Serious Gun Control Compromise?

OK Sup Forums what do you think of this.

1. Eliminating federal bore limits and "sporting purposes" limitation on imports
2. Allow dealers to sell to out of state residents.
3. Repeal handgun ban for 18-20 y/o
4. Open the machine-gun registry to post 1986 guns
5. Ban unwarranted searches of FFL dealers properties.
6. Repeal gun ban on people with restraining orders.

In exchange for...
1. Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.
2. Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
3. Make the Instant-Check system digital, more inclusive of records and a quick yes/no result.
4. Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.

What do you think?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/MCSySuemiHU
youtube.com/watch?v=B-xQtdu6aOg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

SHALL

SHALL
NOT

ME SAY

SHALL NOT

SHALL NOT
BE
IN
MOTHERFUCKIN
FRINGED

NOT

If you can't be trusted with a gun, you don't belong in society

Here's a better compromise. We repeal all the gun laws and in return we don't prosecute gun grabbers for treason if they agree to shut their fucking pie holes about grabbing guns.

Also, here's one for you.

Give us back our goddamn cake, but open up NICS to the public and allow us to run our own background checks instead of getting cucked by FFLs.

>1. Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.
>2. Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
>3. Make the Instant-Check system digital, more inclusive of records and a quick yes/no result.
>4. Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.

Remove these and you have my vote

clever bait desu

seconded.

oh boy guess everybody forgot the "serious" part

How about this: blah blah blah blah blah.

>1. Prohibit
What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED don't you understand fuckwit?

>people who negligently shoot themselves in the foot should own a gun

>compromising on a right
get fucked

We are serious.

Now fuck off.

Why should we compromise?

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Or maybe this: restrict gun sales to conservatives only. Liberalism is a psychiatric condition and those sociopaths should not have guns.

pretty sure you can take away liberties due to criminal convictions m'kay

My rights are not up for compromise.

Nope.

you do realize you can some things by giving up less important things.

thats the art of deal freindo

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

If you're scared of guns then go on a vacation to a flyover state and experience that not all of America is the same. BLACKS are the problem. If intercity populations were suddenly all white, 99% OF GUN RELATED DEATHS WOULD DISAPPEAR

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED YOU MOTHER FUCKERS.

NO COMPROMISE.

YOU WANT IT.....COME AND TAKE IT.

That's ok. They will take it anyway. They just wanted to offer a compromise so that you would give a little more up freely. It makes it easier to take the rest later.

If you compromise on your rights, you don't deserve your rights. How about we have serious signposting control compromise starting with you OP?

So say it with me: SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

You don't deal with rights. You eliminate threats to them.

>machine guns GTG again
>can only have 15 round mags

dropped, kys, yadda yadda you know the drill

Guns should be unregulated.

Anything the military has I should have.

If you disagree with me then we will settle this with pistols at dawn.

Come on guys. How are they going to build a utopian society of happy little slaves if you won't give up your guns? It's not fair. In the name of fairness at least share a few bullets with them...preferably sharp end first and moving really fast.

>almost every police officer would be disqualified from owning a gun
Guess we need some """""reasonable""""" exemptions then ;)

No because of (4) - magazines.

NO MORE COMPROMISES.

Is SHALL NOT the whiteguy version of WE WUZ?

give them an inch, they'll take a million miles.

I am not sure I agree with the "anything the military has" argument. The military is not allowed to deploy on US soil, so no American should be allowed to deploy the same weapons on American soil either. But the policing agencies have major weaponry and anything they have should be allowed to civilians as well. If Obama has the right to be defended by automatic weapons, drones, etc, than so do I. If the police are allowed to roll around in tanks, than I have the same right.

In my country we say: "Give your hand and they'll take your arm."
Accept this shit and, in 10 years, they'll push for more regulations, limitations and all that.

>Serious Gun Control Compromise?
>OK Sup Forums what do you think of this.

