Gun Control Reform Activism

samir.g

(836 posts) Sun Nov 12, 2017, 05:44 PM Nov 2017

Hand Over Your Weapons

Hand Over Your Weapons

If gun-control advocates really want to stanch the blood, they'll have to persuade more people of the need to confiscate millions of firearms

The logic of gun control lies, at bottom, in substantially reducing the number of deadly weapons on the street—and confiscation is far and away the most effective approach. Is there any conceivable turn of events in our politics that could make confiscation happen? And what would a mass seizure look like?

...

The United States’ astronomically high rates of firearm violence aren’t rooted in some unique American propensity for derangement and delinquency. Studies show our levels of mental illness and basic criminality are on par with other wealthy countries.

Other common explanations, like the social fissures created by our racial diversity, have been debunked by researchers, too. The only explanation left—an explanation borne out by a number of careful studies—is the sheer size of the American arsenal. There are 310 million handguns, shotguns, and semi-automatic weapons in American homes, garages, and waistbands.

Ultimately, if gun-control advocates really want to stanch the blood, there’s no way around it: They’ll have to persuade more people of the need to confiscate millions of those firearms, as radical as that idea may now seem.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/11/12/hand-over-your-weapons

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hand Over Your Weapons (Original Post) samir.g Nov 2017 OP

If it could be done I would like it to become socially unacceptable to own wasupaloopa Nov 2017 #1

Exactly. It worked for tobacco, incest, polluting, etc. Why not guns? Hoyt Nov 2017 #3

Every gun-humper who used to tell us they are law-abiding, suddenly say they won't comply Hoyt Nov 2017 #2

Your call for the confiscation billh58 Nov 2017 #4

wasupaloopa

(4,516 posts)

1. If it could be done I would like it to become socially unacceptable to own

Reply to samir.g (Original post)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:06 PM

Nov 2017

guns other than hunting and sport and historic guns.

Then future generations would not support the gun culture we have today.

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

3. Exactly. It worked for tobacco, incest, polluting, etc. Why not guns?

Reply to wasupaloopa (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:59 PM

Nov 2017

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

2. Every gun-humper who used to tell us they are law-abiding, suddenly say they won't comply

Reply to samir.g (Original post)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:57 PM

Nov 2017

with such laws. They are law-abiding as long as they have access to more guns.

Even if confiscation is impossible -- which it's not -- stopping new production will help. It may take decades to see the full benefit, but it will help.

Also levy severe penalties on anyone who transfers an illegal gun. Of course, gun-humpers will whine about that too. Just go to any white wing gun forum and call Randy Weaver a racist, gun-trafficker who hid behind his family.

billh58

(6,642 posts)

4. Your call for the confiscation

Reply to samir.g (Original post)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 08:38 PM

Nov 2017

of legal firearms is straight out of the NRA "fear" handbook aimed at selling more guns, but thanks for your concern. There will never be a mass "confiscation" of guns as the Second Amendment does not allow it, and REAL gun control advocates aren't calling for any form of mass confiscation. A ban on the production and sale of automatic large capacity (so-called assault) rifles is a plank in the Democratic Party platform, and most reasonable Americans agree with that stance.

The immediate answer to our gun violence epidemic is tighter control of who can have a gun (stringent local and national background checks) and where they can carry it (no open or concealed public carry). Average Americans have absolutely no need for rapid firing weapons, and their manufacture and sale should be tightly controlled. You want a gun? Keep it at home, or while you're hunting, or at the range.

I'm not sure if you're trolling this Group, or just horribly misinformed.

Reply to this discussion