Common Sense (Gun Control)

I posted an R2 argument and it was deleted 20hrs after I posted it. How strange. I will be more brief than I was before. In my view, Your final statement has conceded the debate to me. That is the only point I previously brought up and you accepted it. This should be noted by our readers, But I will expand to multiple points to see if there is any common sense gun control that you don't like. You have a strange idea of what "Common Sense" gun control is. Common sense refers to the fact that the forms of gun control it suggests are not hotly contested by the majority of the public. IE about 80% of the population when asked are FOR these things. One or two of these are a bit more contested than that, But exceptions can be made for these to mostly accept as well. The only ones who do not accept common sense gun control are extreme constitutional literalists who believe 'shall not be infringed' means we cannot make any laws surrounding guns at all. An AR Ban is not part of common sense gun control. It is on the fringe, It is not comfortably inside it, In my view. Arguments can be made for it, But if that is the only thing you're against then you aren't Con Common Sense Gun Control and you've lost the debate before you've started. 1. Common Sense Gun Control Policies. 1a. Strengthening Background Checks. If you look up where most mass shooters get their weapons, (1) you will notice a trend for the majority of them. They get their guns despite histories of violence, Psychiatric admittance, Problems in the military, Violent crime, Et cetera. Some are prohibited some kinds of guns but allowed to use others. Strengthening background checks consists largely of holding the FBI, Psychiatrists, The military, Judges, Et cetera to a higher standard of reporting these negatives on people's record so they can be prevented from getting guns. You have already said you agree to this. 1b. Ending Private Sales/Gun Show Loopholes In many states, Private sellers don't have to run background checks. If you agree with background checks to screen for crimes et cetera listed above, You should also be for this. 1c. Licenses/Permits A small step above background checks. This may require training with the weaponry before purchase, But not necessarily. We require licenses to operate dangerous vehicles, Additional tests for larger vehicles, Et cetera. Requiring training prior to allowing people to purchase guns is the same. This could be a lifetime certification that needs no renewal, And the 2nd gun you go to purchase would not require licensing. This has been shown to reduce crime directly with no corresponding increase in crime via other weaponry. (2) When these laws are lifted, It also shows crime increases afterwards. (2) These are not insignificant margins, And it is a fairly insignificant barrier to entry. 1d. 24-72 Hour Waiting Periods This is mostly to stop spur of the moment suicides as well as crimes of passion. A cooldown period. An exception could be made that if someone already owns a gun they are exempt from the waiting period, Because it would follow that this would not stop them if they already have a gun. 1e. Requiring Gun Safes for Households with Children Many shooting 'accidents' would be easily preventable if adults locked away their guns properly in households with children. CPS already notes many dangerous things about the household that constitutes a dangerous environment. Having legal grounds to prosecute parents whose children gain access to their weaponry should absolutely be mandatory. There are several mass shootings that have happened that would have been potentially prevented because of this. 2. The claim that guns save 2. 1m people a year. I'm going to need a source for this. If this includes cops, Then it is an irrelevant point. Cops will not be prevented from having access to guns. Cops with backgrounds of mental instability should not be cops. They can be replaced. 3. AR Ban. Hunting Rifles? As I said prior, AR bans are not under the umbrella of 'common sense. ' (3) Some fringe elements of people suggest banning all guns. This may be common sense to them, But it is not something the majority believes in as the majority does common sense reform. Hunting rifle have never been discussed outside of a total ban. "Gun Control" does not necessarily mean "Gun Elimination. " Either way, Most people accept hunters as an exception to these kind of things. Guns are a requirement for safety for many. To conclude, As my profile says, I'm Pro-Gun. I believe guns are mandatory to protect civilians from invasion of other countries, To protect themselves when the police cannot, To protect themselves from government, And for fun. Most freedoms, However, Come with a cost to life to pay for those freedoms. There are a lot of statistics people use to say guns should be eliminated that are fraudulent, Or flawed. I do not make those points. I make the point that these simple steps that pose no extreme difficulty to law abiding citizens can save a lot more innocent lives and are well worth the cost of 1. Waiting a few days before getting your first gun. 2. Taking a class on guns that would probably be tons of fun and save you money via better information. 3. Keeping your guns locked up away from your kids. None of these are particularly controversial points. If you wish to continue the debate, You have to have a problem with 1b-1e. You've already accepted 1a. Lets say for argument's sake that I have conceded an AR ban to you, Although I have stated why I don't put that under 'common sense' gun law. So now it is on you. What between 1b and 1e do you disagree with? If you accept 1a-1e or the majority of those, You are not con common sense gun control. Sources in comments (to try and make sure this one doesn't get deleted as well) May your thoughts be clear, -Thoht