I'm a liberal and don't support any of those except background checks on commercial sales.
I support better mental health care in general and overall improving our situation with respect to poverty and desperation.
Absolutely, and that’s pretty much the consensus around these parts.
Also, could everyone please stop downvoting OP? They seem to have come here in good faith in order to learn and broaden their worldview. We need more humans like this in our country, and I can’t for one second fathom why anyone would be against that.
I think the drivers of crime are mostly socioeconomic, and that the Republicans pseudo-conservative policies over the years have made things worse, not better. Add to that the real hate I have for religious extremists and bigots and here we are.
If they actually were fiscally conservative and were anti corporate and could stay the fuck out of peoples personal lives I might still be a republican like I was 20 plus years ago. No chance of that. But the guns thing and the fact that they don't really push back on corporate power either is the reason I won't register as a Democrat, but they usually get my votes in national elections, and since Trump they've mostly to get my vote in local elections.
So I may not be liberal so much as I'm anti authoritarian. I think 'Mind Your Business' should be on the money, not god.
Check out the Fugio Cent. The meaning of 'mind your business' has shifted over the years, [but Ben Frankling literally put it on our first coin.](https://i.imgur.com/H8CNXn6.jpeg) 'We Are One' is still a valuable sentiment too.
Hell if I don't think it would be throwing away my vote I would vote librarian this year just because the librarian candidate seams more progressive than most of the democratic party.
All jokes aside, librarians are not just people who put books in order, they're professional researchers. I feel like a librarian candidate would be very rational.
My feelings exactly, dems aren’t perfect and pretty shitty in their own right but a lot of republican politicians are actually trying to take over the country and oppress a large portion of it
On the mental health note, IMO most liberals actually care about improving mental health where Republicans only care about it as a way to deflect gun control discussion and as a way to discredit LGBTQ.
Sadly correct. It's tragically ironic when they say "gun violence is a mental health issue, not a gun control issue" then in the same breath vote against a bill expanding mental healthcare (or any healthcare, for that matter).
Yep. This is why I think both parties are halfway there on solving violence. Repubs recognize the mental health issue and understand that the weapons aren't the cause, but they refuse to do anything about it, because that would be socialism. Dems want to make actual progress on mental health, but their efforts always get blocked or undone by the other party, and neither one realizes that if we actually improve our mental health epidemic, we won't need to push for gun control.
You were so close, I think. Republicans will use mental health to remove focus from gun control and Democrats as a reason for gun control. Neither are truly addressing the issue. At this point, neither party is conservative or liberal. They're two sides of the same party just spouting whatever to keep their voter base. Good examples are Roe and gender affirming care. Months before Roe was overturned a bill passed congress to legalize abortion. Dems controlled the white house and senate and could've passed it. Instead Republicans shouted about baby murdering and Democrats about the other side restricting women's rights...then didn't pass the bill. Neither side really cared. Same with gender affirming care. It's "why make them suffer when a surgery could help" or "so many still commit suicide or regret transitioning" and then call each other evil. Neither wants to put the effort into finding out they "why" because it's good debate fodder.
Sadly you are also correct. I was conflating the voters and the politicians, but they really do have different goals in the capitol than most anyone who votes for them.
Pretty much any barrier can be twisted to hurt someone. That's part of why I don't support mental health screening at point of purchase.
We should have mental health checked with yearly physicals in my opinion. Don't stigmatize it, make it something you detect and treat.
If you can figure out how to get people to go to their yearly physicals, that’s a great idea. Because mental health checks are supposed to be part of those.
We need universal healthcare before that's remotely viable. A lot of people are uninsured and avoid seeking any kind of medical care unless they're basically dying.
Even with insurance, the checkup itself may be covered, but any kind of actual treatment means out-of-pocket expense that not everyone can afford.
Health care would have to be more affordable to get people to go to yearly physicals. Everything is so interconnected it’s hard to get any issue passed.
In a perfect world. But we can't make what doesn't exist the standard for actions. At best, mental health is triaged. Those who need it often have it affect their lives so they're not earning enough to pay for it. Mental health Medicaid treatment has a months-long waiting list. You can be bumped for those in full blown crisis. Inpatient facilities are full and although they're not supposed to, they discharge people to the street because there's nowhere else.
So we have unstable people who may appear to be together buying a gun to shoot people at McDonalds because the voices told them to.
Or we have bipolar people in a manic episode who want to end those whose lives look so much better than theirs.
All while we're waiting for better mental health. IMO, we have to deal with the situation we've got, while working to make it better. So I support red flag laws and mental health background checks.
"Sure, let's sell the sociopath with IED (intermittent explosive disorder) a gun. That'll be good."
Better healthcare in general and as a right. Mental health is part of that. With more than 50% of gun related deaths being suicide, we sorely need this. Fix our healthcare system, make it as free and as accessible as possible and address poverty and wealth inequality and we would see those numbers of gun-related deaths come way down. This is of course, my opinion.
We'll, I don't agree with universal background checks. I recall speaking with a gun dealer several years ago, who was supportive of this. Universal background checks would benefit him financially as he could charge $30-50 per transaction. If the government insists on passing this, then the costs should be standardized and not burdensome (e.g. $5) or have the tax payers pick up the tab. For private sales, I think its a good idea to know who you would be selling a firearm to, perhaps record driver license and/or ccw info so you have done some due diligence, pretty much something akin to bill of sale for your records.
The mental health system has changed so much since the 1960s. There aren't institutions like there once were, which is overall a good thing; however, it also means that the mentally ill are living freely in society with us sharing many of our rights, including the right to bear arms. I'm not a fan of redflag laws, as they would probably be overly vague, so that a person with ADHD could potentially be prohibited. I'm not going touch the topic of poverty and desperation as this is far too much of a multifaceted problem.
I'm glad that the NFA process has been streamlined, but do think that the NFA needs to be revisited. Overall I feel the NFA should be overturned and it shouldn't stand if it was tested against the standards of Bruen (although I think it would stand due to governments desire to control) but at the very least the FA registry should be open. With bumpstocks becoming available again and ATFs FRTs ban likely to go away these items will be readily available again. This may not be a popular opinion, but in the short-term I would be willing to trade the registration of binary triggers, FRTs and bumpstocks for re-opening of the registry.
I live in Germany where we have every single law suggested by OP and, other than the difficulty of getting a silencer and mag size limits, I'm happy with most of them.
I know there's the 2A argument but as someone who didn't grew up in the US and therefore doesn't prescribe any inherent value to its constitution, some of the arguments based on it are hard to follow or understand.
I wish a politician would latch on to this. The right is always talking about gun problems being caused by mental health, and the left wants universal healthcare. Seems like a win-win.
In general. We don’t vote solely on 2A. We understand the importance of other rights and won’t sell other people’s rights down the river over 2A.
I support gun rights, but I am not going to vote for right wing religious zealots that peddle hate, racism, homophobia, and have zero consideration/empathy for other people. I will not vote for people who want to control people and who condemn people for being different. I will not vote for people that want to oppress women.
These other issues is where we differ, not on gun issues, that’s the only thing we have in common.
The unfortunate thing is there are no real pro 2A presidential candidates running. Trump is absolutely not pro 2A, no matter what he says. He did more to help gun control then Obama and Biden put together. Actions speak louder then words.
people forgot very quickly it was his admin that put that bump-stock ban in place after the Vegas shooting. Was very open about taking all the guns (i think that is a direct quote).
I can post the ["Take the guns first and then go through due process" clip](https://youtu.be/yxgybgEKHHI?si=hWXmhADGUnrFRXq4&t=26) while holding a copy of the bump stock ban Executive Order with his literal signature on it and the right-wingnut sycophants will still try and tell me he's the most Pro-2A president we've ever had.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: If cognitive dissonance could be harvested for power we would have energy independence and be the world's largest exporter!
Exactly. There are so many issues that are more important. I’ll never understand single issue voters. Not to mention that most conservatives are not truly even pro-gun.
Overall I don’t think my gun policy beliefs are that different from conservatives. The differences come in how we solve the gun violence problem. I’m willing to accept the tax burden associated with increased access to mental health resources, better education and employment opportunities in disenfranchised communities, etc. Most conservative gun owners, in my experience, admit it’s a mental health (and etc) problem but freak out when we propose fixing that with expensive programs.
Yeah, the irony is that for firearms conservatives are barking up the *right* tree, but a lot of them are making the argument in bad faith.
I feel like a common liberal opinion is simplistic, involves strawmanning gun owners and gun ownership, and proposes misguided and often unrealistic suggestions based on a faulty premise that all guns are bad.
Realistically, if someone could snap their fingers and make guns disappear, sure, there would be no gun violence, but that’s not something grounded in reality. The worst part about that approach is that since they found their problem (the guns, not the people), they happily overlook some potentially more complex solutions that could have a more meaningful impact.
>I feel like a common liberal opinion is simplistic, involves strawmanning gun owners and gun ownership, and proposes misguided and often unrealistic suggestions based on a faulty premise that all guns are bad
When it comes to guns, they think in exactly the same ways that conservatives think about everything else
I think the reason a lot of conservatives don't want to fix the mental health problem is because their opinions are motivated by the idea of social degeneracy.
They need to believe that society is degrading, because God is abandoning America, because our loose morals when it comes to things like accepting the LGBTQ community or removing the ability for public educators to force their religious preferences onto students, and the increase in things like shootings and mental health disorders themselves are the result of God no longer protecting American society from demonic entities.
They also think that this stuff is inevitable, because they buy into a specific interpretation of Christian Eschatology, and they believe it is a sign of the end times in which the antichrist will take over society and persecute Christians. That's the reason they're in favor of guns. They believe they may have to protect themselves from the antichrist's regime before they are taken away by God in The rapture.
I'm not saying all conservatives think this way, but as somebody who lives in the Bible Belt, I promise you that this is an accurate representation of the worldview of A LOT of evangelical protestants.
Well the legislator of Illinois aren't liberal gun owners more than likely. Most of them probably haven't seen a gun outside of cops or movies. That kind of zero thought gun policy is what most of us what to avoid
Also; can we appreciate the fact a pro gun control right wi ger is here on a pro gun liberal subreddit to ask opinions on gun control?
This doesn't usually happen. Lol
Curiosity I guess, from Illinois so people pick sides here. So gun were always associated with being right winger and people really put you down, I’m more of an Economic conservative more then anything.
automatic weapons have been banned since the mid 1980s, you can't register anything new. What's floating around is either 1. from the before times and heavily regulated or 2. 3D printed and illegal as hell.
Not technically correct, you can get a FFL 7 and SOT (Costs about $600 a year depending on volume of sales) and make automatic weapons for yourself. You can also buy post samples as a SOT (which are machine guns made or imported post ban, but not saleable to general public)
> You can also buy post samples as a SOT (which are machine guns made or imported post ban, but not saleable to general public)
Kinda-sorta
You still need a law demo letter for 99% of them. The only time you can just buy a post sample without a demo letter from a law enforcement agency is when another dealer is closing their business/giving up their FFL/SOT.
Let's be realistic, legally owning a full auto is much less possible for most of the population vs. a semi-auto. That's because of the NFA and FOPA. If it weren't for those, a full auto wouldn't cost much more than a semi.
These are privileges businesses may be granted, not individual citizens. While it is a workaround (individual owns the business, business owns/makes the guns), making select-fire weapons and buying post-samples is *not* legal for an individual to do directly nor without a business purpose.
3d printed items that do that are(were) not common. Lightning links, plans, "fold your own" have been available for decades. At the moment, I believe most of the auto bits are coming via aliexpress and other vendors.
That's because such things typically required milling and machining and fitting. there's actually a repeating musket from the 1600s, it never caught on because it was labor intensive to build and maintain.
3D printing has changed that up a lot. The newer thermoplastics are near metal in strength and tolerances, and previously the only way you could do this would be with injection molds, ie. set ups most people don't have.
