Semi-Auto Sponsorship Program?

We do not need the second amendment to be infringed upon.
We need accountability and responsibility.
I think that we should have to have training and a sponsor to own, purchase or make semi auto firearms.
This is already the case for automatic weapons as far as i know.
This is the case if you go into the military and most all forms of weaponry employment.
This would cut down on gun ownership in cases on mental instability.
The training and sponsorship program could be implemented with help of the nra and one would have to have a certified owner/trainer to purchase semi-auto.
This along with a functioning nics system would be a determining factor when buying for ones self or as gift.
This law could be enforced and hold to account the gun holder,the seller and trainer.
With the possibility of jail time for others involved we would then see a severe effort being made all around to weed out those among us that possess unresponsively.
I believe that retailers would not be hurt in this process cause they would be subsidized by the training fees.
I look forward to both positive and negative input on the subject in order to create a better system than what we have now.

The help of the NRA?

The same NRA who has been taking Russian blood money to finance these terrorist attacks disguised as "school shootings".

The same NRA who has immature idiots like this moron (who should not have access to guns) committing deranged acts of anger for no rational reason.
www.mediamatters.org...

K~

a reply to: aethertek

i think you missed the point
this would not be dependent on the nra or any joe smashing stuff
the point you missed was the need for serious training for serious weaponery
your link was seriously lacking any supporting facts for your staetment and really serves to undermine the idea presented.
thanks for the knee jerk you should get that checked

We need nothing with exception to people to read the Bill of Rights.

Where it begins and ends.

originally posted by: aethertek
The help of the NRA?

The same NRA who has been taking Russian blood money to finance these terrorist attacks disguised as "school shootings".

The same NRA who has immature idiots like this moron (who should not have access to guns) committing deranged acts of anger for no rational reason.
www.mediamatters.org...

K~

Have anything other than a mouthpiece for Soros?

a reply to: neo96

that would help but the idea purposed does not infringe imo
please tell me how you see it as an infringement

a reply to: aethertek

"Russian blood money".

Is that all you leftists have left? Russia?

Must be convenient.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I think that we should have to have training and a sponsor to own, purchase or make semi auto firearms.

Let me know when I was at this shooting with my rifle taking lives. Only then will I accept any form of punishment or restrictions on my rights.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: howtonhawky

I think that we should have to have training and a sponsor to own, purchase or make semi auto firearms.

Let me know when I was at this shooting with my rifle taking lives. Only then will I accept any form of punishment or restrictions on my rights.

i think your brain is smoking right now

a reply to: howtonhawky

We need accountability and responsibility.

Infringe means the same thing as deny and disparage.

Not just a single amendment in play.

The RIGHTS of the people.

The other amendments that deal with due process and crimes be proven in courts of law.

In front of a jury of their peers.

The 5th that says.

No person shall be held answerable to a capital or otherwise infamous crime.

End on the 14 amendment.

That clearly says.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

www.law.cornell.edu...

To put it succinctly.

The only person responsible for the action of a mass shooting is the shooter.

No one else.

originally posted by: aethertek
The help of the NRA?

The same NRA who has been taking Russian blood money to finance these terrorist attacks disguised as "school shootings".

The same NRA who has immature idiots like this moron (who should not have access to guns) committing deranged acts of anger for no rational reason.
www.mediamatters.org...

K~

lol, damn I got a good laugh from the first comment in your link...

Why didn't he just shoot it? Does he have something against guns?

a reply to: neo96

to be honest you are too deep into the issue to see the need for training for the more serious arsenals.

training to use and operate a device does not go against any of your rights.

if your argument was correct then we would be able to own make and possess anything we want regardless of intent. that is not the case

srry ownership of property comes with responsibility
our social ignorance is responsible for such violence you me and the rest of the lot

a reply to: howtonhawky

Words mean things.

Apparently the word "infringe" has a different meaning to you than it does to the dictionary.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: howtonhawky

Words mean things.

Apparently the word "infringe" has a different meaning to you than it does to the dictionary.

if that is your argument then you have as much ground to stand on as anarchist do

you were infringed long ago

again can you own an full auto weapon without infringement?

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: howtonhawky

Words mean things.

Apparently the word "infringe" has a different meaning to you than it does to the dictionary.

if that is your argument then you have as much ground to stand on as anarchist do

you were infringed long ago

again can you own an full auto weapon without infringement?

That's really what your argument boils down to: well the right is already infringed, so lets infringe some more and this time not only will we infringe, but we'll put third-parties on the hook for what a gun owner does also.

a reply to: howtonhawky

again can you own an full auto weapon without infringement?

Obviously not.

So the question then becomes, after over a century of gun control and infringement, how much more of it do you think we're supposed to accept?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Obviously, this is a well thought out proposal.

The most American thing we can do is charge someone else for the crimes of another.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Not a terrible idea... you gotta train to drive a car... but you COULD just walk into a store and pick up one monster of a rifle with not a CLUE as to how to operate it.

Where would the line be for this though? Would it based on clip size? Caliber? Simple nomenclature of the weapon? (All AR Type) Is a 7.62 NATO round MORE lethal than a .45 ACP? Probably depends on a number of factors, many of which have nothing to do with the round/gun itself.

So many variables that would get all types of twisted in the legal jargon.

The opposition would surely say something like... "Great... now we are providing training for these mass murderers!"

What a mess...

a reply to: projectvxn

imo
you should be able to own anything you can and will be responsible for and in the case of firearms any weapon you can demonstrate knowledge of proper operation and use. The line should be drawn at semi autos and single shots,bolt and pump gun safety,responsibility operation should be taught in school.

if you want to buy me a gun and give it to me then you should be held accountable for your actions if i turn around and screw up with that weapon.

I propose banning gun free zones.
They seem to be a magnet for gun violence.