OT Trump prematurely ejaculates

[ramAnag]

If I were a USA citizen I would be so entrenched in my opinion on this that whatever side of the fence I was ten years ago I would be now and I will be til I die - that's part of the problem. As an observer, a former gun owner (a 4/10) and first hand observer of two accidents with firearms, my recommendation would be: 1) Don't look to repeal the 2nd amendment, its political suicide - almost all my US friends are Democrats, almost all 'carry' or have a legal gun in the home, almost all would vote Republican if it meant retaining the right - so forget that as idealism. 2) Work towards a point where a test of reasonableness can be applied, ie what amount and type of firearms can one person reasonably need for legitimate means. 3) identify the areas of life where possession of firearms for 'legitimate' (in their eyes) such as personal defence/law enforcement/hunting (for game that is then eaten)/stock protection becomes possession for 'illegitimate' means such as person on person attack in all its forms. 3) for those areas of life, initiate a two pronged 'attack' - 3a) zero tolerance towards perps (whole life sentences for instance) and 3b) probably most importantly, address the root cause of each (type of) incident and make serious steps to reverse whatever behaviours/trends/cultures have given rise to it. Trouble is even as I write that, especially 3b, it just reads like complete fantasy. Whats your position?

My position takes three forms. Firstly I find it frustrating that you and GP (Ram59 is at least consistent) can seldom actually make your minds up, albeit for different reasons, and take a stance. You did the same thing over Brexit, both voting against it, both sometimes arguing against it but eventually coming out in some sort of vague support for it and, in GP’s case, regularly heaping scorn on those who continue to think it represents imminent disaster...or in your case suggesting that those who oppose gun control are nothing more than ‘idealists’. Take a stance that you believe in.

Decisions can be influenced by time and changing circumstances. No one in their right mind would have legalised the widespread selling of cigarettes and alcohol had they known what they know now. Conversely, 15 years ago it would have been difficult to believe that smoking in public places would have ever been banned and going even further back...in the late sixties/early seventies(?) the notion of any objection to drinking and driving and the use of breathalysers would have been opposed on the basis of some infringement of civil liberty. Unpopular legislation can be passed if the argument is strong.

I completely accept the greater need for landowners/farmers to own certain guns in the US. Beyond that and despite their ‘Wild West’ history, there is, imo, no justification for ordinary people to own a gun which they keep in the home and on their person and there is absolutely no need and no justification for individuals to have the right to own rapid fire automatic or semi automatic weapons. Things need to change, people need to - for want of a much, much better expression - stick to their (metaphorical) guns, and the US needs to have a rational, logical national debate about the issue.

For the sake of argument, and completely hypothetically, if we in the UK were now to try and change laws relating to gun control, ownership and availability to being like those in the USA would you support such change? Y/N...no pontificating...take a stance!