The Gun Thread

While you're on, are you seeing ANY 30 carbine for sale?

Strict gun bill on Oregon ballot will cause 'greater risk of violence,' harmful to public safety, critics warn

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/st...k-violence-harmful-public-safety-critics-warn

Irritated with my state of Oregon right now. There is a measure on our ballet, Measure 114, that wants to force us to have a permit to buy guns. Not only that, but a person who wants to buy a gun would have to take classes in shooting before buying a gun...but they aren't provided a gun for said classes. How does a person take such a required class if they can't buy a gun and aren't provided one? Not to mention it will be difficult to find a place that provides the classes as they aren't widely available. Basically sounds like they're trying to make it impossible to be a gun owner.
If it passes (and with how liberal the state is, I imagine it will. sigh) it will be going against federal law and, hopefully, be taken to the Supreme Court.

Gun permits are a thing for a reason. For the reasons I described above

Gun permits fly in the face of the law which says bearing arms, "Shall not be infringed."
No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

As an aside, we go through background checks (still an infringement, I would say, but gotta do it so...). Those background checks are supposed to stop the yahoos from running around armed. A permit, especially what Oregon is proposing, will only make it nigh on impossible for the good guys to arm themselves while those loonies run around terrorizing people.

Do you think it's a good idea for violent criminals to be armed? Because that's what happens if you get rid of permit laws.
Also supreme Court gets to decide what is or isn't constitutional so the second amendment doesn't mean guns can't be regulated... it says well regulated right there in the amendment

I think if more "good guys" were armed and trained to actually defend themselves the violent criminals would be less likely to try anything.
Oregon has never had permit laws (except for conceal carry). We have background checks and if anything, that should be enough. We don't need a permit when we're legally allowed to own a gun via the constitution.

Yeah it says well regulated right there in the amendment meaning gun laws can be regulated

Gun permits are a thing for a reason.
Allowing just any Yahoo to run around armed is not a good idea.
Remember Omar Mateen, the FBI knew he was a terrorist and he was able to purchase an AR-15 with no problem in murder 80 Americans.
Vetting processes exist for a reason. People who should not be legally armed include, people with violent priors, people who have ties to terrorist organizations, people whose eyesight is so bad they can't even see the target. I am all for law abiding citizens being able to legally arm themselves but putting guns in the wrong hands is a liability

You are willfully ignorant on this matter and twisting the meaning of the consitution. Obviously nothing I can say will get through to you so I'm going to decline any further conversation with you on the matter.

Again.. it says WELL REGULATED for a reason.
People think the government can't regulate firearms but by that logic we should let a two year old walk around armed.

Do you think it's a good idea for violent criminals to be armed?

Another thing to take into consideration is that an untrained person with a gun is potentially just as dangerous as the criminal.

Do you think that violent criminals are going to follow the law? What kind of Pollyanna world would THAT be in?

Okay then let's just get rid of all laws since laws are pointless.

I think a training course should be required to legally carry because I don't want some untrained idiot popping off rounds in Walmart parking lot hitting people with stray bullets because he can't hit his Target..