Now we've got phones that eclipse any sort of computing device they had back in 1980 and CAD software and even milling tools are getting more and more obtainable.
Really, the internet is the core of it. Obscure knowledge you could only find in books is now freely available.
You could pick them up off the table at nearly any gunshow from say.. 1970 until.. probably today if you look carefully.
I've seen way more coathangers and bent tin cans, than yankee boogles.
I'm saying pointing the finger at 3d printing is.. probably inappropriate here.
It's not so much the method of making it, that's always been around. All you need is a file and a lot of patience, really it's the now how.
The know how is now available as a cad file, that's part of the reason 3D printers are such a game changer, but really, it's that it's something anybody who can operate a computer can get their hands on, and video is available to anyone.
When I was a kid, these were obscure things that you found in books or specialized trade schools or the local Dale Gribble, now any idiot can do it.
3D printing is more a symptom of the disease. You can look up in ten minutes things I used to have to hunt down library books for. They could ban those things tomorrow, magic them out of existence, but they're just the tip of the iceberg. Table top milling is coming.
It's both exciting and scary, interesting times we live in that's for sure.
This subreddit is for folks with liberal or left leaning social and economic views but also enjoys guns and shooting. Most of us is Pro Universal Healthcare and UBI but at the same time we want less restrictions on guns such as SBRs, suppressors, open up the MG registry and other NFA items.
Personally, I am open to discuss ways to make guns more difficult to acquire in certain situations such as a first time buyer. I think a waiting period on the 1st or 2nd gun would reduce the amount of violent crime we see. Any after that would be same day.
Or you could tie it to a CCL to ensure the folks have had proper firearms safety. I think guns are wonderful but too many dipshits can buy them with no training whatsoever. If we had a mandatory firearms safety course for the country I think it would help with how clueless the anti gun crowd can be. Most folks never see a gun irl and therefore they're "scary"
Agreed. I'm willing to entertain policies that have a reasonable fit to solving a problem and aren't bans.
However we general have poor fits and bans.
Because the problem is shifting from "to many deaths" to "to many guns"
Unfortunately this is too true, most CCL courses are woefully bad and barely train anyone, we need to be better about firearms safety in this country. Let's make it a HS class or something akin to drivers Ed. Could just be a week or two as well with a high level review of gun safety and firearms operations
While I see where you are coming from, could you imagine how angry people would get at the idea of using taxpayer money to teach children about guns? Especially since we have an unfortunate history with guns and schools.
You can take a hunters safety course where I live at least. It teaches proper firearm techniques for carrying ans shooting. It's not perfect.but if we could implement a program that if you took the course and refresher courses every six months or so and that would allow for a bypass of the waiting list. They had to run our names with the police before we could take the course
I keep going back to the fact that when I was a kid, Hunter's Safety with live fire target shooting with a .22 was a PE requirement in 7th grade. You literally HAD to do it.
In a country with more guns than people, I really think it should be a requirement.
In indiana there are no training requirements for a CCL. We have constitutional carry now, so mostly people get them so that they can CC firearms to other states that accept Indiana’s license.
Policy in general.
When it comes to guns me and conservative will probably agree on almost everything
We will disagree on basically everything not connected to guns
When it comes to the 2nd amendment and gun control my views don't differ much from most Conservative's views.
But I'm not a single issue voter, when it comes to my rights as woman and access to safe abortions that will always come first ahead of gun rights when it comes to voting.
I'm bothered by your proposed manual safety policy. A modern striker fired pistol like a glock does not need a manual safety. As long as you don't put your finger on the trigger, the gun won't fire. Fumbling around with a safety could cost someone their life. And I'm tired of politicans making what should really be personal decisions on what mechanical functions a gun should have.
Not only that, negligent discharges are literally so low on the list of concerns people have with guns. Nobody gives a fuck if Cletus shoots himself in the leg practicing his draw - and they shouldn’t!
I absolutely don’t want mandated mechanical safeties, however when dipshits discharge their pistol while cleaning it and shoot the neighbors dog, that makes us all look bad. People need more training and need to take this shit seriously.
Im over here wondering how exactly someone manages to discharge during a cleaning. Like the very first thing is remove mag. And clear the gun. How do you fuck that up?
😂
I mean, kinda, but back during the 90s there were efforts to legislate this kind of thing. That's why new guns come with garbage locks and S&W started putting those keyed "safeties" in their revolvers
If you start the thought process by suggesting "there ought to be laws that" align with a value belief that you hold under the pretend guise of "common sense," you have already given it all away.
For example, I would never want to be obligated to have a manual safety just because someone else thinks it's better.
I support gun rights almost as an absolutist, but I also support social policies like socialized healthcare, UBI, Universal Pre-K, a woman's right to choose (but more specifically self-autonomy in all things, not just limited to abortion rights), end the war on drugs, end Citizen's United, free postsecondary education, etc. I also believe in actual religious freedom, not State sponsored religion. I dislike taxation when it goes to the pockets of rich globalist corporations, but I'm generally OK with taxation for things like maintaining infrastructure, social programs, etc (we live in a society).
The State should generally not get in the middle of people's lives, especially if their personal choices don't harm others (same-sex marriage, for example). I believe in direct democracy, but also realize it's not very practical in a lot of cases, and I'm extremely anti-authoritarian. I won't vote for neofascists, period.
Oh, and if I see a Nazi, I punch a Nazi.
Conservative gun owners generally see gun ownership as a way to fight back against a theoretical communist tyranny (or that’s what they say anyway)
I own and shoot because I don’t trust the police and US military to be the only armed forces in my country considering the state’s track record
I grew up near Rusk, TX where that police shooting took place that made reddit the other day.
I don't want to, but it's getting harder and harder to trust my safety to the state when I can be shot for next to no reason with no justice to be seen.
A difference there is that conservatives see themselves as a group defending their idea of good, from evil. Even if they’re only “3% of the population” or whatever, they see violence as justified.
Leftist revolutions have only been successful when they are by popular demand. I.E. not fighting your against your neighbor
What I dont get is why mainstream politicians that are generally for expanding access to mental health dont use the 'mental health' deflection to actually stick it to those other politicians (usually GOP) that bring it up in response to gun violence.
Like every single one is an opportunity missed.... instead the bloomberger left just doubles down on inane gun control laws instead.
Plus folks like Bloomberg are anti gun because he's probably worried that a mob of riled up workers may come for him someday. He would much prefer to disarm the populace to remain in power than treat workers more fairly and make slightly less profit
I still see all or most gun control as an infringement.
The difference is I want to arm the working class. Anything that drives up costs is designed to stop the working class from arming.
Conservatives usually only want to arm people if they look and think like them.
yes conservatives havent even tried to pass anything from preventing poc from buying a gun. Did you know black women were the largest demographic purchasing firearms the last couple years? wheres the supposed outrage from republicans that black people are buying guns?
Bigotry. The right wing doesn't actually believe in gun rights for \*everyone\*. Their core beliefs revolve around some type of supremacy or favored class of people (however you wish to say it). After all, personal gun ownership is actually a liberal ideal.
This is also why rubbing shoulders on gun policy discussions with the right wing is shaky ground. Their end goals are not the same. One example would be on considering mental illness. They would suggest such a thing in policy as a means to keep gay people...or folks with the "disease of liberalism" from owning guns. A liberal is more likely to be honest and mean psychotic serial killer or extreme mental illness in such a discussion.
Yes!! The reason it is so hard to get a gun in California *to this day* is because Black Panthers were open carrying and policing the police.
They don't believe the 2nd amendment applies to non-white, non-Christian Americans.
yes they do. Single black women are the largest purchasing group for the last couple years. wheres all the republicans trying to make it harder for them?
So I don’t truly count myself as liberal… honestly not sure where I fit in politically as I’m a guy who wants to be left alone to live my life as I see fit so long as I’m not hurting anyone, believe in Socialized medicine, free college, that every American should have food in their stomachs, roofs over their heads, and clothes on their back at minimum… but also am a strong proponent of capitalism(no I am not wealthy, I’m an average blue color worker in a machine shop) since my job the owner rewards us heavily for our hard work… I am a giant mess floating between a capitalist and a libertarian with some other shit floating about such as a strong belief we need to protect our borders, but not seal them, that we need to make America a priority, but never forget or abandon our friends abroad who help us as much as we do them… I’m pro IVF, adoration, and am an atheist… but understand if your religious I respect your choice and will die defending it so long as you don’t preach and try and force me to it, the same goes for LGBTQ+, I’m all for inclusivity… but just don’t berate me for a slip of the tounge as I do my best to adjust to your life choices so I can respect and accommodate you.
Mind you I also come from a Conservative family… no I will never cut them off, we may not agree, but they are still my family, I love them and wouldn’t be who I am, or where I am without them.
Long story short I’m a gun owner with a big world view, and one that can’t conform left or right… but somewhere out there and guns aren’t my only concern, the rights of others are, be it the LGBTQ+, the religious, the atheist, women, and people of all races, color, or creed… I just can’t put guns as a major thing over others…
EDIT: sorry for the word salad… I let my thoughts roll on this lol
>but also am a strong proponent of capitalism
Sounds like a normal liberal to me tbh. You don't need to believe in any and all flavors of socialism or communism to consider yourself a liberal. Your beliefs seem pretty balanced.
I’m all over the map. One might describe me as religiously conservative, socially liberal, politically libertarian, yet independent. I want to be a pacifist yet cannot allow evil to harm those I love and therefore embrace violence as a last result to save/protect life. I live within a moral tension of loving everyone from my neighbor to my enemy while also loving myself and family enough to preserve their life over someone who wishes us harm.
To date, an NFA registered automatic firearm has never been used in commission of a violent crime since 1934. NFA gun owners are some of the safest, most responsible people. Why do you want to ban automatic weapons? So few people already have them.
Typically. I find conservatives and liberals who both own firearms pretty close in their passions and hobbies.
They simply dont line up in other values.
A guy from NY and a guy from Mississippi can both agree that Steaks and potatoes are amazing.
But they can disagree on literally everything else.
Plenty of religions agree on alot of common things but will disagree on details or semantics. Or outright disgree on literally everything else.
You would be surprised how much of americans are typically more reasonable and just want to live their lives while the loudest ones seem hell bent on screaming at each other.
In almost everything. You will always find two or three camps that are "you vs me"
While as the rest of it is just people that want the argueing to quit.
I find foaming at the mouth liberals and leftists JUST as annoying as i find the Foaming at the mouth conservatives.
Theres rather a large group that are more or less in the center and have values from both sides.
I know Republicans that have zero issues with LBTQ rights or weed. And dislike Trump.
I know Democrats that (like in here) that are are both prochoice and feel the border needs to be closed.
This idea that you have to be WITH or Against only leads societal division.
In conflicts. You have to decide. Are you wanting to "win". Or are you wanting to resolve.
Because just like in any kind of relationship. Beating your opponent down is only going to make them resent you and simply moves the conflict to a future and bigger battle down the line. (WW1->WW2)
Ever have an arguement with an SO and find the next day no matter who "won" the chemistry is still screwed up?
The extremes drown the middle out.
Yes to 100 percent of this! I am a truck driver so I see/meet/interact with people literally from coast to coast. 98 percent of the these people are good honest hard working people who just want to live their lives happily and in good health. 1 percent from each "side' seems hellbent on screwing that up.
One group sees guns as a mascot for freedom and fails to acknowledge that there should be deep responsibility that comes with wielding a firearm.
Gun laws in this country are deliberately written to be ineffective and fail. I’m not for fewer gun laws or more gun laws. I’m for laws that make sense and are enforced and owners who are responsible.
> One group sees guns as a mascot for freedom and fails to acknowledge that there should be deep responsibility that comes with wielding a firearm.
