Should there be more restrictions on the current process of purchasing a gun?
Yes, require strict background checks, psychological testing, and training
“"assault" weapons are a necessary measure of self-defense in some situations as a handgun is not as effective to a lesser trained individual past 10 or so yards. we are already required to have background checks and to take tests to ensure that we are competent to handle a firearm.”
I have a few issues with your argument (while it is clearly well-thought out and reasonable). You are correct, many people can find ways to acquire firearms illegally, one example of this being the 16 year old 2022 school shooter Ethan Crumbley. However, while I am not old enough to purchase a firearm and thus haven't gone through this process, I would hope or advocate for a large part of the testing to revolve around properly containing the weapon in a locked safe or drawer. As for your argument about the effectiveness of a handgun at increasing distances, I would argue that most self-d… Read more
I agree that safety and weapon containment are critical, it's also crucial to acknowledge that criminals rarely follow such rules. Therefore, increased regulation could disproportionately affect law-abiding citizens, while criminals continue to obtain firearms illicitly.
On the point of self-defense scenarios, it's important to realize that it isn't always as cut and dry as home invasions or late-night assaults. For instance, the 1992 Los Angeles riots demonstrated that sometimes, larger-capacity firearms are necessary for self-defense. Many Korean business owners used rifles,… Read more