to a cousin for a weekend of hunting when a smartphone app can deliver the same background check.

As an example for why the UBC laws so far proposed fail for me- since I have an NC CCW and the requirements for it are stricter than the NICS checks I am exempt from NICS when I buy a gun- I just fill the form out. But the supposed UBC proposals would have all required me to still go to a gun dealer and fill out the forms and pay his fee even though he wasn't doing a background check but just looking at my permit- why couldn't I just show that permit to the person I was buying or borrowing the gun from and not waste an hour and $35?

I'm for criminal charges for any state or local agency that fails to update NICS on anyone who is disqualified. Background checks are only as good as the database, and unless you have penalties for not updating the database it will not work.

I am for actual aggressive prosecution of straw purchasers and those who deal in guns without a license. To include expansion of the felony murder laws to allow a person who illegally provides a gun to someone who then murders someone to be charged with the murder as well.

I am for the aggressive prosecution of anyone who attempts to illegally buy a gun. This is the single biggest failure in enforcement of our gun laws right now. If a convicted felon or person with a domestic violence conviction or restraining ore goes to buy a gun now and lies on the form 4473 they have committed a felony. If they had been honest on the form the dealer never would have called NICS, so for every NICS denial there are only two possibilities- either the NICS system screwed up and wrongly denied a person or the attempted buyer committed a felony.

What happens to those 80,000+ people who committed a felony every year trying to buy a gun? Less than .01% are prosecuted, almost all of them are just left alone- so you have a person who can't legally own a gun, who is out trying to get one, who you know committed a felony and have proof..... And they just leave them alone to go seek a gun through illegal means. How many do you think just quit trying to get a gun when turned away at the gun shop? They are known problems out there and a high risk for future gun crimes and we don't do a damn thing about it.

I'm against mandatory licensing- it's been the law in Illinois for 40+ years and has zero impact on crime based on what happens there. Expanding something that's been shown to not work doesn't make sense.

I'm against registration- mostly because it's an unworkable pipe dream. Canada tried it with long guns and failed. NY and CT have seen super low compliance rates on what they have tried- it would be a giant boondockle that would never work. The money and effort are far better spent on things that can work.

I'm for updating the BATFE budget to allow for a good yearly compliance inspection for every dealer and mandatory loss of license and aggressive prosecution for any that are shown to not follow the law.

I'm for mandatory firearms safety education in schools so young people don't learn all about guns from video games and are thought to respect just how dangerous they are. It's not enough to require it of gun owners, people with no intent to buy a gun can and do still come into possession of them and everyone needs to know how to safely handle it.

I'm for the elimination of Jim Crow era gun control laws like NC pistol purchase permit system that enables local sheriffs to deny minorities te right to buy guns.

I'm for mandatory sentence enhancement for any crime committed with a gun- add 5 years to you sentance for any crime if you use a gun, period. Experience shows such laws, when enforced, greatly discourage criminal use of guns.

I'm for enabling local LE to investigate and enforce Federal law in cases where the Feds won't even bother.


I'm for holding federal LE and US Attorneys who don't bother to investigate or prosecute reported Federal violations accountable.

I'm for safe storage laws, and also for the use of the money that comes from excise taxes on ammo and guns to run programs to help buy safes and gun locks for low income gun owners. Tax credits for safe storage equipment are also a good idea to promote safe storage.q

[Jim Beard]

35. A lot of points but none address the amount of guns. Its a fact that research paper

prepared by the University of Arizona not only claimed that mentioning the shooter name made him a martyr but that there are more shooting in areas of high gun ownership. That,s something the sheriff and you failed to mention.

I am a 68 year old life long Democrat, even voting for McGovern and I own several rifles and shotguns. One 410 pistol bought to carry in my pick up seat on the farm if I see jack rabbits or prairie dogs. I don't remind reducing my numbers.

BTW, 3 are WalMart single shot guns bought cheap at WalMart to have something for visitors to use.

[Lee-Lee]

38. I don't see it as an issue

A non-violent person is a non-violent person with no gun, 1 gun or 5 guns. Are you more violent because you own more than one gun?

Would reducing the number of guns you own make you less likely to go commit a crime?

I grew up in an area where guns were common, and worked as a sheriff deputy where guns were everywhere in almost every home. I learned that the focus has to be on those who misuse and abuse, not on the general population.

Anything that forces people to limit ownership seems like a foolish waste of effort to me.

Correlation doesn't equal causation- just because one paper showed a correlation doesn't mean that there is a real link. Just like you owning one more or less shotgun won;t make you any more or less likely to commit a violent crime with them.

[aikoaiko]

17. Hello... Moderate Gun Controllers. Where ARE You?

You often say things like nobody is trying to take away your guns. You could prove this by giving some of our guns back if we concede on some restrictions to reduce gun violence.

