I'll agree in part. There are still some loopholes out there, and we need a better system in place for mental health. Most states have laws in place against selling firearms to the mentally ill, but this is difficult to enforce due to privacy laws. I'll disagree on moving the age to 21 to purchase a firearm. Many young adults move out on their own at 18. If you move the age to 21, they won't have any way to protect themselves for 3 years.
As Long as there are astronomical profits to be made via dealing drugs there will be murders for turf, for stealing drugs from each other and crossfire casualties. Do you honestly think the guns used in an inner city turf war were purchased through the same channels you or I would buy them. All my guns have serial numbers on them lol. The solution whatever it is needs to start at the astronomical profits.
THANK YOU I have no idea why this is so hard for UsefulIdiot to understand. If you present a survey whose sole purpose is to point out that "increased laws and regulation lead to less deaths in children", and then you try to argue that, specific, point, you end up looking like a jackass. Most children who die from guns die from gang related violence which will never be solved with increased laws and regulation. It's not that regulation and smart gun laws curb overall gun violence, they do!
I actually agree with the 21. I'd even argue a higher age is necessary for maturity (I'm on record on this forum saying 25 isn't a bad idea). But it isn't going to stop the majority of crime.
Legal gun owners need to be held responsible for their guns. All guns need to be registered. If a legal gun owners gun is found by police to have been used in a crime the gun owner needs to be banned from owning guns for 5 years.If it happens twice lifetime ban.If a legal gun owner cant keep their guns out of the hands of criminals they shouldn't be allowed to own them imo.
No arguments with any of this. Sometimes I think you have schizophrenia. One very lucid post followed by days of lunacy. But there are hundreds of millions of guns that are not part of any national registration database. You'll never get them to be, either. No gun owner in their right mind will ever trust a liberal's law that says "come and sign your name, we just want you to be on the list."
Legal gun owners should definitely be held responsible in the event of negligence, but that's a slippery slope. You can't really hold someone responsible for a firearm that's been stolen. Vehicles kill a lot more people than guns. Can you imagine if we banned someone from driving if they had their car stolen and the car thief didn't obey traffic laws? I don't support the idea of a national gun registry. It would be mostly useless based off the fact we already have nearly 400 million guns in circulation. Plus we have far left idiots threatening to use EO to seize guns if they get elected. The last thing someone like that needs is a list of legal gun owners.
Guess what, you can sue the owner of the car if the thief steals it and smashed into you and bolts. I have seen it happen where the person in the accident's insurance company goes after the original owner's insurance. This is why all cars have good alarm systems intalled now but still, the insurance goes after the owner because they did not safeguard their car. I think the same structure can be applied to guns that are stolen. If you own a gun the secure the fuck out of it so it does not get stolen. Your homeowner's insurance should cover gun theft protection and you should have to pay.
I’d bet that murders which occurred by a legal registered gun from a person who legally purchased it wether stolen, left unattended or negligently loaned to your cousin is a smidgen of the guns used in murders. No data backing me up lol.
I have never heard of the above. If my car gets stolen and I report it stolen to the police right away then the insurance owes me a car period. I’m calling geico Tomorrow. Sue the gun owner then via homeowners.