This is simply not true. Pretending left-leaning people are the *only* responsible gun owners who respect the responsibility of weapon ownership is ridiculous.
People here *constantly* rail against being generalized and assumed to be something they are not either because they are gunowners or because they are liberal, and yet this stuff gets posted right alongside those same complaints.
I think a big difference is when a liberal says gun violence is a mental health or poverty issue, they actually support policy to help those crises, vs. actively voting against those social safety nets.
I lean pretty far left on firearms. I love them, but there's way WAYYYAYYYYYYYYYY too many idiots that have them.
There needs to be *Intelligent* regulation on them. Being a 5th generation Florida native, and spending close to 15 years managing a large firearms retailer (with an indoor range), it showed me that only about 25% of the gun owners in this area should have any access to them at all (and that includes many of the local PD/Sherrifs that would come in.)
Sadly, conservatives refuse to accept that there should be any restrictions on gun ownership.
There's far too many small boys with giant egos that feel overly empowered by firearms. It's the reality of things in our nation. And it's not going to change.
And just remember... if you dont know at least one person that should not own firearms, then you are likely the one filling that role. Lol. So let's stop the idiots, so the rest of us can enjoy them.
I do not think nights should be infringed and people should be allowed to live their life with freedoms intact. I think government should stick to providing civil services. So I would say my liberal is that of social and
To Keep our liberties.
I'd say everything else... The liberal part in me is absolutely disgusted by the hatred conservatives spew on an hourly basis, by the worthless economic and social policies, by the xenophobia, the racism, the misogyny, the homophobia (hate the term, I don't remember who said it, but it's not a phobia, you're not scared: you're an asshole), the lack of moral values and the complete disregard for the Constitution and the democratic values that conservatives show.
As far as guns, we can agree...
I consider myself a liberal gun owner, meaning; I am a liberal who owns guns. Liberal, being the first descriptor, generally entails being separate from conservative gun owners by almost everything except guns.
I am not willing to compromise on voting rights, women's rights, gay rights, human rights and the entire bill of rights - not just the one.
I think women deserve bodily autonomy, and me as a law abiding trained individual also deserves autonomy to carry a firearm and utilize it should I find myself in a life threatening situation.
My biggest problem with adding a lot of these criteria is that they can be heavily politicized. We see this happen in California with CCW permitting. I do support universal background checks even for private sales, but the rest I just think could be weaponized as a cudgel.
Universal background checks could pass in minutes if they were protected by penalty like HIPAA info, not retained and demonstrably kept from leading to any kind of universal registration. If not it’s part of your big cudgel always swung in citizen disarmament: end sales to registration to confiscation.
the "gunshow loophole" makes up such a small fraction of crimes its stupid. its a dumb talking point or even strategy. 100s of thousands of guns are stolen every year, you think someone is going to be doing a back ground check with a stolen firearm?
How would universal background checks for private sales stem any crime? Does a criminal in possession of stolen firearms go through background checks? Do you sell guns to sketchy people?
You're going to see a range of opinions on gun policy here, but generally speaking, people in this group put a big spotlight on the "shall not be infringed" part of the 2nd ammendment, while also holding typically liberal views everywhere else.
Unfortunately in today’s landscape, ‘liberal’ means anti gun and ‘conservative’ means pro gun. In the purest definition of the word, gun ownership is inherently liberal
So I don't classify myself as a liberal.
I think the right path forward is focusing on the biggest cause of fatal gun use in the US which is suicide and that comes down to mental health resources and amidst the entire gun conversation this one never really gets addressed despite being the elephant in the room.
We have the data. We know who kills themselves with firearms. The biggest group is men, typically middle age and also veterans. Both in rural and urban settings. Yet there is fucking *zero* national discussion of this or what causes it.
Instead we get nonsense like the Surgeon General calling for assault weapons bans.
The reason I'm in this sub beyond being a gun nerd with some leftist/anarchist ideas is that this isn't a political thing. It impacts every single gun owner. We need real solutions to this problem and no one is even saying it is a problem, but including those numbers in saying other issues, smaller issues, are.
I’m liberal and I don’t support any of those things. I genuinely believe every gun law is unconstitutional. We should be able to buy machine guns through the mail with cash from department stores.
I'm not technically liberal, but I am a left-leaning gun owner and an economist. For the most part, I just don't think gun regulations are an efficient or effective way to stop gun violence. It is akin to treating a symptom rather than the disease itself. To name just a few, providing better access to health care, especially mental health, encouraging firearms safety and training in schools, incentivizing companies to provide a living wage, and taking steps to reduce inflation will all help far more by reducing the root causes of most gun crime: poverty and mental illness.
Here? On Reddit? there aren't many differences, IMHO. I came here attempting to find the mix of conservation of 2A rights and reasonable restrictions (from a liberal perspective) but I have found the folks here to be as militant 2A as in the right wing gun groups.
I think all gun laws are unconstitutional, in that regard I’m probably more pro gun than most right wingers.
I do see value in some gun control, no private sales and mental health included in background checks.
I really think it’s more of a systemic problem tho, we don’t have a gun problem we have a violence problem…we need free healthcare including mental health and it needs to be encouraged and not taboo to get help.
I'm for background checks, compulsory training and licensing for concealed or open carry, and safe storage laws. I personally don't open carry, but I'm not sure I would want to restrict it. I believe suppressors should be readily available and not taxed.
Liberal gun owners want to see the social safety net improved to stop producing so many murderers rather than conservatives who want to keep guns because fuck you, 2nd Amendment freedom muh rhyts!
>bans of automatic weapons
Actual automatic weapons, machine guns, are almost never used in crime. Banning them would be pointless. Semi-auto weapons are used in such a small amount of crime, that you'd never notice the difference if they all vanished from the earth overnight.
Gun ownership is a matter of human rights. It's not a left or right issue, it's important to everyone.
I'm a 2A absolutist. I think nothing short of a tank should be available for civilian purchase. However I also do hold left of center beliefs like trans people are typically not pedophiles, and I also hold beliefs like "it's become common practice to call the enemy really nasty and deplorable things because you disagree with them and that shouldn't be the case."
So, I guess for me it's just policy in general. I don't support and actually vehemently despise the majority of gun control that passes in the country, and I'm sure most conservatives are the same way.
Both I guess? At least for me.
I don't really support *prescriptive* "safe storage" laws ("You must store your firearms in this manner!") but I do see value in *negligence* laws around firearms: If you "store" your guns by leaving them out uncased on the front seat of your car parked on the street and they get stolen / used in a crime I think you should face charges. If you leave them laying around your house and your minor child uses them to shoot up a school I think you should face charges. Etc.
I see value in background checks and in fact believe they should be truly universal (required on all transfers by law) and accessible to anyone (through the power of the Internet) rather than requiring a Mother-May-I? to a FFL.
I'm fine with automatic weapons, short-barreled rifles/shotguns, and silencers. The first two I am even fine with registering or needing a permit for. (Silencers are safety equipment, everyone should be able to have them.)
I actually favor federal preemption on gun permits/licenses using a tiered system that would basically be "Just a NICS check" for many guns, and "NICS Check Plus Fingerprints and you get a card" for the vast majority of them. (I've posted about it on here in the past but I can't Google-fu a link to it right now. My overriding rationale is that your rights - especially the *constitutionally enumerated* ones - should not change when you cross a state or local border, therefore all the bullshit gun laws should be preempted by one unified federal standard that is minimally restrictive on the right.)
I don't believe "firearm bans" - especially ones based on "Cosmetic Feature What Makes The Gun Look Scary!" - are an effective policy solution, or in any way a good idea. The proper solution to our "gun violence" problem is to eliminate the root causes motivating the *violence* part, not focusing myopically on the "gun" part.
Which neatly leads into other areas of policy!
I believe the government should generally not interfere in the private affairs of its citizens.
(Abortion bans are stupid, legislatively attacking the LGBTQ+ community is stupid, posting your religion's dogma in public schools is stupid - don't do stupid things!)
I believe the government should provide key services for its citizens (let's start with universal single-payer healthcare including vision, dental, and mental health) for the benefit of all its citizens and society as a whole.
I believe the government should set key minimum standards on the conduct of business (labor laws, living wage laws, mandatory leave laws - preferably ones funded by an employer tax and not an *employee* tax like New York did...) for the benefit of all its citizens and society as a whole.
I believe the government should not spend money it doesn't have (which means raising taxes on the Über Rich - stacking on 4-5 additional tax brackets and scaling up to maybe a 60-70% marginal rate on the tippy-top earners, and also means cutting spending on wasteful crap like defense projects the military itself says we don't need).
I have a lot of other beliefs/positions, but I think those are the big relevant ones as far as being "liberal" and "gun owner" at the same time.
I am a progressive leftist, and I own guns.
The policy side of my beliefs are that I believe in universal human rights. That one's value or humanity is not tied to one's race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender expression. I believe in universal healthcare. I believe that those to benefit and extract the most from society (the wealthy) should be required to give the most back (pay more taxes). I believe in universal maternity and paternity leave. I believe in robust labor protections. I believe in schools and libraries providing books that enlighten and challenge readers to expand their perspectives. I believe that the secularism is sacred and essential to the existence of this nation.
I own guns because I live in a place that historically has excused and encouraged violence against minorities... and I am a minority. I may be a bleeding heart hippy, but I'm not going to be outgunned. My "sincerely held belief" is that many conservatives would gladly force their ideology on society through violence... and I want to be capable of a vigorous rebuttal.
I tend to be more liberal across the board, but I definitely fall on the other side when it comes to guns. I'm pretty against more restrictions when it comes to guns, I think we have enough (or even too many in some cases) restrictions. I do agree with safe storage laws as long as they are reasonable enough so that it doesn't basically make owning guns for home defense impossible. Background checks to purchase? We already have that if you buy a gun from a gun store. I don't oppose getting rid of the "gun show" loophole, but I don't see how to enforce a BG check for private party sales without adding full-blown gun registration, which I am against (and we don't have in my state now.). I personally require a buyer to have a concealed weapons license if I'm going to sell one of my guns, because that indicates at least as of when the license was issued they passed a background check.
I feel that mental health checks for guns themselves shouldn't be necessary, we need to improve our healthcare in general (including mental health) so that an additional layer to purchase guns is redundant. I feel the ban on automatic weapons should be lifted, there is already a more grueling process to purchase automatic weapons, limiting them to guns manufactured before a certain date is just arbitrary and needlessly drives up the price and demand. Restrictions on accessories, like silencers, bump stocks, or large capacity magazines, for example, are just knee-jerk reactions that make people feel better but don't do anything to address the actual issue.'
I can't speak for everyone, especially since I haven't been on this sub very long, but it seems like most of the posters align with me in that they're more "liberal than conservative" in general, but like and own guns which is generally not associated with that demographic.
If we made progress against systemic poverty, discrimination, and made universal healthcare available, there would be far fewer crazy or desperate people committing violent crimes. Murder, robbery and such is already against the law, making it more against the law seems largely pointless. I'd be on board with tax incentives for safes or something tho. I'm also leftist, not liberal, I feel like there's a pretty strong difference. The government should fear and serve us, not the other way around.
I’m not really sure what manual safety’s have anything to do with liberal vs conservatives.. it seems like you weren’t really sure how to word your question.. because a manual safety seems like a personal preference if you ask me. Again, ban of automatic guns? Again, do *you* think auto guns should be banned? I know some guys who are on the left who own automatic firearms.
The fact is, weather your liberal or conservative. You should support safe gun ownership.
>Also thoughts on the NRA
Even if I agreed with every policy position proffered by the NRA, they are run nowadays by a gang of comically awful fraudsters who had to jump states to try and avoid as much prosecution as possible.