>1. Eliminating federal bore limits and "sporting purposes" limitation on imports
retarded, lowers demand for us firearm industry, lowers demand for imperial calibers
>2. Allow dealers to sell to out of state residents.
retarded,
>3. Repeal handgun ban for 18-20 y/o
retarded,
>4. Open the machine-gun registry to post 1986 guns
not necessary
>5. Ban unwarranted searches of FFL dealers properties.
possible
>6. Repeal gun ban on people with restraining orders.
diff in every state, in mine they confiscate and return seized itmes


>In exchange for...
>1. Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.
unconstitutional, unenforceable
>2. Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
unenforceable
>3. Make the Instant-Check system digital, more inclusive of records and a quick yes/no result.
possible
>4. Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.
unenforceable

>What do you think?
the stuff that is possible violates state rights, fuck off cunt. statehood is not going anywhere, go back to school faggot

Gun owners have been having to give up "less important things" for fifty years, and we've never gotten ANYTHING in return for it

The group that wants gun control is the same that wants to "transform" America. They are willing to use force, manipulation, and lies, because they know better than we do what is good for us. How strange that they want to disarm the people, right?

>i will never be american proud of 2nd amendment

hold on to your guns ameribros this cant be told too many times. you still have hope

KYS

>Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS WON'T AFFECT CRIMINALS JUST BOB DOWN THE STREET WITH A CLEAN RECORD

>Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.
So 15 rounds is perfectly safe but 16 rounds is super deadly and should be regulated more heavily?
Arbitrary bullshit meaningless law

Rest of that seems reasonable, also add just get rid of the NFA all together and have national reciprocity for carry permits
Also add an amendment to the 2nd amendment saying that any elected politician or government official that advocates gun control shall be arrested and tried for treason for failing to uphold the Constitutional oath they swore.

>SHER NOT BE IFRINGBBBED!!!!1!

Time for a lesson in the constitution.

>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Where is the right to SELL a gun?

> nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

damn looks like your liberties can be deprived if convicted of a crime.

Checked and yes, yes it is. But I don't care.

>Mag restrictions

Watch this video and then hang your head in shame you fucking idiot.

youtu.be/MCSySuemiHU

I don't give a fuck about your dumb argument. I wasn't asking, I'm demanding.

>Where is the right to SELL a gun?
I believe that falls under the shall not be infringed part. It's my personal property that I paid for with my own money that I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with

>congress cant regulate commerce

Nobody can refute this

Only interstate commerce. They have no business being involved between private citizens in the same state

When push comes to shove, you'll find that we 2nd Amendment supporters have the advantage. No more compromise. It's our way or nothing.

I'm done listening to gun control idiots. We are not going to compromise anymore.

Change #1 to:
Anyone who uses a gun to commit a violent crime (from misdemeanor assault to capital murder) or causes severe injury/loss of life to another through gross criminal negligence are prohibited from owning one. Ever.

For dumb negligent shit like accidental discharge leading to self-inflicted injury or 3rd party property damage, leaving it unsecured in a place where someone else might gain access to it, and other dumb shit where someone could've potentially be injured, confiscation and license suspension for up to 6 months, with remedial firearms training required for reinstatement.

WELL REGULATED before SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

#4 should be removed because banning guns based on features has been proven to be asinine.

>lul

>products that intend to cross state lines

lrn2law

United States v. Darby Lumber Co.

There are dozens and dozens and dozens of firearms related laws on the books already; both federal and state, regarding purchase, sale, transfer, transport etc. etc. etc. etc. ETC.

We don't have a gun problem in America. If normies would even bother to look at the statistics for crime, they would (hopefully) realize that we have a stupid nigger/gang banger problem in America.

Leave me and my right to ownership alone you fucking commie.

For a misdemeanor? No, for a full on, hard core felony? Yes. Those are two entirely different realms of criminality.

All but Exchange #4 is good. mag size is a moot point. 5 15 50 rounds. doesnt matter. and #6 should go.

can you read mother fucker? simple sentences... small word?


why the fuck would you ask his?

No.

>compromise
>on gun control

yeah no, I'll just shoot you.

The US does not need compromise on Gun laws.

The US needs to bring back education on firearms. Liberals have no clue how firearms work let alone what makes them different from eachother. There are people who honestly think that Full Auto is legal without the 20G taxstamp.

