Common sense Gun control,based on our Constitution

imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:

Lurchiron wrote:

I would say that the reasoning is all about the up close and personal nature of handguns as compared to the " I can see you coming from a mile away with that smokepole in your hands" effect of a long gun. Just like most sheeple are scared of concealed guns in general(all guns for that matter), but if the gov. says "with training", well then it must be ok cause big brother says so; right?

If you check the yes box on that, well I can let you have some prime swamp land real cheap.

Click to expand...

I check no on that box, but think of it like this, guns(wether you like to admit it or not)= power, and power without knowledge is a very dangerous thing...

Click to expand...

Agreed, but should not one study the Constitution for its own sake; rather than just to be able to buy a gun?

imported post

Sgt_Habz wrote:

So, I like the general idea, just not that specific execution of it. Keep up the ideas though, because I think you hit on a very good point... our general lack of education on the subject.

Click to expand...

Damn Sgt, I'll give you that one. Very, Very, true.

imported post

Lurchiron wrote:

Just what is your post about then. Seems as though the fodder of my reply comes straight out of thewording of your post. Tests & Haitians', your words; your post.

Click to expand...

Lurchiron wrote:

Sorry to hear 'bout your wife's bad decisions, but what exactly is your point(other than the one under your hat). Sounds like your dredging up past encounters just to puff yourself up?

Click to expand...

And now we come to the root of our problem. Here I thought we were debating with someone of intelligence. It's clear you're having difficulty understanding things.

And nice tactic, by the way. Dismiss my point and counter-claim that I must be trying to boost my ego? lol... Suppose I'll have to quote the OP... "act like an adult."

imported post

RE:Lurchiron-

Yes, I agree, I think the problem starts with our wonderfull public Education (honestly more of a dumbification) system. But still, the results of such a system are now ever present and growing and honestly, what as a society can we doother than make people who abuse their rights learn them?

imported post

Sgt_Habz wrote:

Lurchiron wrote:

Just what is your post about then. Seems as though the fodder of my reply comes straight out of thewording of your post. Tests & Haitians', your words; your post.

Click to expand...

Lurchiron wrote:

Sorry to hear 'bout your wife's bad decisions, but what exactly is your point(other than the one under your hat). Sounds like your dredging up past encounters just to puff yourself up?

Click to expand...

And now we come to the root of our problem. Here I thought we were debating with someone of intelligence. It's clear you're having difficulty understanding things.

And nice tactic, by the way. Dismiss my point and counter-claim that I must be trying to boost my ego? lol... Suppose I'll have to quote the OP... "act like an adult."

Click to expand...

Is that the best you can do(weak)? Oh and I'm still waiting for you to explain your point of view rather than entering another pissing contest.

Shouldn't open your pie-hole if your not prepared to eat them just the same.

imported post

I also don't feel the 2 day wait (cooling off period) is too horrible, although technically could be considered unconstitutional itself (impeding, but that's another debate). The background check also has merit.

To require a test before your allowed to purchase a firearm would indicate it's a privilege, not a right. That's where the snagbegins. So no, that would be unacceptable.


An immediate felony conviction with out due process, gee that seems fair and right. (don't slip on the dripping sarcasm)

Not flaming you Landose, butthis is a bit "out there".

imported post

bigdaddy1 wrote:

I also don't feel the 2 day wait (cooling off period) is too horrible, although technically could be considered unconstitutional itself (impeding, but that's another debate). The background check also has merit.

To require a test before your allowed to purchase a firearm would indicate it's a privilege, not a right. That's where the snagbegins. So no, that would be unacceptable.


An immediate felony conviction with out due process, gee that seems fair and right. (don't slip on the dripping sarcasm)

Not flaming you Landose, butthis is a bit "out there".

Click to expand...

This is why the subject is open to debate, to make a final "acceptable" proposal that most (not all) of us can agree upon. Honestly the felony thing is more of an arrestable offense with the outcome being a felony conviction, not the latter.

imported post

And no, I dont have any better ideas at the moment.

imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:

RE:Lurchiron-

Yes, I agree, I think the problem starts with our wonderfull public Education (honestly more of a dumbification) system. But still, the results of such a system are now ever present and growing and honestly, what as a society can we doother than make people who abuse their rights learn them?

Click to expand...

Yes the school system and its control by the lefties is a major problem with today's society and the way it behaves & thinks. Not only are the lefties a bunch of weasels and cowards only interested in control, rather than actually teaching useful education; but they seem to be doing all they can to apply it to all aspects of our lives.

imported post

A thought that just came to mind.