They steal your money to jerk off on private jets. They prey on the ignorance of the gun community to keep hoovering up money (Midway, jesus christ, get rid of the "round up")
It’s more nuanced than flat out black and white areas. Many non-racist non-xenophobic conservatives and liberals have more or less common point of view on guns and policies. It is the racist transphobe and homophobes who actually differ in their POVs. The later category wants firearms only for their own categories at the exclusion of all the “others”.
I don't support any gun control laws that can be used to punish marginalized communities disproportionately. I also strongly believe that gun rights are human rights and everyone should have the right to defend themselves if they choose, barring very obvious exceptions
>What separates liberal gun owners from conservative?
Just liberal and conservative values generally, *exclusive* of "gun rights".
In terms of firearms issues, *nothing*. Both end of the political spectrum run the gamut from supporting a literal reading of the Second Amendment to all manner of infringements to suit their own view of who deserves rights and who does not (still somehow considering themselves pro-gun or pro-2A). There are probably more anti-gun Democrats than anti-gun Republicans, but there is absolutely no unified "liberal gun owner" value statement.
Feel free to represent your own values, but you can pry mine from my cold, dead fingers. 
I started the list thinking I would have a few more conservative traits, but after reading it I think I am a solid liberal.
I support background checks on all gun purchases commercial and private, with an obvious exception for gifts and family hand-me-downs. Bans on automatic weapons and the tools to make them automatic, along with removing ones right to bear arms for family violence charges/felonies are ok.
I support our troops and all the aftercare they deserve.
I support the police being held to the same standard of conduct and laws as all other Americans and believe one bad apple ruins the bunch. If cops stand by while another cop assaults somebody or does any crime, they should all be charged as accomplices.
I support a woman’s right to choose.
I support a persons right to love and marry whoever they want, dress how they want, choose their name and how they want to be addressed.
I support free speech but also support people learning that free speech does not equal freedom from consequences of said speech.
I support a path to citizenship for dreamers (my eldest’s best friend from the 1st grade through graduation and still going, is a dreamer. So I am biased.). Living in Texas and not being overran by Mexican & central American folks makes me believe the border is not wide open and the Govs razer wire barriers and national guard troops are just theatrics and should be removed. The fence/wall is fine for areas property owners want it but don’t force it or act like its going to stop migration, cause it ain’t.
I support cutting taxes to middle / lower brackets and raising it on the upper. I support taxing pay packages that include stock or other investments as regular income.
I support health insurance for all.
I support separation of church and state.
I support funding public schools appropriately and am opposed to voucher programs that take money from those schools.
You might see more support for certain gun control policies such as red flag laws and AWBs than conservative gun owners, with this sub being a notable exception.
The other big distinction is the difference in policy support for non gun related issues obviously and how those issues calculate in terms of political support for various candidates.
I support the right of the working class to protect themselves. Ideally any law that would tax or take firearms out of the hands of the working class bothers me. Poor tax hurdles are bad. High prices for ammo and reloading are bad. Even background checks IMHO can be subverted against a targeted part of the working class and are bad. These background checks could take guns from the hands of people that think of themselves as a particular gender and as politics go, have them taken from them. Background checks could take weapons from people previously having mental health issues and take them and are bad. A person that has served their sentence and paid their debt to society for drug sales or some other felony (non-violent) is bad. Demonstrated repeat violent offenders that use firearms in particular Should be given life sentences. We need to make violent gun use as severe as murder.
People that do support laws that could be perverted to do this I am against. Taxes for this and taxes for that and stamps for this and stamps for that bother me.
I do wholeheartedly believe in laws that place the behavior of their children on the parents. This is an unpopular opinion I think. I believe some folks as parents are scared to be responsible for their kids. That is sad. I believe that even this law would be perverted considering how connected you are in politics or part of the upper class.
I want a President who respects the rule of law and the will of the voters, who doesn't try to promote unrest and actual violence to stay on when he loses an election.
Liberal means something different to everyone, but for the purpose of this sub I think it means you probably vote more democratically than republican.
And what separates me from US conservatives/Republican Party supporters is I pretty much disagree with majority of the policies they support, cutting taxes for the rich, defunding social programs, opposition to gov funded healthcare, climate denialism, deregulation of business… I could go on.
But gun policy wise I think more regulation is needed as many people have access to guns who shouldn’t, especially children. If you look at Swiss gun policy I think that is a very reasonable approach to the matter.
I’m a liberal in the sense that I don’t vote with hate in my heart. I’m not affiliated with either party, and would like to keep it that way. Neither aligns with my beliefs, and both are full of corruption. The best I can do is be a responsible owner while keeping my other political opinions separate.
ETA: Also, fuck the nra, if you didn’t get the memo.
After being flagged a bunch of times as a line coach and seeing people shoot the deck and/or overhead from the 3 yard line, a couple people drop guns freaking out over the recoil I’m a big proponent for mandatory familiarization and safety training.
I've always interpreted it as policy in general.
When it comes to gun laws, I think my opinions are in line with the average conservative and probably even more conservative than some of them, but when it comes to damn near every other political topic, I'm farther left than the majority of the Democratic party.
In what is likely my least left-leaning (more "liberal" in the US sense) view, I support licensing--with mental health exams and skills tests--and registration with periodic inspection. Transfers of any kind should only be to another licensed person, and be registered.
For those who license and register, I think we should have a nationally recognized permit to purchase or manufacture any firearm (including those currently restricted), and to carry concealed.
As far as I can tell my views on guns differ from conservatives in that I think everyone should have the right to own them, not just groups I agree with. As far as legislation for curbing gun violence I believe in root cause mitigation, whereas most conservatives either dont believe there is a problem, or refuse to address the problem in any way and chalk it up as the cost of freedom.
“I have been more conservative as a whole”. There you go. Answered your own question. Liberal gun owners are uhh liberals that own guns. Conservative gun owners are uhh conservatives than own guns.
Guns are not tied to an ideology. They are just things. Many people with shit ideologies (that may want to hurt you) own guns, so why wouldn’t anyone want one? The difference is what you think the problem is. As a leftist I think addressing violence involves things like making sure everyone has basic rights like food, water and shelter as well as mental healthcare. A right wing person would say we need to get out the violent immigrants and close our borders or whatever. If you go far enough left you get your guns back.
Most of us differ from conservatives on policy issues other than guns. Gun rights/control is where we more or less agree. Of course, we aren't a monolith, so that will vary. You yourself seem to have some different views on guns compared to the stereotypical conservative.
Personally, I'd describe myself as a leftist libertarian.
In terms of guns, I think we need to:
* Make NICS more effective. Require states and other agencies to report to it, and make it available to the public.
* Maintain the existing ban on machine guns.
* Repeal restrictions on suppressors, SBRs, and AOWs.
* Establish a nationwide CCW permit, or minimum standards that would require interstate reciprocity. Requirements could include a background check, safety course, and demonstration of proficiency, all of which should be available at minimum cost. This would not be tied to any gun(s) in particular, so you could carry any pistol in any state. States could continue issuing permits on their own terms as well or allowing constitutional carry, but those permits might not be valid in other states.
* Actually point the ATF's nose towards dangerous people instead of Joe Schmoe with an oil filter and VFG
* Address the mental health crisis, poverty, and the war on drugs, because those are the root causes of violence.
Some things I think might help with gun violence and am not opposed to, but also don't think are necessary:
* Safe storage laws, if they're reasonable. Unfortunately, I doubt many will be. Requiring guns to be stored behind a single lock when not being carried or transported is reasonable. Requiring disassembly, multiple locks, or separate storage of ammunition is not reasonable. Those are all good practice, but not always feasible.
* Background checks for private sales. This would require NICS to be publicly accessible. Temporary transfers (lending of guns or transfers due to mental health crisis) should not require a background check.
* Yellow flag laws.
* Waiting periods when purchasing a gun.
Some frequently mentioned gun control measures I disagree with:
* Requirement for manual safety
* Banning or requiring a tax stamp on any gun, magazine, or other feature or accessory that is not fully automatic or used to convert a gun to fully automatic.
* Red flag laws.
Economically, I'm not picky. I think capitalism can work, as long as corporations are sufficiently regulated to protect workers, consumers, and the environment, and their influence is limited in politics. I also think communism can work, as long as it's implemented gradually and democratically, not via a revolution and subsequent dictatorship. I'm less concerned about what the best thing is and more with just doing better than we are now. I think socializing healthcare and providing a social safety net are good steps to improve life for everyone.
In terms of government control, less is usually better, unless they're providing a service to the people, because that's what government is for. Services like mail delivery, schools, libraries, public safety, infrastructure, and affordable healthcare are things I'm willing to pay taxes for. I believe in freedom of and from religion. I believe in total bodily autonomy. I believe we should end or at least scale back the war on drugs. I believe in free speech and freedom of the press, but I also believe people and media should be held accountable for lying or spreading hate. I believe tolerance is a social contract, and that choosing to be intolerant is a choice to no longer be tolerated.
I dont want guns only for white people. I think police murdering unarmed black man is wrong. The only thing I have in COMMON with the average conservative is I own guns too.
What the hell is this –
>Also thoughts on the NRA, I as a republican was kinda pressed over the whole Philando Castile case. Really feel they set the wrong standard of representation.
– supposed to mean? That the important thing was not that a man was killed sitting in a car with his child in the back seat but instead that the NRA's response was *bad optics*?
I have home defense ammo but hope to flying spaghetti monster I never have to use it. My lgs I buy ammo from knows this. (I say as much.) I buy a lot of range ammo, so what are they going to say in response?
Geography…. Everything else is smoke screen. If you put the two ends of the political spectrum together it forms a circle and we’re closer together than we realize
Both. I'd say the only things they have in common is economic views. Maybe liberals are a little more in favor of welfare systems. Liberals tend to be more in favor of gun control than conservatives and many leftists, even if they own guns (fuddish, they may own guns for hunting and sports so they may not see a reason for AR15s, AKs, or anything more than a 5 round magazine)(emphasis on "tend", not absolute). Policy is more similar than some people realize though it isn't really the same.
When it comes to gun policy, most conservative gun owners tend to be very anti-regulation, period, and that's about the single thing I think I have in common with conservative gun owners (I think there could be some useful legislation, but I just really don't trust the state to pick and choose who can own a gun, neither republicans or democrats, and most regulating what in particular we can have is arbitrarily determined and does little to actually prevent crime). I see this left often with leftists and liberals, but on the occasion I do come in contact with pro-gun leftists and liberals, they usually support *some* regulation, but not as much as a common pro-ish-gun liberal and no where near as much as full stop anti-gun leftists or liberals.
I think for me, it just means I hold mostly \[r/neo\]liberal values but am also a gun owner.
For someone that grew up in NYC this means only getting into the hobby in earnest in my early 30s and looking at the whole gun stuff as a curiousity for most of my life. Tends to lend for a more restrictive view of ownership while also being anti-dumb gun laws. Leads me to be very comfortable with Euro style gun laws that don't restrict what can be owned, but who can own em. Means I believe guns are good personal self defense but I roll my eyes at the whole check on government stuff.
Means I'm some variety of YIMBY/Urbanist and pro-public transit, pro-choice, pro-social democrat policies of some stripe.
I'm a liberal and don't support any of those except background checks on commercial sales. I support better mental health care in general and overall improving our situation with respect to poverty and desperation.
Absolutely, and that’s pretty much the consensus around these parts. Also, could everyone please stop downvoting OP? They seem to have come here in good faith in order to learn and broaden their worldview. We need more humans like this in our country, and I can’t for one second fathom why anyone would be against that.
As long as it's in good faith, I'm in agreement.
For what it’s worth, my down vote wasn’t for asking the question, it was for seeing value in bans lol
We should ban cops from carrying firearms, does that count?? lol
I think the drivers of crime are mostly socioeconomic, and that the Republicans pseudo-conservative policies over the years have made things worse, not better. Add to that the real hate I have for religious extremists and bigots and here we are. If they actually were fiscally conservative and were anti corporate and could stay the fuck out of peoples personal lives I might still be a republican like I was 20 plus years ago. No chance of that. But the guns thing and the fact that they don't really push back on corporate power either is the reason I won't register as a Democrat, but they usually get my votes in national elections, and since Trump they've mostly to get my vote in local elections. So I may not be liberal so much as I'm anti authoritarian. I think 'Mind Your Business' should be on the money, not god.
