I have already heard people talking about just that recently..... ;)

I know somebody who did something wonderful. Trust me.

"Gun control proponents want legislation that will restrict access to firearms. The rationale for such legislation is to reduce accidental shootings and the criminal use of guns against people. But if harm reduction is the goal, policymakers should pause to consider how many crimes--murders, rapes, assaults, robberies--are thwarted by ordinary persons who were fortunate enough to have access to a gun. Gun control proponents cannot deny that people use guns successfully against criminals, but they tend to play down how often such events take place. The purpose of this map is to draw more attention to this aspect of the firearms policy debate. "

Guns and Self Defense | Cato Institute

MK ULTRA rears it's head again....:D

Or we could just do our southern neighbors. How is it working out down there?

Mexico

What's wrong with owners required to be within close proximity of their unlocked guns, ie, within eyesight or reaching distance? Otherwise lock em up.

Ancestor worship. The founders saw the musket as serious deadly force. And it was, in spite of the skill and time needed for each round. An assault rifle with high capacity clip is something even a brain damaged, misfit pantywaist can use for mass slaughter. Not sure what sort of sci-fi the founders were into or if it speculated about weapons of this sort.

I do agree that the 'gun-free' zones don't accomplish anything and could make the problem worse. And if I were a principal at any school, I think I'd find the idea of a revolver or two in a highly secure, quickly accessible safe an attractive idea. Some principals probably wouldn't.

But something in our belief system that guns will keep us safe has gone round the bend. Stats show over and over that guns in the house prevent an armed intruder less frequently than they're used for suicide or the killing of one family member by another, and by a wide margin IINM.

Any solutions won't be easy but I suspect there are many people like Lanza's mother who are clueless and delusional about their arsenal and its availability to others.

The human mind is funny in a weak kind of way. I recall as a 16 year old new kid in town fantasizing about commandeering the tank at the local armory and venting my wrath on my uncaring community. None would dare stand in the way of my prowess. I have no doubt that other immature souls feel the same way when they hold this or that assault rifle and imagine dispatching their foes.

I didn't have access to the tank but plenty of angry young misfits today have access to some serious weaponry.

It's never the right time to bring it up with NRAers for life.

An unregistered gun could not be traced to you. Im only talking about unregistered weapons that can be traced. Now if hey find DNA evidence I have you in jail on that.

You are more than welcome to leave your guns unsecure but when there involved in a crime where do my rights covenant play? All I am saying is that you will be held responsible for your guns. If your gun kills someone, you are responsible.

An unregistered gun can also be traced if the arrested suspect fingers you as the source.

I'm aware of that. However, it's probably people with guns who are creating the problems in the first place. The tail is wagging the dog here.....

No, it's realy quite rare. Anything that contains mutiple murders has usully been with long rifles or some description or another.

One of the main reasons we have far less gun crime here is simply because hand guns are restricted. You can own one but the basic belief is that it's not going to be used agaisnt anyone. With less hand guns available suddenly you have a far less gun mentality and far less gun deaths.

We still depend on the cops to sort stuff out for us if we feel threatened. You are allowed to use deadly force if needed but I rarely har of it. Yes, be have B&E's but most of the time no one is home. Your average thief isn't usually armed. I'm pretty sure that any gun crime will get you 5 years.

Almost none of the current population remembers when you could carry a hand gun around so it's simply not part of our every day life. Believe me, it's something you can get used to quite easily.

That's a pretty simplistic approach for a guy like you. Every revolution that involved weapons also included the use of them or the threat of using them.

So........ guns don't kill people, people kill people. I wonder how many times that sorry assed line of reasoning will be used?

There is no longer a registration here but you are still required to have a license to buy ammo. I have a POL ( posession only ) which allows me to own what I have but I can't buy more. Since the registraion is gone I think I will be able to buy privately but I would want to find out first.
A PAL is a license to buy a fire arm. You need a special restricted lisence to buy a hand gun or some restricted rifles. Full auto is banned.

When I go to buy shotgun shells they ask to see my paperwork. THey won't sell to me without it. I could buy it from someone so it's kind of limited that way. To get my license renewed they asked me all sorts of questions:
any criminal charges
changed jobs
been fired in last two years
taking any pills for depression
split up with wife or GF ( they have to sign the paper saying you're OK )
moved residence

Many other questions but all are designed to asess your risk factor. I got mine without problem but many people give up before they send it in because they know they won't qualify. The main difference being gun ownership is considered a privlegde here, not a 2nd A right.