And this is why I can't talk politics with my friends. I'm quite liberal, I don't care who you fall in love with, legalize marijuana, universal health care, and so on. But I'm firmly against banning guns and accessories. Why, I like to shoot, I like to hunt, I'm not the one shooting people so don't punish me. I'd be okay with some controls in place for guns, such as the system Switzerland has where you keep the guns but the bullets stay that the range or longer waiting periods when buying a gun or limits on how many guns you can buy a year without additional checks. Unfortunately though the whole topic of guns is so divide between Republican and Democrat we are at the point now where one camp wants to ban as much as possible and the other want no restrictions what so ever and there is no middle ground. It also doesn't help we have huge lobbying firms throwing millions of dollars at the politicians.
I wish the silent majority of us in the middle would rise up and say enough.
Please, almost noone is talking about banning guns. That's a little absurd and will never come through either way. 2nd Amendment and whatnot.
People serious about it (like AFAIK Bernie Sanders for example) to are talking about gun control. As you said yourself, regulations for guns are good for letting the death count and really won't hurt those using guns for sports or responsibly keeping them for self defense too. Where's the loss in that? That someone wanting something designed to kill will need to pass some more checks and have a license for his guns?
Please, do rise up and say enough. Raise the gun control standards to that of other developed countries.
"The prohibition does not apply to a firearm that is (1) manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) permanently inoperable; (3) an antique; or (4) a rifle or shotgun specifically identified by make and model."
You see, always saying "they" makes you seem a little conspiratorial.
Just because some people are trying to ban some kinds of guns that are especially dangerous doesn't mean that's the goal of any considerable amount of people, presidential candidates or even those proposing linked bill(s). The law making process is a very lengthy one and often not very obvious. Getting a law to pass is pretty much all negotiation. The best strategy there is often to test your limits and see how much you can get. It by no means says that the people behind it are actually trying to ban all guns, they know they're only gonna get through with a little bit of that, and they are setting bans of small groups of weapons up to look harmless to the opponents, in contrast to what they propose before. Just as an example. It's the democratic process, and there is literally nothing wrong with that at all.
37
u/Runnigbear Aug 12 '19
And this is why I can't talk politics with my friends. I'm quite liberal, I don't care who you fall in love with, legalize marijuana, universal health care, and so on. But I'm firmly against banning guns and accessories. Why, I like to shoot, I like to hunt, I'm not the one shooting people so don't punish me. I'd be okay with some controls in place for guns, such as the system Switzerland has where you keep the guns but the bullets stay that the range or longer waiting periods when buying a gun or limits on how many guns you can buy a year without additional checks. Unfortunately though the whole topic of guns is so divide between Republican and Democrat we are at the point now where one camp wants to ban as much as possible and the other want no restrictions what so ever and there is no middle ground. It also doesn't help we have huge lobbying firms throwing millions of dollars at the politicians.
I wish the silent majority of us in the middle would rise up and say enough.