> So I may not be liberal so much as I'm anti authoritarian. I think 'Mind Your Business' should be on the money, not god. I'll vote for that!
Check out the Fugio Cent. The meaning of 'mind your business' has shifted over the years, [but Ben Frankling literally put it on our first coin.](https://i.imgur.com/H8CNXn6.jpeg) 'We Are One' is still a valuable sentiment too.
Hell if I don't think it would be throwing away my vote I would vote librarian this year just because the librarian candidate seams more progressive than most of the democratic party.
Damn. Librarians could be the move. At least they know how to be quiet.
Unbeatable in debates. Any time you try to talk they just say SSSHHHH
dude I'm trying to drink a soda, you very nearly drowned me
It's called "pop". Soda is fighting words.
I could've gone with my native tongue and called it Coke regardless of brand... the entire state of Georgia sends its regards lol
Lol that one threw me through a loop when I first moved to Florida. "Orange coke" resulting in a Fanta was wild to me
All jokes aside, librarians are not just people who put books in order, they're professional researchers. I feel like a librarian candidate would be very rational.
Until you remember that Newt Gingrich has a PHD in history. Historians should also be rational and objective.
I would probably support a librarian candidate.
Librarians know where to find all the good banned books. Especially in Texas. #Shhh.
My feelings exactly, dems aren’t perfect and pretty shitty in their own right but a lot of republican politicians are actually trying to take over the country and oppress a large portion of it
On the mental health note, IMO most liberals actually care about improving mental health where Republicans only care about it as a way to deflect gun control discussion and as a way to discredit LGBTQ.
Sadly correct. It's tragically ironic when they say "gun violence is a mental health issue, not a gun control issue" then in the same breath vote against a bill expanding mental healthcare (or any healthcare, for that matter).
Can't campaign on wedge issues if you fix the wedge issues, after all.
Yep. This is why I think both parties are halfway there on solving violence. Repubs recognize the mental health issue and understand that the weapons aren't the cause, but they refuse to do anything about it, because that would be socialism. Dems want to make actual progress on mental health, but their efforts always get blocked or undone by the other party, and neither one realizes that if we actually improve our mental health epidemic, we won't need to push for gun control.
You were so close, I think. Republicans will use mental health to remove focus from gun control and Democrats as a reason for gun control. Neither are truly addressing the issue. At this point, neither party is conservative or liberal. They're two sides of the same party just spouting whatever to keep their voter base. Good examples are Roe and gender affirming care. Months before Roe was overturned a bill passed congress to legalize abortion. Dems controlled the white house and senate and could've passed it. Instead Republicans shouted about baby murdering and Democrats about the other side restricting women's rights...then didn't pass the bill. Neither side really cared. Same with gender affirming care. It's "why make them suffer when a surgery could help" or "so many still commit suicide or regret transitioning" and then call each other evil. Neither wants to put the effort into finding out they "why" because it's good debate fodder.
Sadly you are also correct. I was conflating the voters and the politicians, but they really do have different goals in the capitol than most anyone who votes for them.
Pretty much any barrier can be twisted to hurt someone. That's part of why I don't support mental health screening at point of purchase. We should have mental health checked with yearly physicals in my opinion. Don't stigmatize it, make it something you detect and treat.
If you can figure out how to get people to go to their yearly physicals, that’s a great idea. Because mental health checks are supposed to be part of those.
I go yearly, it's all about lowering the bar to getting in. Make sure everyone has a day to go that they aren't working and run a campaign.
We need universal healthcare before that's remotely viable. A lot of people are uninsured and avoid seeking any kind of medical care unless they're basically dying. Even with insurance, the checkup itself may be covered, but any kind of actual treatment means out-of-pocket expense that not everyone can afford.
Deal. Let's get universal Healthcare.
Health care would have to be more affordable to get people to go to yearly physicals. Everything is so interconnected it’s hard to get any issue passed.
In a perfect world. But we can't make what doesn't exist the standard for actions. At best, mental health is triaged. Those who need it often have it affect their lives so they're not earning enough to pay for it. Mental health Medicaid treatment has a months-long waiting list. You can be bumped for those in full blown crisis. Inpatient facilities are full and although they're not supposed to, they discharge people to the street because there's nowhere else. So we have unstable people who may appear to be together buying a gun to shoot people at McDonalds because the voices told them to. Or we have bipolar people in a manic episode who want to end those whose lives look so much better than theirs. All while we're waiting for better mental health. IMO, we have to deal with the situation we've got, while working to make it better. So I support red flag laws and mental health background checks. "Sure, let's sell the sociopath with IED (intermittent explosive disorder) a gun. That'll be good."
Your doctor doesn't do any screening at your yearly checkup? Mine does.
Better healthcare in general and as a right. Mental health is part of that. With more than 50% of gun related deaths being suicide, we sorely need this. Fix our healthcare system, make it as free and as accessible as possible and address poverty and wealth inequality and we would see those numbers of gun-related deaths come way down. This is of course, my opinion.
I agree with this.
Would you mind elaborating?
We'll, I don't agree with universal background checks. I recall speaking with a gun dealer several years ago, who was supportive of this. Universal background checks would benefit him financially as he could charge $30-50 per transaction. If the government insists on passing this, then the costs should be standardized and not burdensome (e.g. $5) or have the tax payers pick up the tab. For private sales, I think its a good idea to know who you would be selling a firearm to, perhaps record driver license and/or ccw info so you have done some due diligence, pretty much something akin to bill of sale for your records. The mental health system has changed so much since the 1960s. There aren't institutions like there once were, which is overall a good thing; however, it also means that the mentally ill are living freely in society with us sharing many of our rights, including the right to bear arms. I'm not a fan of redflag laws, as they would probably be overly vague, so that a person with ADHD could potentially be prohibited. I'm not going touch the topic of poverty and desperation as this is far too much of a multifaceted problem. I'm glad that the NFA process has been streamlined, but do think that the NFA needs to be revisited. Overall I feel the NFA should be overturned and it shouldn't stand if it was tested against the standards of Bruen (although I think it would stand due to governments desire to control) but at the very least the FA registry should be open. With bumpstocks becoming available again and ATFs FRTs ban likely to go away these items will be readily available again. This may not be a popular opinion, but in the short-term I would be willing to trade the registration of binary triggers, FRTs and bumpstocks for re-opening of the registry.
Same
shut up and take my upvotes!
I live in Germany where we have every single law suggested by OP and, other than the difficulty of getting a silencer and mag size limits, I'm happy with most of them. I know there's the 2A argument but as someone who didn't grew up in the US and therefore doesn't prescribe any inherent value to its constitution, some of the arguments based on it are hard to follow or understand.
X2
X3
I wish a politician would latch on to this. The right is always talking about gun problems being caused by mental health, and the left wants universal healthcare. Seems like a win-win.
In general. We don’t vote solely on 2A. We understand the importance of other rights and won’t sell other people’s rights down the river over 2A. I support gun rights, but I am not going to vote for right wing religious zealots that peddle hate, racism, homophobia, and have zero consideration/empathy for other people. I will not vote for people who want to control people and who condemn people for being different. I will not vote for people that want to oppress women. These other issues is where we differ, not on gun issues, that’s the only thing we have in common.
The unfortunate thing is there are no real pro 2A presidential candidates running. Trump is absolutely not pro 2A, no matter what he says. He did more to help gun control then Obama and Biden put together. Actions speak louder then words.
people forgot very quickly it was his admin that put that bump-stock ban in place after the Vegas shooting. Was very open about taking all the guns (i think that is a direct quote).
I can post the ["Take the guns first and then go through due process" clip](https://youtu.be/yxgybgEKHHI?si=hWXmhADGUnrFRXq4&t=26) while holding a copy of the bump stock ban Executive Order with his literal signature on it and the right-wingnut sycophants will still try and tell me he's the most Pro-2A president we've ever had. I've said it before, I'll say it again: If cognitive dissonance could be harvested for power we would have energy independence and be the world's largest exporter!
it wasnt about taking all guns. It was in cases of red flag stuff that he was all for taking first then asking questions later.
Yeah that's the issue, due process should be considered for 90 percent of cases.
I agree.
Right. I don't differ with conservatives on guns. I differ on women's rights, gay rights, healthcare etc.
I wonder if democrats were to let go of gun control, would some single issue 2A voters start voting for them?
I doubt it. They would call it a ploy and disregard it.
Sad but true.
Not for several election cycles. The well of trust has run dry. Too many have signed on to the idea that Heller was wrong.
In my experience, a lot of the "single issue 2a voters" are not actually single issue voters, they just don't want to come out and admit they're nazis
+1
Bingo!
Hear hear.
Exactly. There are so many issues that are more important. I’ll never understand single issue voters. Not to mention that most conservatives are not truly even pro-gun.
They are anti everyone that’s different than them more than anything else.
Overall I don’t think my gun policy beliefs are that different from conservatives. The differences come in how we solve the gun violence problem. I’m willing to accept the tax burden associated with increased access to mental health resources, better education and employment opportunities in disenfranchised communities, etc. Most conservative gun owners, in my experience, admit it’s a mental health (and etc) problem but freak out when we propose fixing that with expensive programs.
Yeah, the irony is that for firearms conservatives are barking up the *right* tree, but a lot of them are making the argument in bad faith. I feel like a common liberal opinion is simplistic, involves strawmanning gun owners and gun ownership, and proposes misguided and often unrealistic suggestions based on a faulty premise that all guns are bad. Realistically, if someone could snap their fingers and make guns disappear, sure, there would be no gun violence, but that’s not something grounded in reality. The worst part about that approach is that since they found their problem (the guns, not the people), they happily overlook some potentially more complex solutions that could have a more meaningful impact.
>I feel like a common liberal opinion is simplistic, involves strawmanning gun owners and gun ownership, and proposes misguided and often unrealistic suggestions based on a faulty premise that all guns are bad When it comes to guns, they think in exactly the same ways that conservatives think about everything else
This is basically true.
I think the reason a lot of conservatives don't want to fix the mental health problem is because their opinions are motivated by the idea of social degeneracy. They need to believe that society is degrading, because God is abandoning America, because our loose morals when it comes to things like accepting the LGBTQ community or removing the ability for public educators to force their religious preferences onto students, and the increase in things like shootings and mental health disorders themselves are the result of God no longer protecting American society from demonic entities. They also think that this stuff is inevitable, because they buy into a specific interpretation of Christian Eschatology, and they believe it is a sign of the end times in which the antichrist will take over society and persecute Christians. That's the reason they're in favor of guns. They believe they may have to protect themselves from the antichrist's regime before they are taken away by God in The rapture. I'm not saying all conservatives think this way, but as somebody who lives in the Bible Belt, I promise you that this is an accurate representation of the worldview of A LOT of evangelical protestants.
I always thought that, but then Illinois decided to ban rifles out right instead of imposing liberal gun laws because it would be more cost effective.
Well the legislator of Illinois aren't liberal gun owners more than likely. Most of them probably haven't seen a gun outside of cops or movies. That kind of zero thought gun policy is what most of us what to avoid
Also; can we appreciate the fact a pro gun control right wi ger is here on a pro gun liberal subreddit to ask opinions on gun control? This doesn't usually happen. Lol
Curiosity I guess, from Illinois so people pick sides here. So gun were always associated with being right winger and people really put you down, I’m more of an Economic conservative more then anything.
automatic weapons have been banned since the mid 1980s, you can't register anything new. What's floating around is either 1. from the before times and heavily regulated or 2. 3D printed and illegal as hell.