For example, except for one incident (and he was a cop), there has been no reported shootings or murders with machine guns that have been registered under the NFA. A few of you like to use this example as proof that control works. However, newly manufactured machine guns since 1986 are not legal to sell to civilians. They are legal for police and security contractors, but the average adult with a squeaky clean record.

If gun owners agree to give up some current liberties in the pursuit of safety, would you be willing to give us back some of our guns that are so tightly regulated that virtually no crimes of violence are committed with them?

[Paladin]

20. So you're asking for easy access to machine guns?

To what end---other than watching the inevitable increase in mayhem in which full autos are used? Why would control advocates cede one of the very few positive trends we see? Doesn't seem very moderate, to me.

[aikoaiko]

24. Aren't you one the people who say the NFA is proof that gun control works and wanted to apply it to

all firearms?

If it works, it works. There's no need for the moratorium if what you say is true.

For 50 years without a moratorium there were no criminal homicides, then one incident in the 80s, and then nothing (in conjunction with the moratorium).

[Paladin]

30. I never said it should be applied to all firearms.

I have repeatedly pointed it out as an example of how effective gun control can be---contrary to what the pro-gun lobby has been saying for years and years.

[Lee-Lee]

40. The NFA's effectiveness in stopping arms under it from being used in crimes is mostly economic.

It doesn't have anything to do with the background checks (a NC pistol purchase permit is actually more in depth than an NFA check) nor the registration.

Its the $200 tax.

In 1934 the tax was set at $200 and the law written to allow corporations to own machine guns so that the banks, union busting companies and groups like the Pinkertons could keep buying machine guns while the private citizen could never afford one even if technically it was allowed.

While the tax remains at $200, the high tax and the fact that the BATFE takes 6+ months to process paperwork after the gun has been paid for before you take possession means that, quite simple, only the 1%of gun owners could ever afford NFA weapons. And with the moratorium what should be a $1200 rifle + $200 tax sells for $20,000+.

Criminal activity and misuse of guns is done, by a HUGE margin, almost entirely by the population near or below the poverty line. These people couldn't afford a $200 tax on a gun in 1934, and still can't now, so they choose cheaper tools.

It isn't background checks or registration that stopped any crime- its the use of taxes and later limited supply to drive the costs up to the point where the average person, and most criminals, simply can never afford it.

[Lee-Lee]

21. Or how about nationwide CCW

Create a nationwide CCW for those who want it, with a trainibg requirement that's reasonable, in exchange for UBC.

What say you gun control propents?

[aikoaiko]

33. Maybe.

[kcr]

19. I absolutely believe it

I can't think of a more selfish position than to insist on keeping unfettered access to a product that causes such harm to society. They don't care. It's that simple. There is nothing I own and wish to buy that is that important to me.

[NutmegYankee]

22. It's a difficult place to be on DU. I would know.

Both sides hate you. I instead just sit back and push back at the authoritarians who keep suggesting to violate some civil liberty or legal protection (there are many NOT related to the 2nd Amend).

And when I state Authoritarian, I mean the Authoritarian left:




I tend to fall in the Libertarian socialism section, which is part of why I push back on civil liberties so hard.

[ibegurpard]

23. drowned out by the idiots

Who call for unconstitutional bans and the mouth breathers who insist the gubmint is coming to get our guns...

[krispos42]

28. Being called "gun-humpers" and NRA stooges, as usual.

And being lectured what "reasonable" is by people long on emotion and short on practical knowledge.

[Kang Colby]

29. I am a liberal gun owner.

I always wonder what gun control advocates mean when they talk about compromise. I would like to know what specifically gun control advocates are willing to give up. For example, a repeal of NFA '34, select modifications to GCA '68, and national carry reciprocity with a federal option would surely see UBCs passed with exemptions for relatives. So I guess if moderate means willing to compromise, I am a moderate.

Just my .02.

[ileus]

31. Same place I've always been.

Where are the moderate gun haters???

[TheKentuckian]

32. Pretty much everyone you ever talk to or hear from on the subject to some degree or another

Happens when one refuses to accept the actual poles are absolute ban on all fire arms and absolutely no restrictions.

[Kaleva]

34. I've owned guns for decades now.

And I wouldn't care if semi-autos were strictly controlled or even outright banned. Nor would I care if if training was made mandatory and one had to go thru a back ground check and have a special photo I.D. in order to purchase and have in one's possession a gun and/or ammo.

[Lee-Lee]

39. Illinois has done the special ID for gun and ammo purchases for many decades now

It is pretty clear that the end result is such laws have zero impact on crime, but just are more hassle for lawful gun owners.

There is no point expanding what has been shown to be ineffective.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

36. I scanned this quickly and saw "gun lovers".

No, I'm not in-love with my gun and it's not my 'toy', let alone my sex toy.

Sick of this rubbish.

Funny thing - I was an outspoken anti-gun person when I signed up here. I kid you not.