NRA needs to put some money into education programs again, because the fear and refusal to learn about firearms is one of the leading issues in America today.

>Those are two entirely different realms of criminality.

and yet both crimes

sorry, i dont want retards who dont know gun safety having a gun

...

>Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.
could easily be manipulated by legalese

>Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
impossible to enforce. useless.

> Make the Instant-Check system digital, more inclusive of records and a quick yes/no result.
don't have a problem with this, gun stores already use NICS anyway.

>Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.
fuck no. what the hell does it matter if I can shoot 10 rounds or 100? you are literally saying that killing 1 or 10 is fine, but killing more than 10 people is bad. the size of the magazine and 'probability of' is all speculative bullshit and reminds me of stupidity from people like that kike nancy pelosi.

>Regulate magazine sizes and increase the amount of unnecessary and inneffectual background checks.
What would you benefit from doing this?

Being guilty of a misdemeanor and being retarded are not correlated, derp.

The Judicial, via the police are designed to extort. The system is already biased toward a guilty verdict. A misdemeanor is far easier to pursue in court than a felony would be. Likewise, it is far easier for police officer to cite a misdemeanor. Having something like this that would allow the state to strip you of your right, is ripe for abuse.

Instead of making it that complicated, just do this one:
Each state will be given a (non-occupation) total gun ban (binding) referendum. Maximum democracy, people hating on the result leaves state.

Nah, federal government wants total control. That would never happen

None of that is going to stop someone from illegally acquiring a gun. None of that is going to stop niggers from being niggers in the presence of law enforcement. If someone wants to kill you, they are going to do it in any way they can. No one needs a gun to do horrible things. Humans are creative and too clever for their own good.

Sure as hell sounds like a decent place to start from

Nothing.

The biggest problem with creating laws is there are going to be people who will not follow these laws. Ironicly these people are the reason the laws were created in the first place.

Restricting the amount of ammunition one can hold really has little effect for two reasons
1. The magazines are already out there. If this was passed there would just be panic buying and re-selling for massive profit. Anyone who really wanted one would have one.

2. At demonstrated yesterday with the Dallas sniper who used a SKS with an internal mag the restrictive laws were useless as this was a firearm that would be untouched in nearly every gun infringing state.

As for increased background checks I dont even know what that means. WeedMan called for "increased background checks" for Canadian gun owners but failed to say how that is any different then the background checks already in place.

I am all for background checks. I don't think a convicted Felon should be able to own a firearm.

The thing is the GOP introduced a true compromise bill and the Democrats voted it down because they didn't get things 100% their way

Liberals don't want "compromise". They want to win. They don't care about the people in any way, they just want to pass their agendas

All this defense for firearms and none for explosives, artillery, and Electronic warfare devices like jammers?

Step it up, Sup Forums.

For a while I thought that the Liberals were genuinely sincere about stopping violence, just woefully misinformed and misguided.

Seeing them shoot down the Republican terror watchlist bills when they knew the Democrat versions had no chance of passing enlightened me as to my naivete. They do not care about human life, whatsoever.

>1. Eliminating federal bore limits and "sporting purposes" limitation on imports
>retarded, lowers demand for us firearm industry, lowers demand for imperial calibers

oh boo-hoo, the US gun industry might have some one to compete with for once

>explosives
Not hard to build a pipe bomb or improvise a pressure cooker
>artillery
If you have the cash you can own canons, tanks, planes etc
>Electronic warfare devices like jammers
That's why guns are so important. They are organic machines immune to outside electronic interference, which is why no one likes the idea of smart guns

>if they intend to cross interstate lines then they have to go through a FFL, just as is currently the law. There is no reason to regulate person to person transfers in state

The Bill of Rights does not GIVE rights, you fucking kike. It explicitly limits the powers of the Government to take rights away.

>compromise

Get out.

>mocking of how southerners speak

I wonder who (((you))) could be?

>1. Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.

>Someone who makes a minor (misdemeanor) mistake no longer has rights

None of those proposed trade offs are at all worth it. I'm tired of fucking compromise.