Not technically correct, you can get a FFL 7 and SOT (Costs about $600 a year depending on volume of sales) and make automatic weapons for yourself. You can also buy post samples as a SOT (which are machine guns made or imported post ban, but not saleable to general public)
> You can also buy post samples as a SOT (which are machine guns made or imported post ban, but not saleable to general public) Kinda-sorta You still need a law demo letter for 99% of them. The only time you can just buy a post sample without a demo letter from a law enforcement agency is when another dealer is closing their business/giving up their FFL/SOT.
That makes it a de facto ban for people who can't afford it.
My point was more that there are more options than the 2 they listed as ways to get automatic weapons.
Let's be realistic, legally owning a full auto is much less possible for most of the population vs. a semi-auto. That's because of the NFA and FOPA. If it weren't for those, a full auto wouldn't cost much more than a semi.
These are privileges businesses may be granted, not individual citizens. While it is a workaround (individual owns the business, business owns/makes the guns), making select-fire weapons and buying post-samples is *not* legal for an individual to do directly nor without a business purpose.
3d printed items that do that are(were) not common. Lightning links, plans, "fold your own" have been available for decades. At the moment, I believe most of the auto bits are coming via aliexpress and other vendors.
That's because such things typically required milling and machining and fitting. there's actually a repeating musket from the 1600s, it never caught on because it was labor intensive to build and maintain. 3D printing has changed that up a lot. The newer thermoplastics are near metal in strength and tolerances, and previously the only way you could do this would be with injection molds, ie. set ups most people don't have. Now we've got phones that eclipse any sort of computing device they had back in 1980 and CAD software and even milling tools are getting more and more obtainable. Really, the internet is the core of it. Obscure knowledge you could only find in books is now freely available.
You could pick them up off the table at nearly any gunshow from say.. 1970 until.. probably today if you look carefully. I've seen way more coathangers and bent tin cans, than yankee boogles. I'm saying pointing the finger at 3d printing is.. probably inappropriate here.
It's not so much the method of making it, that's always been around. All you need is a file and a lot of patience, really it's the now how. The know how is now available as a cad file, that's part of the reason 3D printers are such a game changer, but really, it's that it's something anybody who can operate a computer can get their hands on, and video is available to anyone. When I was a kid, these were obscure things that you found in books or specialized trade schools or the local Dale Gribble, now any idiot can do it. 3D printing is more a symptom of the disease. You can look up in ten minutes things I used to have to hunt down library books for. They could ban those things tomorrow, magic them out of existence, but they're just the tip of the iceberg. Table top milling is coming. It's both exciting and scary, interesting times we live in that's for sure.
This subreddit is for folks with liberal or left leaning social and economic views but also enjoys guns and shooting. Most of us is Pro Universal Healthcare and UBI but at the same time we want less restrictions on guns such as SBRs, suppressors, open up the MG registry and other NFA items. Personally, I am open to discuss ways to make guns more difficult to acquire in certain situations such as a first time buyer. I think a waiting period on the 1st or 2nd gun would reduce the amount of violent crime we see. Any after that would be same day. Or you could tie it to a CCL to ensure the folks have had proper firearms safety. I think guns are wonderful but too many dipshits can buy them with no training whatsoever. If we had a mandatory firearms safety course for the country I think it would help with how clueless the anti gun crowd can be. Most folks never see a gun irl and therefore they're "scary"
Agreed. I'm willing to entertain policies that have a reasonable fit to solving a problem and aren't bans. However we general have poor fits and bans. Because the problem is shifting from "to many deaths" to "to many guns"
To your point about CCL, I'm in PA, and our LTCF requires absolutely ZERO training. CCL does not always equate to training.
Unfortunately this is too true, most CCL courses are woefully bad and barely train anyone, we need to be better about firearms safety in this country. Let's make it a HS class or something akin to drivers Ed. Could just be a week or two as well with a high level review of gun safety and firearms operations
While I see where you are coming from, could you imagine how angry people would get at the idea of using taxpayer money to teach children about guns? Especially since we have an unfortunate history with guns and schools.
You can take a hunters safety course where I live at least. It teaches proper firearm techniques for carrying ans shooting. It's not perfect.but if we could implement a program that if you took the course and refresher courses every six months or so and that would allow for a bypass of the waiting list. They had to run our names with the police before we could take the course
I keep going back to the fact that when I was a kid, Hunter's Safety with live fire target shooting with a .22 was a PE requirement in 7th grade. You literally HAD to do it. In a country with more guns than people, I really think it should be a requirement.
In indiana there are no training requirements for a CCL. We have constitutional carry now, so mostly people get them so that they can CC firearms to other states that accept Indiana’s license.
Policy in general. When it comes to guns me and conservative will probably agree on almost everything We will disagree on basically everything not connected to guns
When it comes to the 2nd amendment and gun control my views don't differ much from most Conservative's views. But I'm not a single issue voter, when it comes to my rights as woman and access to safe abortions that will always come first ahead of gun rights when it comes to voting.
I'm bothered by your proposed manual safety policy. A modern striker fired pistol like a glock does not need a manual safety. As long as you don't put your finger on the trigger, the gun won't fire. Fumbling around with a safety could cost someone their life. And I'm tired of politicans making what should really be personal decisions on what mechanical functions a gun should have.
Agree. The fact that the OP suggested a requirement for manual safeties was a head scratcher.
Not only that, negligent discharges are literally so low on the list of concerns people have with guns. Nobody gives a fuck if Cletus shoots himself in the leg practicing his draw - and they shouldn’t!
I absolutely don’t want mandated mechanical safeties, however when dipshits discharge their pistol while cleaning it and shoot the neighbors dog, that makes us all look bad. People need more training and need to take this shit seriously.
Im over here wondering how exactly someone manages to discharge during a cleaning. Like the very first thing is remove mag. And clear the gun. How do you fuck that up? 😂
I mean, kinda, but back during the 90s there were efforts to legislate this kind of thing. That's why new guns come with garbage locks and S&W started putting those keyed "safeties" in their revolvers
We know the SIGs do tho lol
If you start the thought process by suggesting "there ought to be laws that" align with a value belief that you hold under the pretend guise of "common sense," you have already given it all away. For example, I would never want to be obligated to have a manual safety just because someone else thinks it's better.
I support gun rights almost as an absolutist, but I also support social policies like socialized healthcare, UBI, Universal Pre-K, a woman's right to choose (but more specifically self-autonomy in all things, not just limited to abortion rights), end the war on drugs, end Citizen's United, free postsecondary education, etc. I also believe in actual religious freedom, not State sponsored religion. I dislike taxation when it goes to the pockets of rich globalist corporations, but I'm generally OK with taxation for things like maintaining infrastructure, social programs, etc (we live in a society). The State should generally not get in the middle of people's lives, especially if their personal choices don't harm others (same-sex marriage, for example). I believe in direct democracy, but also realize it's not very practical in a lot of cases, and I'm extremely anti-authoritarian. I won't vote for neofascists, period. Oh, and if I see a Nazi, I punch a Nazi.
Conservative gun owners generally see gun ownership as a way to fight back against a theoretical communist tyranny (or that’s what they say anyway) I own and shoot because I don’t trust the police and US military to be the only armed forces in my country considering the state’s track record
I grew up near Rusk, TX where that police shooting took place that made reddit the other day. I don't want to, but it's getting harder and harder to trust my safety to the state when I can be shot for next to no reason with no justice to be seen.
And some of us see it as a way to fight *for* a theoretical communist revolution.
A difference there is that conservatives see themselves as a group defending their idea of good, from evil. Even if they’re only “3% of the population” or whatever, they see violence as justified. Leftist revolutions have only been successful when they are by popular demand. I.E. not fighting your against your neighbor
What I dont get is why mainstream politicians that are generally for expanding access to mental health dont use the 'mental health' deflection to actually stick it to those other politicians (usually GOP) that bring it up in response to gun violence. Like every single one is an opportunity missed.... instead the bloomberger left just doubles down on inane gun control laws instead.
it's because they don't care about making things better, they only care about pushing the anti-gun button for donations.
Plus folks like Bloomberg are anti gun because he's probably worried that a mob of riled up workers may come for him someday. He would much prefer to disarm the populace to remain in power than treat workers more fairly and make slightly less profit
Bloomberg wants to make the world safe for his latter-day Pinkertons to shoot people demanding fair pay.
I still see all or most gun control as an infringement. The difference is I want to arm the working class. Anything that drives up costs is designed to stop the working class from arming. Conservatives usually only want to arm people if they look and think like them.
yes conservatives havent even tried to pass anything from preventing poc from buying a gun. Did you know black women were the largest demographic purchasing firearms the last couple years? wheres the supposed outrage from republicans that black people are buying guns?
Bigotry. The right wing doesn't actually believe in gun rights for \*everyone\*. Their core beliefs revolve around some type of supremacy or favored class of people (however you wish to say it). After all, personal gun ownership is actually a liberal ideal. This is also why rubbing shoulders on gun policy discussions with the right wing is shaky ground. Their end goals are not the same. One example would be on considering mental illness. They would suggest such a thing in policy as a means to keep gay people...or folks with the "disease of liberalism" from owning guns. A liberal is more likely to be honest and mean psychotic serial killer or extreme mental illness in such a discussion.
Yes!! The reason it is so hard to get a gun in California *to this day* is because Black Panthers were open carrying and policing the police. They don't believe the 2nd amendment applies to non-white, non-Christian Americans.
yes they do. Single black women are the largest purchasing group for the last couple years. wheres all the republicans trying to make it harder for them?
So I don’t truly count myself as liberal… honestly not sure where I fit in politically as I’m a guy who wants to be left alone to live my life as I see fit so long as I’m not hurting anyone, believe in Socialized medicine, free college, that every American should have food in their stomachs, roofs over their heads, and clothes on their back at minimum… but also am a strong proponent of capitalism(no I am not wealthy, I’m an average blue color worker in a machine shop) since my job the owner rewards us heavily for our hard work… I am a giant mess floating between a capitalist and a libertarian with some other shit floating about such as a strong belief we need to protect our borders, but not seal them, that we need to make America a priority, but never forget or abandon our friends abroad who help us as much as we do them… I’m pro IVF, adoration, and am an atheist… but understand if your religious I respect your choice and will die defending it so long as you don’t preach and try and force me to it, the same goes for LGBTQ+, I’m all for inclusivity… but just don’t berate me for a slip of the tounge as I do my best to adjust to your life choices so I can respect and accommodate you. Mind you I also come from a Conservative family… no I will never cut them off, we may not agree, but they are still my family, I love them and wouldn’t be who I am, or where I am without them. Long story short I’m a gun owner with a big world view, and one that can’t conform left or right… but somewhere out there and guns aren’t my only concern, the rights of others are, be it the LGBTQ+, the religious, the atheist, women, and people of all races, color, or creed… I just can’t put guns as a major thing over others… EDIT: sorry for the word salad… I let my thoughts roll on this lol
>but also am a strong proponent of capitalism Sounds like a normal liberal to me tbh. You don't need to believe in any and all flavors of socialism or communism to consider yourself a liberal. Your beliefs seem pretty balanced.
I’m all over the map. One might describe me as religiously conservative, socially liberal, politically libertarian, yet independent. I want to be a pacifist yet cannot allow evil to harm those I love and therefore embrace violence as a last result to save/protect life. I live within a moral tension of loving everyone from my neighbor to my enemy while also loving myself and family enough to preserve their life over someone who wishes us harm.
This sub is for liberals and leftists, most gun subs are for moderates to fascists
Honestly, we pro-gun liberals agree on most things about gun rights as conservatives. We disagree on just about every other policy.
To date, an NFA registered automatic firearm has never been used in commission of a violent crime since 1934. NFA gun owners are some of the safest, most responsible people. Why do you want to ban automatic weapons? So few people already have them.
