Why are gun owners afraid to admit they own guns?

[DutchJazzer]

Honestly, I have no clue. I've never really thought about it. If you were required to take safety classes, etc, I'd be a lot more open to it.

would you require safety class for freedom of speech?

 

[DutchJazzer]

I think in a nation where gun rights are part of our founding documents we should be teaching gun safety and basic gun competency in high school.

we need less government controlled education not more!

 

[Stoked]

Honestly, I have no clue. I've never really thought about it. If you were required to take safety classes, etc, I'd be a lot more open to it.

There was a thread on cougar board about someone down at Wheeler farm who pulled a gun to get his kid on a hay ride.

https://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=17527393

If that story is true, then that person should be in jail. That person should not be carrying a gun.

I'd have to learn more before I could make a final judgement, but I'd say this:

Extreme punishment for breaking guns laws. If that story is true, then lots of jail time for that. Let the marijuana users out and put the crazy gun brandishers in.

Licensing, with classes, etc with the ability to carry and conceal.

I don't see why anyone ever would need to open carry. There is no need for that, other than to intimidate and be a horse's ***.

Then, each state could further restrict from there if they see fit. I'm ok with state's rights.

This right here is why so many gun owners oppose registration.

Because now it's also:

Registration w/license
Required classes
No open carry
"Extreme" punishment
Increased potential to lose a right

They see it as the road to the restriction, and possibly the removal, of a constitutional right.

For me personally I have long supported requiring a shooting test in order to get a CCW. I partially agree on your punishment remark (depends on each case) and I support open carry,

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

You answered your own question. Those that want a registry generally do want to take people's guns away from them. You would have no problem with the government using the gun registry to round up all the guns or maybe just "assault weapons". I bet you would vote for a politician that advocated for it.

You're being intellectually dishonest. Ultimately you would like to see guns banned. You see a registry as a step in the right direction. Other people disagree with you. They don't want guns banned. You call them crazy for thinking that your ultimate intentions are exactly what they are.

I am not oppossed to a registry and would probably suppport one, but I have no desire to take people's guns away from them. I think it's pretty well estabslished that the Constitution provides the right for citizens to possess and own firearms (although I do not think this includes ALL types of firearms). And, unlike many of the people on the right who say they love the Constitution--until it's not convenient to love it, I believe all, including this, Constitutional rights should be protected. I just don't see things such as registries, background checks, and such prudent measures to constitute an unreasonable burden on the exercise of those rights (although I'm not 100% certain of the registry, I can think of scenarios in which this might not be a good idea and am open to being swayed against it).

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

This right here is why so many gun owners oppose registration.

Because now it's also:

Registration w/license
Required classes
No open carry
"Extreme" punishment
Increased potential to lose a right

They see it as the road to the restriction, and possibly the removal, of a constitutional right.

For me personally I have long supported requiring a shooting test in order to get a CCW. I partially agree on your punishment remark (depends on each case) and I support open carry,

So, is this your typical slippery slope type of fallacious reasoning, or are these legitimate concerns? Until demonstrated otherwise, and understanding something of the fanaticism and unreasonablness of the 2nd Amendment devotees, I'll assume the former.

 

[Stoked]

So, is this your typical slippery slope type of fallacious reasoning, or are these legitimate concerns? Until demonstrated otherwise, and understanding something of the fanaticism and unreasonablness of the 2nd Amendment devotees, I'll assume the former.

You can view that any way you want but it is the real POV of many gun owners. I think that it is a slope but due to the tons of court cases and constitution it's not that slippery.

I'm not worried about guns being taken away. It won't get to that point as proven, IMO, through American history and even if it did I think it would spark armed revolt. Civil war, I really do.

Personally, I am for "universal" background checks, linking mental health records to background checks which can potentially lead to a waiting period and a more extensive mental health screening (depending on the "illness"), requiring shooting for a CCW license and that license to be valid nation wide.

 

[green]

I think in a nation where gun rights are part of our founding documents we should be teaching gun safety and basic gun competency in high school.

So, you are for expanding school hours, raising teacher's pay, and hiring more teachers?

 

[green]

This right here is why so many gun owners oppose registration.

Because now it's also:

Registration w/license
Required classes
No open carry
"Extreme" punishment
Increased potential to lose a right

They see it as the road to the restriction, and possibly the removal, of a constitutional right.

For me personally I have long supported requiring a shooting test in order to get a CCW. I partially agree on your punishment remark (depends on each case) and I support open carry,

Eh. It's a gun. It's a very dangerous weapon/tool. Why would licensing them and requiring safety classes lead to taking away a constitutional right? That's illogical. That is fear mongering.

One path is intelligent and follows common sense. One path is unintelligent and follows fear.

I haven't seen a good reason for open carry. And "the holster makes me uncomfortable" isn't a good reason. Why would you need to carry a gun?

 

[green]

I am not oppossed to a registry and would probably suppport one, but I have no desire to take people's guns away from them. I think it's pretty well estabslished that the Constitution provides the right for citizens to possess and own firearms (although I do not think this includes ALL types of firearms). And, unlike many of the people on the right who say they love the Constitution--until it's not convenient to love it, I believe all, including this, Constitutional rights should be protected. I just don't see things such as registries, background checks, and such prudent measures to constitute an unreasonable burden on the exercise of those rights (although I'm not 100% certain of the registry, I can think of scenarios in which this might not be a good idea and am open to being swayed against it).

I agree with all this. You can lose your constitutional rights. You should have a right to a gun, when you are responsible enough for one. Take a class. Register your weapons. Re-take classes every three years. Done. If you commit a felony, you lose your right. If you stalk someone, you lose your right. If you commit a crime where you use violence, you lose your right.

How is that asking too much?

 

[green]

You can view that any way you want but it is the real POV of many gun owners. I think that it is a slope but due to the tons of court cases and constitution it's not that slippery.

I'm not worried about guns being taken away. It won't get to that point as proven, IMO, through American history and even if it did I think it would spark armed revolt. Civil war, I really do.

Personally, I am for "universal" background checks, linking mental health records to background checks which can potentially lead to a waiting period and a more extensive mental health screening (depending on the "illness"), requiring shooting for a CCW license and that license to be valid nation wide.

So, you agree that gun owner's fears are not founded in reality. That is the whole point of this thread.

 

[Stoked]

I’ve never gotten this.


I don’t own a gun. I have owned guns before and I will probably own guns in the future. I have no cares if you own one or not. BUT, why do gun owners freak out when they are asked if they own a gun?


Aren’t their guns recorded when they buy them? Why the fear of admiting you are a gun owner? I don’t understand it.


Who is going to come and take away your guns? Why do you care if a Dr. asks if you own a gun?


Maybe I just don’t understand. can any of you, who own guns and don’t like to tell people about it, help me understand this phenomenon?


Enlighten me.

So, you agree that gun owner's fears are not founded in reality. That is the whole point of this thread.

So you do understand you just don't agree, great. What I was doing as explaining their hang ups. I can understand them just fine, even if I don't agree or think it's silly. Just like how I find your dismissal of their fears of governmental over reach (AKA gun confiscation)as "unintelligent" to be silly.

I've posted 2-3 times already where I stand.

 

[Stoked]

So, you are for expanding school hours, raising teacher's pay, and hiring more teachers?

No

Absolutely yes, I would double a teachers pay. I would dramatically alter what is taught and how. No need to increase the hours IMO.