Skip to main content

View Diary: The RKBA From the Left - A Matter of Trust (375 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nothing that you mentioned would be threatened (14+ / 0-)

    by the proposed legislation.

    I think everyone here understands that you all own guns for different reasons and that you're responsible and law-abiding and everything else that we want gun owners to be.

    But why be against gun control? That it's "people control" is silly- that's what all laws are. I could just as easily point to what a responsible driver I am, and how laws that govern automobiles are actually laws that govern people. And yeah, some people drive wrecklessly and don't carry insurance and don't use seat belts and drive drunk- the law doesn't stop all people from doing that.

    But just because I would drive safely and responsibly whether there were laws in place about that or not doesn't mean that we don't need those laws.

    My apologies, but I don't understand the point of this diary.

    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

    by BoiseBlue on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 11:24:56 AM PST

    •  Exactly... (5+ / 0-)

      If we outlaw bank robbery, only criminals will rob banks.  So why bother?

      If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. Albert Einstein

      by kharma on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 12:03:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let's use your car/gun comparison. (10+ / 0-)

      The automobile laws that you mention only come into affect during or after an unlawful act has taken place. We have the same type of limitations/laws for guns as well - you can't brandish for no reason, you can't shoot someone for no reason, murder someone, etc...Basically the same "control" as for automobiles.

      Your (and I don't mean just you, no offense meant at all) vision of gun "control" would be like automobile "control" having laws that no vehicle can be sold that goes over 60 MPH - if you already have one it must be turned in for an $200 gift card to; Racing stripes, hood scoops, & tail fins are now illegal since they make the car "look" fast, hence more dangerous; All new vehicles must have an device built in that causes all mobile electronic devices to not work in it - all exisitng vehicles must have this device added - at your cost, if you want to continue to own the vehicle.

      •  We have the same controls for both? (5+ / 0-)

        Since when do gun owners have to be licensed? When did we start mandating liability insurance for guns? Is there a shooting while intoxicated law that I'm not aware of? Are children under the age of sixteen no longer able to use a gun?

        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

        by BoiseBlue on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 12:19:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I never said that they have the same controls. (9+ / 0-)

          Not sure where you got that from. But they shouldn't have the same controls anyway - one is an right, the other an priviledge.

          To address you specific questions:

          I would hope it's never mandated to have insurance for a right. That's sort of unconstitutional.

          I think all (or at least most) CCL state laws prohibit drinking any alcohol (let alone being intoxicated) while carrying - my state does. Some, I have no idea how many, also prohibit concealed carry into bars - my state does.

          Children under the age of 16 have never been restricted from operating an vehicle as long as they're not on public property. I started driving a tractor at 7 years old, and was either 9 or 10 when I first drove a truck - all on a farm - nothing illegal about that at all. Why should the use of a gun be any different, as long as an parent or other adult provides the proper safety & usage training?

        •  We DO have the same controls (4+ / 0-)

          License are generally required to carry guns in public.  Some states allow for the open display of a carried gun in public, but many do not.  

          Liability insurance is a non starter for several reasons.  This equine has been flogged several times in multiple other diaries.

          There are plenty of shooting while intoxicated laws.  In most states you can't consume alcohol at all while possessing a weapon in public.  This law is more strict that the vehicle equivalent.

          There are age laws.  While children are permitted to use guns, they are not permitted to buy them.  The premise is that gun use is something that must be supervised by an adult.

    •  It depends upon what you mean by proposed (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ToeJamFootball, PavePusher, ancblu

      legislation.  An AWB, capacity limits, liability insurance, registration, etc very much do threaten every aspect of the right to keep and bear arms that i choose to exercise.

      My apologies, but I don't understand the point of this diary.
      The main point to the diary is that one can not give the anti-gunners the guarantee that they seek because life comes without any such guarantee.  This nation, founded on the principles of liberty, justice, enshrines the ability to exercise rights, including the right to keep, carry, and use guns, until such time as a person has demonstrated that they are no longer entitled to that right.

      It doesn't matter if the anti-gunners don't like it.  They are just going to have to trust that the majority of the others around them are good people, even those who chose to carry a gun.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site