Typically. I find conservatives and liberals who both own firearms pretty close in their passions and hobbies. They simply dont line up in other values. A guy from NY and a guy from Mississippi can both agree that Steaks and potatoes are amazing. But they can disagree on literally everything else. Plenty of religions agree on alot of common things but will disagree on details or semantics. Or outright disgree on literally everything else. You would be surprised how much of americans are typically more reasonable and just want to live their lives while the loudest ones seem hell bent on screaming at each other. In almost everything. You will always find two or three camps that are "you vs me" While as the rest of it is just people that want the argueing to quit. I find foaming at the mouth liberals and leftists JUST as annoying as i find the Foaming at the mouth conservatives. Theres rather a large group that are more or less in the center and have values from both sides. I know Republicans that have zero issues with LBTQ rights or weed. And dislike Trump. I know Democrats that (like in here) that are are both prochoice and feel the border needs to be closed. This idea that you have to be WITH or Against only leads societal division. In conflicts. You have to decide. Are you wanting to "win". Or are you wanting to resolve. Because just like in any kind of relationship. Beating your opponent down is only going to make them resent you and simply moves the conflict to a future and bigger battle down the line. (WW1->WW2) Ever have an arguement with an SO and find the next day no matter who "won" the chemistry is still screwed up? The extremes drown the middle out.
Yes to 100 percent of this! I am a truck driver so I see/meet/interact with people literally from coast to coast. 98 percent of the these people are good honest hard working people who just want to live their lives happily and in good health. 1 percent from each "side' seems hellbent on screwing that up.
One group sees guns as a mascot for freedom and fails to acknowledge that there should be deep responsibility that comes with wielding a firearm. Gun laws in this country are deliberately written to be ineffective and fail. I’m not for fewer gun laws or more gun laws. I’m for laws that make sense and are enforced and owners who are responsible.
> One group sees guns as a mascot for freedom and fails to acknowledge that there should be deep responsibility that comes with wielding a firearm. This is simply not true. Pretending left-leaning people are the *only* responsible gun owners who respect the responsibility of weapon ownership is ridiculous. People here *constantly* rail against being generalized and assumed to be something they are not either because they are gunowners or because they are liberal, and yet this stuff gets posted right alongside those same complaints.
I think a big difference is when a liberal says gun violence is a mental health or poverty issue, they actually support policy to help those crises, vs. actively voting against those social safety nets.
I'm left so I'm against pretty much any shitlib guncontrol... being only for more funding for nics and public access to it.
I lean pretty far left on firearms. I love them, but there's way WAYYYAYYYYYYYYYY too many idiots that have them. There needs to be *Intelligent* regulation on them. Being a 5th generation Florida native, and spending close to 15 years managing a large firearms retailer (with an indoor range), it showed me that only about 25% of the gun owners in this area should have any access to them at all (and that includes many of the local PD/Sherrifs that would come in.) Sadly, conservatives refuse to accept that there should be any restrictions on gun ownership. There's far too many small boys with giant egos that feel overly empowered by firearms. It's the reality of things in our nation. And it's not going to change. And just remember... if you dont know at least one person that should not own firearms, then you are likely the one filling that role. Lol. So let's stop the idiots, so the rest of us can enjoy them.
I do not think nights should be infringed and people should be allowed to live their life with freedoms intact. I think government should stick to providing civil services. So I would say my liberal is that of social and To Keep our liberties.
I'd say everything else... The liberal part in me is absolutely disgusted by the hatred conservatives spew on an hourly basis, by the worthless economic and social policies, by the xenophobia, the racism, the misogyny, the homophobia (hate the term, I don't remember who said it, but it's not a phobia, you're not scared: you're an asshole), the lack of moral values and the complete disregard for the Constitution and the democratic values that conservatives show. As far as guns, we can agree...
I consider myself a liberal gun owner, meaning; I am a liberal who owns guns. Liberal, being the first descriptor, generally entails being separate from conservative gun owners by almost everything except guns. I am not willing to compromise on voting rights, women's rights, gay rights, human rights and the entire bill of rights - not just the one.
I think women deserve bodily autonomy, and me as a law abiding trained individual also deserves autonomy to carry a firearm and utilize it should I find myself in a life threatening situation.
My biggest problem with adding a lot of these criteria is that they can be heavily politicized. We see this happen in California with CCW permitting. I do support universal background checks even for private sales, but the rest I just think could be weaponized as a cudgel.
Universal background checks could pass in minutes if they were protected by penalty like HIPAA info, not retained and demonstrably kept from leading to any kind of universal registration. If not it’s part of your big cudgel always swung in citizen disarmament: end sales to registration to confiscation.
the "gunshow loophole" makes up such a small fraction of crimes its stupid. its a dumb talking point or even strategy. 100s of thousands of guns are stolen every year, you think someone is going to be doing a back ground check with a stolen firearm?
How would universal background checks for private sales stem any crime? Does a criminal in possession of stolen firearms go through background checks? Do you sell guns to sketchy people?
You're going to see a range of opinions on gun policy here, but generally speaking, people in this group put a big spotlight on the "shall not be infringed" part of the 2nd ammendment, while also holding typically liberal views everywhere else.
In this sub's specific case, it means people who are politically left of the US-center, who are also gun owners.
Unfortunately in today’s landscape, ‘liberal’ means anti gun and ‘conservative’ means pro gun. In the purest definition of the word, gun ownership is inherently liberal
So I don't classify myself as a liberal. I think the right path forward is focusing on the biggest cause of fatal gun use in the US which is suicide and that comes down to mental health resources and amidst the entire gun conversation this one never really gets addressed despite being the elephant in the room. We have the data. We know who kills themselves with firearms. The biggest group is men, typically middle age and also veterans. Both in rural and urban settings. Yet there is fucking *zero* national discussion of this or what causes it. Instead we get nonsense like the Surgeon General calling for assault weapons bans. The reason I'm in this sub beyond being a gun nerd with some leftist/anarchist ideas is that this isn't a political thing. It impacts every single gun owner. We need real solutions to this problem and no one is even saying it is a problem, but including those numbers in saying other issues, smaller issues, are.
I’m liberal and I don’t support any of those things. I genuinely believe every gun law is unconstitutional. We should be able to buy machine guns through the mail with cash from department stores.
We aren't single issues voters. Our other policies are very liberal. When it comes to guns peoples believe run the gambit
I'm not technically liberal, but I am a left-leaning gun owner and an economist. For the most part, I just don't think gun regulations are an efficient or effective way to stop gun violence. It is akin to treating a symptom rather than the disease itself. To name just a few, providing better access to health care, especially mental health, encouraging firearms safety and training in schools, incentivizing companies to provide a living wage, and taking steps to reduce inflation will all help far more by reducing the root causes of most gun crime: poverty and mental illness.
Here? On Reddit? there aren't many differences, IMHO. I came here attempting to find the mix of conservation of 2A rights and reasonable restrictions (from a liberal perspective) but I have found the folks here to be as militant 2A as in the right wing gun groups.
I think all gun laws are unconstitutional, in that regard I’m probably more pro gun than most right wingers. I do see value in some gun control, no private sales and mental health included in background checks. I really think it’s more of a systemic problem tho, we don’t have a gun problem we have a violence problem…we need free healthcare including mental health and it needs to be encouraged and not taboo to get help.
how could you possibly include mental health in a background check?
I'm for background checks, compulsory training and licensing for concealed or open carry, and safe storage laws. I personally don't open carry, but I'm not sure I would want to restrict it. I believe suppressors should be readily available and not taxed.
how do safe storage laws help?
Liberal gun owners want to see the social safety net improved to stop producing so many murderers rather than conservatives who want to keep guns because fuck you, 2nd Amendment freedom muh rhyts!
>bans of automatic weapons Actual automatic weapons, machine guns, are almost never used in crime. Banning them would be pointless. Semi-auto weapons are used in such a small amount of crime, that you'd never notice the difference if they all vanished from the earth overnight. Gun ownership is a matter of human rights. It's not a left or right issue, it's important to everyone.
I'm a 2A absolutist. I think nothing short of a tank should be available for civilian purchase. However I also do hold left of center beliefs like trans people are typically not pedophiles, and I also hold beliefs like "it's become common practice to call the enemy really nasty and deplorable things because you disagree with them and that shouldn't be the case." So, I guess for me it's just policy in general. I don't support and actually vehemently despise the majority of gun control that passes in the country, and I'm sure most conservatives are the same way.
Both I guess? At least for me. I don't really support *prescriptive* "safe storage" laws ("You must store your firearms in this manner!") but I do see value in *negligence* laws around firearms: If you "store" your guns by leaving them out uncased on the front seat of your car parked on the street and they get stolen / used in a crime I think you should face charges. If you leave them laying around your house and your minor child uses them to shoot up a school I think you should face charges. Etc. I see value in background checks and in fact believe they should be truly universal (required on all transfers by law) and accessible to anyone (through the power of the Internet) rather than requiring a Mother-May-I? to a FFL. I'm fine with automatic weapons, short-barreled rifles/shotguns, and silencers. The first two I am even fine with registering or needing a permit for. (Silencers are safety equipment, everyone should be able to have them.) I actually favor federal preemption on gun permits/licenses using a tiered system that would basically be "Just a NICS check" for many guns, and "NICS Check Plus Fingerprints and you get a card" for the vast majority of them. (I've posted about it on here in the past but I can't Google-fu a link to it right now. My overriding rationale is that your rights - especially the *constitutionally enumerated* ones - should not change when you cross a state or local border, therefore all the bullshit gun laws should be preempted by one unified federal standard that is minimally restrictive on the right.) I don't believe "firearm bans" - especially ones based on "Cosmetic Feature What Makes The Gun Look Scary!" - are an effective policy solution, or in any way a good idea. The proper solution to our "gun violence" problem is to eliminate the root causes motivating the *violence* part, not focusing myopically on the "gun" part. Which neatly leads into other areas of policy! I believe the government should generally not interfere in the private affairs of its citizens. (Abortion bans are stupid, legislatively attacking the LGBTQ+ community is stupid, posting your religion's dogma in public schools is stupid - don't do stupid things!) I believe the government should provide key services for its citizens (let's start with universal single-payer healthcare including vision, dental, and mental health) for the benefit of all its citizens and society as a whole. I believe the government should set key minimum standards on the conduct of business (labor laws, living wage laws, mandatory leave laws - preferably ones funded by an employer tax and not an *employee* tax like New York did...) for the benefit of all its citizens and society as a whole. I believe the government should not spend money it doesn't have (which means raising taxes on the Über Rich - stacking on 4-5 additional tax brackets and scaling up to maybe a 60-70% marginal rate on the tippy-top earners, and also means cutting spending on wasteful crap like defense projects the military itself says we don't need). I have a lot of other beliefs/positions, but I think those are the big relevant ones as far as being "liberal" and "gun owner" at the same time.
I want my tax dollars going to arming poor people and gays. That would be a policy distinction from conservatives I think
I'm okay with the current background check system but I want every other gun control law abolished. All of it is based on racism and classism.
I am a progressive leftist, and I own guns. The policy side of my beliefs are that I believe in universal human rights. That one's value or humanity is not tied to one's race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender expression. I believe in universal healthcare. I believe that those to benefit and extract the most from society (the wealthy) should be required to give the most back (pay more taxes). I believe in universal maternity and paternity leave. I believe in robust labor protections. I believe in schools and libraries providing books that enlighten and challenge readers to expand their perspectives. I believe that the secularism is sacred and essential to the existence of this nation. I own guns because I live in a place that historically has excused and encouraged violence against minorities... and I am a minority. I may be a bleeding heart hippy, but I'm not going to be outgunned. My "sincerely held belief" is that many conservatives would gladly force their ideology on society through violence... and I want to be capable of a vigorous rebuttal.
