Almost all of those are already in place for gun owners.
It is far, far harder to obtain a driver's license than purchase a handgun.
However, people don't buy guns (I am speaking of the average citizen that purchases a gun at a show or from a retailer legally) to kill people.
People don't buy cars to get into accidents with them either. We still require regulation over who drives them, and take away that when they cause other trouble.
Also, a majority of PEOPLE live in urban centers, where all firearms are banned. Apartments, condos and some neighborhoods have a zero-tolerance policy on firearms.
Your point? There is no reason why one would need to keep an assault rifle in their house in an urban area. Sure if you own land and can shoot on it safely. But not everyone does.
I was speaking of invasions when the homeowner was present. Sorry for not clarifying, I thought it was assumed
When a person pulls a gun, they are something around five times more likely to be injured than otherwise. I know there's a source Nichodemus brought up a while back. Though I pulled this out of Nerdsoft's post a few pages ago.
Gun homicide rates vs gun ownership ratesWhen your home has been invaded by an armed man, you are in a confrontation as soon as he sees you.
I do wonder about that. How many burglars would just turn tail and run? They're there because they want your stuff - they don't want to start a manhunt or get caught.
How would you go about stopping an intruder, assuming both of you were armed and you knew he was indoors?
I would call the police and wait, avoiding a confrontation. If it became likely, I would shout out before they knew where I was that I had called the police and they had better get moving.
In every situation, a disrespectful or rebellious student has come from a broken home.
Exaggeration/hyperbole. I'm aware of the statistics on fatherless homes btw. Children from them are 70% more likely to have behavioral problems. That does not translate to every child who misbehaves coming from a broken home. Nor does that even say 70% of them are from fatherless homes. It's just that they're 70% more likely than, if all other factors are held constant, than a home with a father.
Even if your assertion was true, your logic is that of ice cream sales cause shark attacks, because
obviously the ice cream is making the beach goers, who are hot and only go in the summer, that much more appetizing to the sharkies.
Um...that was basically a rant. I never claimed any of those things.
I know you didn't. I was referring to those who do claim those things. You know, the gun nuts who can and do get guns and think like that. Then we wonder why the hell we have these shootings.
I've heard of the suggestion that all firearms in home should be unloaded, locked in a secure location and incapacitated, i.e. slightly disassembled. That defeats all purpose of having a handgun for self-defense, which is why people buy them.
The problem with these kinds of blanket statements is they don't address individual cases. If you live alone, I see no problem with keeping a loaded gun in your bedside drawer. If you live with children, that's a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE idea.
Where do you draw the line to where guns are impossible to steal but also able to serve their purpose?
At the ownership level, teaching people to own them responsibly. Not just saying, "Welp! You haven't ever tried to murder someone or been cited for drug abuse! Here's your lethal weapon! Have fun!"
I have never had and never needed an evaluation (and I'm not going to take one), crimes from family members cannot prove anything about my character or actions, and legal citations would either appear on police records (if severe enough).
A psychological evaluation should be mandatory. There's a heavy stigma about going to a psychologist/psychiatrist when there should be.
The reason for family members is because if you live with one who has committed a crime, that's a risk because they then have access to YOUR gun. Likewise they can visit your home. Things like that should be inquired into and the people buying the gun should be made aware of that risk and taught how to reduce it.
Further, citations you receive from your place of employment for unruly behavior don't always go to the police. There could be signs allllll over that someone idiot who's irresponsible and prone to anger should have a gun that goes overlooked because they've never been cited by the police.
You can't prosecute a gun owner for property that was stolen from them and misused or used for illegal activity.
They should, if it was located in an easy to get spot. It's called negligence. Parents who have their guns stolen by kids that use them to go on shooting sprees are entirely responsible, both for not noticing their kid was having trouble and for leaving a lethal weapon within their reach.
My dad has a handgun because he's an airline pilot. It is kept hidden in his room, unloaded inside a locked bag, apart from the ammo. That's a safe gun. Inside a glass cabinet stored with the ammo is NOT.
Bad people will do bad things, regardless of how they get it done.
Then why do we have laws? Hmm? If criminals are just going to break them anyways? Do you realize how ridiculous the argument is, "well, dem criminals are just gonna get guns anyhowz, so let's make guns e-z to get!"
It's asinine, to say the least.
