Should people be limited to two guns only?

[whisky]

Say you have two already, you want another one, thats fine, you just need to hand in one of the ones you already have to get it.

You still have the right to bear arms, you just dont get to have an entire arsonel at your disposal.

 

[Mirah]

How about people with gun collections? Like hunting rifles and what not? Are you talking about a certain type of gun? OMG My ignorance is showing. I obviously know nothing about this.
Are you talking of concealed weapons only?

I'm not sure how I feel about limiting it. I choose not to carry, I would not interfere with someone else's right to carry or have whatever guns (within legal) they wish to have.

I just think it is unfortunate when certain individuals have left their guns unattended and children have lost their lives as a result of it. ( 2 within months in WA state) that is just carelessness and recklessness. And one was a police officer.

 

[Punisher]

Limiting the amount of guns you are able to legally own will do JACK SHIT to stop this problem.

Why?

BECAUSE CRIMINALS DON'T FUCKING FOLLOW THE FUCKING LAWS!!!!

I'm tired of this stupid-ass rationale. "Less guns, less chances of shootings." That's how a kid thinks. It's like saying "If we lock up cars at night, no one will be able to steal them anymore."

Bad analogy, but you get the point.

What we need are plainclothes security guards armed and in crowd situations like movie theaters, malls, festivals, schools, etc. You have a crazy fuck decide to open fire, you have five or six armed guards who you don't even know are there until they're in play, taking down the sick fuck.

 

[whisky]

Maybe I am mistaken, but the vast majority of shooting sprees have been done by people with no previous criminal records who own their guns legally.

They dont become criminals until they start opening fire with in almost all cases, many legally owned guns.

I'm not saying just having two guns would stop shooting sprees, but it would certainly make them less of "desperado" style shoot guns till empty, throw down and start with more, scenarios.

 

[whisky]

Maybe I am mistaken, but the vast majority of shooting sprees have been done by people with no previous criminal records who own their guns legally.

They dont become criminals until they start opening fire with in almost all cases, many legally owned guns.

I'm not saying just having two guns would stop shooting sprees, but it would certainly make them less of "desperado" style shoot guns till empty, throw down and start with more, scenarios.

 

[jack]

Say you have two already, you want another one, thats fine, you just need to hand in one of the ones you already have to get it.

You still have the right to bear arms, you just dont get to have an entire arsonel at your disposal.

What????? Waht state you live in?

 

[jack]

Maybe I am mistaken, but the vast majority of shooting sprees have been done by people with no previous criminal records who own their guns legally.

They dont become criminals until they start opening fire with in almost all cases, many legally owned guns.

I'm not saying just having two guns would stop shooting sprees, but it would certainly make them less of "desperado" style shoot guns till empty, throw down and start with more, scenarios.

Look elsewhere. These are people who've planned this carefully in our midst. There's a foot thick file on the Aurora shooter.

Seriously.

srslee

 

[Dual]

Why would you even need a single gun? What use is there for a second? Those who live by the gun die by the gun, don't they? :S: