I'm sorry, HMJC, but we do need some "common sense" gun control. I was hoping that some of the reforms relating to background checks, assault weapon/high capacity magazines would have been enacted, but now what we have as a result of the "victories" by the gun proponents is more "phone and pen" stuff by Obama.
I'm not sure it had to be (or would have been) a slippery slope. Some concessions might have promoted compromise on this and other issues. I'm afraid we'll continue to see more of this until Obama and Holder are out of office. 953 days and counting:
We really don't need high capacity rapid fire rifles and pistols to protect ourselves.
A pump shotgun is very capable.
we didn't need the same kind of weaponry that militarys used until we needed them to fight a tyrannical government (1776). they also came in handy during WW2 (it is believed japan did not try to invade due to how well armed the civilian population was). guns are not just about protecting us from criminals. we should be also taking note that all the mass shooting are taking place in "gun free" zones where they know one one will be able to protect themselves
I do concur that common sense initiatives should be considered, My qualms in this instance is a broad sweeping interpretation of ones mental state. Granted I truly don't know how there will not be mistakes with this "legislation" and once you are required to surrender your legally purchased firearms; even if there is a mistake it will be almost impossible to get them back.
I own an M4, its what I carried in the Army and I like to shoot it. I have no claims that this is my personal defense weapon. I just like it... I will also concede that I cannot justify why I have it besides that fact that I am an avid shooting sports type of guy who likes things that go boom...
Lastly although not a great point; if someone is determined to obtain a weapon to commit crimes; they will find that weapon regardless of any gun control measures enacted. Furthermore, if they cant do it with a gun they will find another way.
Agree totally. If guns aren't available, they find pressure cookers, knives, etc., but automatic weapons with high capacity magazines do improve the quantity and efficiency of murderers who are able to obtain them.
As for my Army experience, I much preferred carrying the M1911 to the M16, so when I retired I purchased a Colt Defender .45 ACP, which is essentially an M1911 but reduced in size and weight. It's the only weapon I have around the house for "home defense." If I could have another weapon from my Army experience, it would definitely be the M79. If you are unfamiliar with this weapon, see:
Not much use for "home defense," but it sure was fun to shoot.
It has always been my understanding that our founding fathers were of the opinion that we needed the right to bear arms in case we were ever to feel like we needed to overthrow our government.
That was the idea. But governments by nature do not want to be overthrown; consequently, we have this back and forth on what "rights" we should have (at least in this country).
The public good has to be weighed against individual rights and the need for law and order. There will never be total agreement on the issue, and the majority consensus is not necessarily correct in all cases. It's a tough one, that's for sure.