Look towards the Swiss, they require their citizens to serve in the military. They provide the training, and you learn of the importance of your rights.

Not that I am saying make military service mandatory, but if your trained and educated, your less likely to be a looser.

imported post

bigdaddy1 wrote:

if your trained and educated, your less likely to be a looser.

Click to expand...

Applause all around Big Daddy,

This is the point I was trying to make with my original post, a lil knowledge goes a long way.

imported post

I have a problem with a test as well. The Second Amendment clearly states, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (Emphasis added). AK and VT do not have very many gun problems, why can we not follow that way?

imported post

So we all pretty much agree that a lack of knowledge is what stems our infringements. And most of us agree that our 2A rights shall not be infringed upon, so any proposed test or permit before you can carry seems to be out of the question...

if the problem is lack of knowledge, what can we do to ensure (or at least improve) upon the general knowledge of the Constitution and our Rights? I don't see a way to mandate it, but I certainly think something can be done to improve upon it. Ideas?

imported post

Sgt_Habz wrote:

So we all pretty much agree that a lack of knowledge is what stems our infringements. And most of us agree that our 2A rights shall not be infringed upon, so any proposed test or permit before you can carry seems to be out of the question...

if the problem is lack of knowledge, what can we do to ensure (or at least improve) upon the general knowledge of the Constitution and our Rights? I don't see a way to mandate it, but I certainly think something can be done to improve upon it. Ideas?

Click to expand...

The only way I can see getting this rectified is for schools to actually teach it in the curriculum once again.

imported post

so if i forget my proof that i passed the test, then i instantly become a felon???

so i take it you NEVER forgot your wallet, drivers license, cell phone, check book, or other important item??? if anything, the fact that you passed should be in a full access network to the police everywhere just like your drivers license, so when they look up your name/address, it shows that you are "permited".



BUT..................



I have a better Idea. Why don't we write the laws like this.


Definition of FIRE ARM: anything that ejects a projectile with the use of air or explosive accelerant

1) if you have not been convicted of a violent crime, and by any other known factor are a law abiding citizen, you are allowed to purchase and own a fire arm as per the constitution.

2) it is illegal to brandish, or use ones fire arm towards another human being unless it is in self defense.

3) if you are convicted by a jury to have committed a crime towards another human involving the use of a fire arm while sober or under the influence of any legal or illegal drug, your right to own a fire arm shall be removed.





yes. i literally just thought of that. and i think that's about as simple as you can get. why does gun ownership have to be so damn complicated.


here is the SIMPLE FACT. criminals will own guns. so why shouldn't everybody else. innocent until proven guilty right??? so EVERYBODY is allowed to have a gun, and if you use it to harm somebody, then you loose that right. PERIOD.

imported post

bigdaddy1 wrote:

A thought that just came to mind.

Look towards the Swiss, they require their citizens to  serve in the military.  They provide the training, and you learn of the importance of your rights.

Not that I am saying make military service mandatory, but if your trained and educated, your less likely to be a looser.

Click to expand...

don't forget to mention that when they are done, they are allowed to take their service rifle home with them, and they have yearly shooting events with GOVERNMENT PROVIDED AMMUNITION.

if somebody here would suggest something like that everybody in the states would shit themselves.

imported post

This will piss some of you off, so whatever...I'm not in a make nice mood.

It boggles my mind why people feel the need to infuse division in areas that serves no purpose. Some people would cut off there own foot just to spite their toes.

I'll let some of you in on a little secret. There are nasty little liberals who lurk this site because they believe in 2A (and many other things which might surprise some of you) but never participate because of the negative discourse that takes place here by some. You do everyone a disservice when you slight them with disparaging comments.

I happen to be 2A and I know many a lib who is also 2A. I want all those in favor of 2A to be on my side. I don't want to chase them off because some of you can't climb down off your high horse and be adults for the 10 seconds it takes to post a comment.

It took time but we've come to realize (most of us anyway) that the everyday people of Vietnam, Russia, North Korea, China, Japan, and other areas are basically decent people with brothers, sisters, parents and children who just want to raise their families to the best of their ability. We may disagree with their governments or even some members of a certain nationality, but largely the people are much like us in the end.

SO ARE THE NASTY LIBERALS. GET OVER IT.

imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:

Ok, I'd like to first say that I know it's been a while since I've been on the forum and it feels damn good to be back in Wisconsin, and back on the board in general.

