The 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings caused several states and cities to pass strict gun control measures. In response, state lawmakers in gun friendly states in the South and West passed bills that would strengthen Stand Your Ground laws and allow weapons in most public places. In 2014, 21 states passed laws that expanded the rights of gun owners allowing them to possess firearms in churches, bars, schools and college campuses. The federal government has not passed any gun control measures since the 1994 Brady Bill and 42 states now allow the possession of assault rifles. In the U.S. two-thirds of all gun deaths are suicides and in 2010 there were 19,000 firearm suicides and 11,000 firearm homicides.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Show more types:
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Electoral District (2011):
These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of Gun Control
@8YVYRH43yrs3Y
only if they are legal to ow a gun
@37FS3MQ5yrs5Y
No, mentally ill and criminals can also be in danger, and have a right to self-protection.
@37FS3MQ4yrs4Y
No, and mentally ill and criminals can also be in danger, and have a right to self-protection.
@37FS3MQ4yrs4Y
No, and mentally ill and criminals should be able to purchase guns for their protection.
@6HDD83R4yrs4Y
Support and defend gun rights (where concealed and open carry firearms (i.e. semi-automatic firearms) and other weapons are allowed to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who are also officially state or U.S. territorial residents over 21 years of age and are legally and officially licensed, at the same time, enact a type of gun control, where acquiring, possessing and carrying firearms is limited to those who are mentally and physically competent, officially and legally trained and licensed, and currently not members or associate members, fellow traveler, sympathizers, … Read more
@8JPYDGH4yrs4Y
No they should take away some restriction.
@8XVVHDP3yrs3Y
No, encourage strict background checks, increase penalties for gun-related crimes, and regulate private gun markets instead
@heatherdvdprincess3yrs3Y
Yes and no.
End the gun show loophole.
Do not require a course for a license to own a gun, or else it will be limited by income, time (doctors may be too booked to class the class, for example), and supply of teachers and spaces in each class.
No discrimination on a religious basis. Even Muslim terrorists are likely to lie about their religion or get a gun illegally anyway.
Make sure it is possible for people with mental health issues to get it, provided that their condition is controlled well enough.
People who have gone to a mental hospital before should not be disqualified from having a… Read more
@riddlecongress5yrs5Y
We need to enforce current laws better and have background checks for private sales go through FFL dealers with the exception of Family/inheritance transfers, i.e. close the gun-show loophole.
@8KH79S24yrs4Y
Yes, they should do a background check first.
@LangworthyUS9th4yrs4Y
No repeal the Brady Bill, 68 Gun Control Act, and the NFA
@8PRKY7Q4yrs4Y
No, we should abolish many gun laws but always keep the 2nd amendment
@8SGXQ5C4yrs4Y
NO and 16 year old's should be allowed to keep and bear arms in accordance with the constitution
@8SGXQ5C4yrs4Y
No and 16 year old's should be allowed to keep and bear arms in accordance with the second amendment
@8SVGQV94yrs4Y
Yes, require more thorough background tests.
@8V2C9ZY4yrs4Y
They way I think of this Is if my family was armed it would be only for protection but then again if everyone were to have the same reason then some of them would not be true and would endanger others
@8XC79HW3yrs3Y
Yes, because guns will save lives and reduce crimes.
@8YFXWT53yrs3Y
yes they should require a strict background check
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
