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
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: OK, here are some suggestions without impeding 2A rights. [View all]RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)17. Not bad...however
change it to semi auto to semi auto assault weapons. Many hunters would object to this and also those with automatic pistols for protection. History of violence would have to be carefully worded and limited to initiated violence. Even then it can come down to word against word. Maybe a history of x number of occurrences. Certain types of violence one occurence. Remember most of the shooters had no previous criminal records. They only had a history of mental illness. The rest is good. Military and law enforcement are already using RFID. Maybe both GPS and RFID. Also RFID in the ammo?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
216 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
if its not a flintlock musket or pistol you have no right to have one, as we know
msongs
Dec 2012
#2
Yep, and the 1st amendment only applies to newspapers, books, and soapboxes - not the internet,
kelly1mm
Dec 2012
#9
thank you for stating this so much better than I did below. but, this mental stuff has to be careful
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#13
microchips. how sci-fi of you. define mental instability. GPS chip? kiss my ass.
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#10
you do realize that most pros get in the field to try and understand their own neuroses/psychoses?
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#19
There isn't a lot of gun violence to begin with. 300 million people, 100 million guns
Ashgrey77
Dec 2012
#206
Tell that to the families of the 30,000+ who lose their lives every year.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#208
My whole point to you was they wouldn't have been stolen with this technology
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#91
Because you are trying to solve problems in society with a less than adequate
ProgressiveProfessor
Dec 2012
#190
Right Mr. Negativity, except it will be you who loses his guns, not me.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#209
That is a good step in the right direction but would it be expensive to implement?
JDPriestly
Dec 2012
#12
Only as long as law enforcement agencies agree to the same conditions in reference to the technology
Remmah2
Dec 2012
#18
Nothing is going to work every time, but if it works sometimes it could save lives
Bjorn Against
Dec 2012
#114
I'll have to think about some of those...the tracking thing sounds too Patriot Act to me.
Common Sense Party
Dec 2012
#28
Not all. Quite a few are very positive. I'm really encouraged by the response.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#101
It's not embarrassment, it's because it's none of your fucking business that I'm carrying
Kennah
Dec 2012
#148
This is an argument I have often with open carriers. I'm safer being anonymous.
Kennah
Dec 2012
#166
Correct. It would be a defacto registration system for certain types of weapons.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2012
#84
You can't require something until the technology is actually available.
GreenStormCloud
Dec 2012
#184
What laws do you support that protect an individual's inalienable right to self-defense against
jody
Dec 2012
#170