>leaf
>begging to please please let him trade freedom for "security"
there's a reason we let england keep you, cucknadia

There are no Compromises you Bootlicking faggot

My point is now that the police are using robots to kill criminals, the right to bear arms like explosives and RF jammers is more important than ever.

I would be fine with that. I mean, it's literally part of their job to handle guns responsibly. If they can't do that they shouldn't have that job.

Once again misusing the term well regulated.

>My point is now that the police are using robots to kill criminals
They basically strapped a shotgun with slug onto an RC car and drove it up to the guy and set it off. It wasn't some Terminator shit

Yes, it's like that TODAY. And even today that's bad enough because it gives TYRANTS too much power. They're going to use robots now, and the people have the RIGHT to weaponry to defend themselves and even overthrow those tyrants.

Explosives to disable the robots (bullets won't work like on humans).

RF Jammers to prevent aggressive use of the EM spectrum to oppress the people.

>Being guilty of a misdemeanor and being retarded are not correlated, derp.

misdemeanor negligence is correlated with being retarded.

>Explosives to disable the robots (bullets won't work like on humans).
I disagree

youtube.com/watch?v=B-xQtdu6aOg

And did you forget the government has been using drones for years?

>1. Eliminating federal bore limits and "sporting purposes" limitation on imports
why? what do you want to get?
>2. Allow dealers to sell to out of state residents.
how about accountability of those weapons? dealers will be responsible?
>3. Repeal handgun ban for 18-20 y/o
yep we need more niggers with legal weapons on our streets
>4. Open the machine-gun registry to post 1986 guns
what for?
>5. Ban unwarranted searches of FFL dealers properties.
so they can hide illegal shit beforehand?
>6. Repeal gun ban on people with restraining orders.
the fuck?
>In exchange for...
>1. Prohibit people charged for misdemeanor negligence or unlawful discharge of a gun from owning one.
excuse me but you are prohibite already from owning a gun with criminal records related to listed things
>2. Ensure all gun transfers are made with FFL dealers conducting a background check.
that's the common sense for the good of gun owners you dummy
>3. Make the Instant-Check system digital, more inclusive of records and a quick yes/no result.
have you seen those paper records? are you going to help scan and ocr everything?
>4. Regulate any magazine over 15 rounds as a Title II item, but grandfather all existing ones.
either all or nothing

No. If you are not currently serving a sentence for a criminal conviction or committed to a mental health facility, no rights should be denied to you. If you are too dangerous to exercise your rights, you are too dangerous to be allowed to roam free in society.

The military uses drones. The military is legally prohibited from law enforcement inside the country, and they actually follow those laws.

Now local law enforcement is using "drones". That's not to say it was okay last week when it was just the military, because it wasn't okay. But now it's like the threat went from across town to across the street.

If you think it's going to be bad enough trying to fight against police tyranny with all their swat gear, imagine how much worse it will be when you have to go through a dozen robots just to get to the fleshy tyrants themselves.

How would you ensure #2?
What is the point of making machine guns legal, if you are limited to 15 rounds?

Answer those questions, and I'll respond.

Well the reason the Continental Army and the militias behind them won against the powerful British military was because of guerilla warfare

I agree that fighting them directly would be stupid. That's why you have to have different tactics.
You want to use your robots to kill dissenters of the state? Fine. I'll kill your family in their sleep. I'll shoot you through your bathroom window while you're taking a shit.
You want to turn the people into the enemy? We'll act like the enemy

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

>compromise

Here's a compromise: Go fuck yourself. Shall not be infringed.

>How would you ensure #2?

Obviously you cannot prevent it, but you attach criminal penalties to failure to comply as a deterrent.

>What is the point of making machine guns legal, if you are limited to 15 rounds?

In this hypothetical, the 100 round magazine and machine-guns will both be title II items, they can both be owned by qualifying people.

>but you attach criminal penalties to failure to comply as a deterrent.
But it's already illegal for criminals to buy and possess guns, and the penalties are pretty stiff as it is. How would making it more illegal help?