I support barring nuts and convicts from getting guns, and instant background checks to make sure they don't. I'm pretty sure i support the prohibitions of guns on planes too.(though i want the pilots to have them).

Beyond that, i don't support any gun laws.

I would add..

No age limit at all for buying any kind of gun. Children and adults alike.
All kinds of weapon available, also military issues like hand grenades etc.
All kinds of weapons should be available in any nearby convenient store.

Agree with most of the above and especially if someone is convicted of a violent felony or is mentally ill.

There does not need to be a law about firearms that go off when dropped. Do not believe that we have laws addressing this now. Its real simple... if a weapon does this the maker will correct it or no one will buy the gun and they go out of business!

Second, how and why can anyone equate to the same treatment for someone who for instance was convicted of fraud, or some other crime that is a felony but has nothing to do with violence?

I used to do some of the hiring at our airline. In the process I found out that there were more people than most would think working with us who were convicted felons. One of them was very senior and a check airman/instructor, a very high position in the company. He got busted with pot as a kid and took the hit, but really made the most out of his life after that. We lived in a state that restored his rights after his probation ended and I went out shooting with him often. Very nice guy and in no way did he deserve to have firearms restricted in ANY way in his life.

Instead of having a knee jerk reaction to things, maybe its time to think things over again.

Agree should be a distinction btwn violent and non-violent crimes.

But even for non-violent crimes, I can see prohibition against gun ownership for 5 years or so, *if* there's evidence that commission of a non-violent crime means one is more likely to commit a subsequent violent crime.

John,

Totally agree. Some accountant who fuched up the books and got nailed for a felony is not the same thing as a bank robber or someone who used a weapon in the commission of a violent crime.

I do not know the rules or regs but many states have laws that felons who have been off probation or out of jail more than 5-10 years have their rights restored. How far this goes I do not know.

Personally I would love to have someone like G.Gordon Liddy on my side as opposed to a bank robber. Both are convicted felons... but should not be treated as such in some areas.

Even though I don't personally own a gun I have no problem advocating the right to bear arms. That said I would also vote for harsher punishment to those who commit crimes with a gun - including the registered owner of said gun. My neighbor had a couple rifles hidden under his bed that were stolen when his house was broken into. Sloppy gun management in my book and thus if one of his guns get's ID'd in a crime he should also be partially responsible.

I don't agree with that at all.

They were hidden in a LOCKED HOUSE.

I know you were being sarcastic but I agree with all of that except the children part. :D

Thanks, Noah! I was afraid you would take me seriously. I am no American, I can not have a formed opinion on an issue in a country I don´t live in. I did not mean to offend anyone, but I could not resist the temptation either. :D

buy a .45, get a free Slurpee?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1214943474.jpg

No, buy a Slurpee, get a free .45

That would be a great deal. :)

but if you have a .45, Slurpees are always free I've found. it's a great deal!:D

Well, if you consider being incarcerated for armed robbery free...sure. :-P

I support background checks when you purchase a weapon.

I support a National Carry permit. One stop, pass a more intensive background check, fire arm safety class, much like the current carry permit and you can take a weapon with you anywhere but the Court, and on Airplanes.

Other than that I don't think we need anything. My understanding is that when you look at gun cases where a weapon was used in a crime the vast majority of them violate a existing gun law. Making new ones when we don't have enforcement on the existing ones is stupid.

I would also like add a restriction to illegal aliens and those who have overstayed their visas owning a firearm.

Joey....CA has a DROP TEST for Saturday Night Specials. It is just another ruse to make it more difficult to sell guns in the state.

What's wrong w/ a drop test for a firearm?

We establish certain minimum safety requirements for cars, motorcycles, airplanes, cellphones, etc - why not firearms?

Any quality firearm should pass a drop test. Any reputable manufacturer would not want to sell a firearm that didn't. And its not just cheap "Saturday Night Specials" that should be tested. E.g. Ruger, a high-quality manufacturer, has recalled some of their new SR-9 for this reason.

My beef w/ the California regulation is that, IIRC, each model of firearm must be re-certified every so many years, even if there have been no design changes. Some manufacturers don't bother to re-certify their older, discontinued models. This effectively reduces the supply of those older guns on the used market (since after a model drops off the certified list, those guns cannot be imported for sale into Calif). This tends to make the consumer purchase new guns. You can see why a manufacturer might like that . . .

I would agree with that one too, actually.

Strongly.

I don't really mind a drop test either. There's no reason that we need striker-fired weapons with no passive firing pin safety with today's technology. I wouldn't ban existing ones, by any means, but i don't see any reason why guns should be any different than cars wrt reasonable safety requirements.

You can't buy a gun legally if you're an illegal alien anyway. You have to be a citizen or have a green card. I'm not saying they really check into this, but the question is on the paperwork.