So anyways,I have been doing a lot ofpondering on how to curtail this nationwide problem we have with criminals having guns and so on and so forth, and It came to me that it isn't the guns,nor the magizine size or caliber of the guns,but it is a overall lack of education on not just the 2nd amendment, but the entire constitution & Bill of rights in general.

Now bear with me, this is what I impose as a way to do away with CCW permits,gun registration and the whole school zone crap law.

I say that yes we keep the background check,and hell maybe even keep the 48 hr hold law(that's a big maybe ). But in an effort to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, we inact a law that makes it mandatory to know the Constitution and Bill of rights for ANYONE purchasing a firearm for the first time. Once the test is passed, the tester will be given a card or document stating they have gone thru the proper chanels to obtain a firearm.

Click to expand...

No, I will not have you or anybody else tell me whether or not I am qualified to be a citizen with he rights of a citizen. Even if you 'enact' a law mandating it, that law will be just as unconstitutional as any other law infringing on our rights.

That goes for back ground checks too. They accomplish nothing except to make the procedure more expensive and arduous for us and does nothing to stop criminals from being criminals. You want to stop criminals from using guns in crime, that is fine by me, lock them up and keep them locked up. Its amazing how there are fewer crimes committed by them while incarcerated and unable to procure a gun. Don't ask me what I think of DA's who plea bargain away gun charges in order to get a quick conviction and then a judge gives a light sentence and a parole board gives an early release to the same boogerman who has learned that a crime with a gun is no more hazardous or inconvenient to his well being than a crime without one.

imported post

gbu28 wrote:

This will piss some of you off, so whatever...I'm not in a make nice mood.

It boggles my mind why people feel the need to infuse division in areas that serves no purpose. Some people would cut off there own foot just to spite their toes.

I'll let some of you in on a little secret. There are nasty little liberals who lurk this site because they believe in 2A (and many other things which might surprise some of you) but never participate because of the negative discourse that takes place here by some. You do everyone a disservice when you slight them with disparaging comments.

I happen to be 2A and I know many a lib who is also 2A. I want all those in favor of 2A to be on my side. I don't want to chase them off because some of you can't climb down off your high horse and be adults for the 10 seconds it takes to post a comment.

It took time but we've come to realize (most of us anyway) that the everyday people of Vietnam, Russia, North Korea, China, Japan, and other areas are basically decent people with brothers, sisters, parents and children who just want to raise their families to the best of their ability. We may disagree with their governments or even some members of a certain nationality, but largely the people are much like us in the end.

SO ARE THE NASTY LIBERALS. GET OVER IT.

Click to expand...

You play with dirt... eventually you get dirty; pretty simple.

Also you've lumped Nippon(never a commie country) in with all those leftist countries; where by the way, the citizenry have never grown a pair of balls big enough to overthrow their oppressive rulers. Be fortunate as an American that we had no such problem throwing off our chains of oppression. And what tool did we use to achive this? Guns, guns, and more guns. The very thing that a vast majority of your leftist friends try to wrangle from us day in and day out.

Wake up and smell who brews your coffee!!!

imported post

And why not the same test before we write a letter to an editor? Or why not a test before we decide to practise the religion of our choice? Get real, for every person born in the United States the bill of rights is a birth right. No special test. No permits. No cost. No requirements other than being an United States citizen.

In my opinion, and I have voiced it on this forum before, the best way to reduce guns in the hands of criminals is to make the penalty so severe that no criminal will take the risk of committing a crime while using a firearm. There are penalty enhancers on the books and significant penalties for felons in possession of firearms but for the most part they are a joke. You see, most crime prosecutions are political, with little interest in actually reducing crime. Prosecutors aremost interested in having a good score card. A good prosecution score card is essential to any political career advancement. Because a good prosecution record is so importantthey will anxiously plea bargain in order to get a conviction. Many, many times the first charges to be plea bargained away are the firearm charges. Most criminals are aware of that circumstance and when their back is against the wall will use it to their advantage. Criminals are stupid but they aren't dumb.

The courts themselves are not immune from being part of the problem. Courts are so back logged,prisons so full and the cost of incarceration so high that judges are inclined to yield to the politics of the situation when applying sentences. Except for "hardened" criminals probation seems to be the norm.

The solution? Mandatory enforcement and sentencing of severe penalty enhancers for anyone convicted of using a firearm while committing a crime, with no possibility of plea bargaining the charge away. We must put pressure on the Legislature to make it so.