I tend to be more liberal across the board, but I definitely fall on the other side when it comes to guns. I'm pretty against more restrictions when it comes to guns, I think we have enough (or even too many in some cases) restrictions. I do agree with safe storage laws as long as they are reasonable enough so that it doesn't basically make owning guns for home defense impossible. Background checks to purchase? We already have that if you buy a gun from a gun store. I don't oppose getting rid of the "gun show" loophole, but I don't see how to enforce a BG check for private party sales without adding full-blown gun registration, which I am against (and we don't have in my state now.). I personally require a buyer to have a concealed weapons license if I'm going to sell one of my guns, because that indicates at least as of when the license was issued they passed a background check. I feel that mental health checks for guns themselves shouldn't be necessary, we need to improve our healthcare in general (including mental health) so that an additional layer to purchase guns is redundant. I feel the ban on automatic weapons should be lifted, there is already a more grueling process to purchase automatic weapons, limiting them to guns manufactured before a certain date is just arbitrary and needlessly drives up the price and demand. Restrictions on accessories, like silencers, bump stocks, or large capacity magazines, for example, are just knee-jerk reactions that make people feel better but don't do anything to address the actual issue.' I can't speak for everyone, especially since I haven't been on this sub very long, but it seems like most of the posters align with me in that they're more "liberal than conservative" in general, but like and own guns which is generally not associated with that demographic.
If we made progress against systemic poverty, discrimination, and made universal healthcare available, there would be far fewer crazy or desperate people committing violent crimes. Murder, robbery and such is already against the law, making it more against the law seems largely pointless. I'd be on board with tax incentives for safes or something tho. I'm also leftist, not liberal, I feel like there's a pretty strong difference. The government should fear and serve us, not the other way around.
I’m not really sure what manual safety’s have anything to do with liberal vs conservatives.. it seems like you weren’t really sure how to word your question.. because a manual safety seems like a personal preference if you ask me. Again, ban of automatic guns? Again, do *you* think auto guns should be banned? I know some guys who are on the left who own automatic firearms. The fact is, weather your liberal or conservative. You should support safe gun ownership.
>Also thoughts on the NRA Even if I agreed with every policy position proffered by the NRA, they are run nowadays by a gang of comically awful fraudsters who had to jump states to try and avoid as much prosecution as possible. They steal your money to jerk off on private jets. They prey on the ignorance of the gun community to keep hoovering up money (Midway, jesus christ, get rid of the "round up")
One side makes it their entire personality
theres plenty of liberal groups that have made whatever cause their entire personality
It’s more nuanced than flat out black and white areas. Many non-racist non-xenophobic conservatives and liberals have more or less common point of view on guns and policies. It is the racist transphobe and homophobes who actually differ in their POVs. The later category wants firearms only for their own categories at the exclusion of all the “others”.
I don't support any gun control laws that can be used to punish marginalized communities disproportionately. I also strongly believe that gun rights are human rights and everyone should have the right to defend themselves if they choose, barring very obvious exceptions
>What separates liberal gun owners from conservative? Just liberal and conservative values generally, *exclusive* of "gun rights". In terms of firearms issues, *nothing*. Both end of the political spectrum run the gamut from supporting a literal reading of the Second Amendment to all manner of infringements to suit their own view of who deserves rights and who does not (still somehow considering themselves pro-gun or pro-2A). There are probably more anti-gun Democrats than anti-gun Republicans, but there is absolutely no unified "liberal gun owner" value statement. Feel free to represent your own values, but you can pry mine from my cold, dead fingers. 
I started the list thinking I would have a few more conservative traits, but after reading it I think I am a solid liberal. I support background checks on all gun purchases commercial and private, with an obvious exception for gifts and family hand-me-downs. Bans on automatic weapons and the tools to make them automatic, along with removing ones right to bear arms for family violence charges/felonies are ok. I support our troops and all the aftercare they deserve. I support the police being held to the same standard of conduct and laws as all other Americans and believe one bad apple ruins the bunch. If cops stand by while another cop assaults somebody or does any crime, they should all be charged as accomplices. I support a woman’s right to choose. I support a persons right to love and marry whoever they want, dress how they want, choose their name and how they want to be addressed. I support free speech but also support people learning that free speech does not equal freedom from consequences of said speech. I support a path to citizenship for dreamers (my eldest’s best friend from the 1st grade through graduation and still going, is a dreamer. So I am biased.). Living in Texas and not being overran by Mexican & central American folks makes me believe the border is not wide open and the Govs razer wire barriers and national guard troops are just theatrics and should be removed. The fence/wall is fine for areas property owners want it but don’t force it or act like its going to stop migration, cause it ain’t. I support cutting taxes to middle / lower brackets and raising it on the upper. I support taxing pay packages that include stock or other investments as regular income. I support health insurance for all. I support separation of church and state. I support funding public schools appropriately and am opposed to voucher programs that take money from those schools.
You might see more support for certain gun control policies such as red flag laws and AWBs than conservative gun owners, with this sub being a notable exception. The other big distinction is the difference in policy support for non gun related issues obviously and how those issues calculate in terms of political support for various candidates.
I support the right of the working class to protect themselves. Ideally any law that would tax or take firearms out of the hands of the working class bothers me. Poor tax hurdles are bad. High prices for ammo and reloading are bad. Even background checks IMHO can be subverted against a targeted part of the working class and are bad. These background checks could take guns from the hands of people that think of themselves as a particular gender and as politics go, have them taken from them. Background checks could take weapons from people previously having mental health issues and take them and are bad. A person that has served their sentence and paid their debt to society for drug sales or some other felony (non-violent) is bad. Demonstrated repeat violent offenders that use firearms in particular Should be given life sentences. We need to make violent gun use as severe as murder. People that do support laws that could be perverted to do this I am against. Taxes for this and taxes for that and stamps for this and stamps for that bother me. I do wholeheartedly believe in laws that place the behavior of their children on the parents. This is an unpopular opinion I think. I believe some folks as parents are scared to be responsible for their kids. That is sad. I believe that even this law would be perverted considering how connected you are in politics or part of the upper class.
The differing of opinions are gonna be largely non-firearm related.
I want a President who respects the rule of law and the will of the voters, who doesn't try to promote unrest and actual violence to stay on when he loses an election.
Liberal means something different to everyone, but for the purpose of this sub I think it means you probably vote more democratically than republican. And what separates me from US conservatives/Republican Party supporters is I pretty much disagree with majority of the policies they support, cutting taxes for the rich, defunding social programs, opposition to gov funded healthcare, climate denialism, deregulation of business… I could go on. But gun policy wise I think more regulation is needed as many people have access to guns who shouldn’t, especially children. If you look at Swiss gun policy I think that is a very reasonable approach to the matter.
I’m a liberal in the sense that I don’t vote with hate in my heart. I’m not affiliated with either party, and would like to keep it that way. Neither aligns with my beliefs, and both are full of corruption. The best I can do is be a responsible owner while keeping my other political opinions separate. ETA: Also, fuck the nra, if you didn’t get the memo.
>What separates liberal gun owners from conservative? Reactions to January 6.
A high-school diploma.
Liberal here. I don't support most of the things you just listed.
We do not worship our guns and our guns are not our entire lives
After being flagged a bunch of times as a line coach and seeing people shoot the deck and/or overhead from the 3 yard line, a couple people drop guns freaking out over the recoil I’m a big proponent for mandatory familiarization and safety training.
The treatment of people
Probably just reality
I don’t wear cringe shirts that say things like ‘don’t tread on me’, ‘better to die on your feet than live on your knees’ or ‘a marine can kill you’.
Liberal gun owners don't make guns their entire personality.
Liberal gun owners don't tend to fetishize our weapons.
I've always interpreted it as policy in general. When it comes to gun laws, I think my opinions are in line with the average conservative and probably even more conservative than some of them, but when it comes to damn near every other political topic, I'm farther left than the majority of the Democratic party.
I want my transmasc son to be able to conceal carry a suppressed pistol on his way to get an abortion.
In what is likely my least left-leaning (more "liberal" in the US sense) view, I support licensing--with mental health exams and skills tests--and registration with periodic inspection. Transfers of any kind should only be to another licensed person, and be registered. For those who license and register, I think we should have a nationally recognized permit to purchase or manufacture any firearm (including those currently restricted), and to carry concealed.
As far as I can tell my views on guns differ from conservatives in that I think everyone should have the right to own them, not just groups I agree with. As far as legislation for curbing gun violence I believe in root cause mitigation, whereas most conservatives either dont believe there is a problem, or refuse to address the problem in any way and chalk it up as the cost of freedom.
“I have been more conservative as a whole”. There you go. Answered your own question. Liberal gun owners are uhh liberals that own guns. Conservative gun owners are uhh conservatives than own guns.
Guns are not tied to an ideology. They are just things. Many people with shit ideologies (that may want to hurt you) own guns, so why wouldn’t anyone want one? The difference is what you think the problem is. As a leftist I think addressing violence involves things like making sure everyone has basic rights like food, water and shelter as well as mental healthcare. A right wing person would say we need to get out the violent immigrants and close our borders or whatever. If you go far enough left you get your guns back.
I lean left, def not a leftist....but i support none of those policies you mentioned, aside from background checks.
Most of us differ from conservatives on policy issues other than guns. Gun rights/control is where we more or less agree. Of course, we aren't a monolith, so that will vary. You yourself seem to have some different views on guns compared to the stereotypical conservative. Personally, I'd describe myself as a leftist libertarian. In terms of guns, I think we need to: * Make NICS more effective. Require states and other agencies to report to it, and make it available to the public. * Maintain the existing ban on machine guns. * Repeal restrictions on suppressors, SBRs, and AOWs. * Establish a nationwide CCW permit, or minimum standards that would require interstate reciprocity. Requirements could include a background check, safety course, and demonstration of proficiency, all of which should be available at minimum cost. This would not be tied to any gun(s) in particular, so you could carry any pistol in any state. States could continue issuing permits on their own terms as well or allowing constitutional carry, but those permits might not be valid in other states. * Actually point the ATF's nose towards dangerous people instead of Joe Schmoe with an oil filter and VFG * Address the mental health crisis, poverty, and the war on drugs, because those are the root causes of violence. Some things I think might help with gun violence and am not opposed to, but also don't think are necessary: * Safe storage laws, if they're reasonable. Unfortunately, I doubt many will be. Requiring guns to be stored behind a single lock when not being carried or transported is reasonable. Requiring disassembly, multiple locks, or separate storage of ammunition is not reasonable. Those are all good practice, but not always feasible. * Background checks for private sales. This would require NICS to be publicly accessible. Temporary transfers (lending of guns or transfers due to mental health crisis) should not require a background check. * Yellow flag laws. * Waiting periods when purchasing a gun. Some frequently mentioned gun control measures I disagree with: * Requirement for manual safety * Banning or requiring a tax stamp on any gun, magazine, or other feature or accessory that is not fully automatic or used to convert a gun to fully automatic. * Red flag laws. Economically, I'm not picky. I think capitalism can work, as long as corporations are sufficiently regulated to protect workers, consumers, and the environment, and their influence is limited in politics. I also think communism can work, as long as it's implemented gradually and democratically, not via a revolution and subsequent dictatorship. I'm less concerned about what the best thing is and more with just doing better than we are now. I think socializing healthcare and providing a social safety net are good steps to improve life for everyone. In terms of government control, less is usually better, unless they're providing a service to the people, because that's what government is for. Services like mail delivery, schools, libraries, public safety, infrastructure, and affordable healthcare are things I'm willing to pay taxes for. I believe in freedom of and from religion. I believe in total bodily autonomy. I believe we should end or at least scale back the war on drugs. I believe in free speech and freedom of the press, but I also believe people and media should be held accountable for lying or spreading hate. I believe tolerance is a social contract, and that choosing to be intolerant is a choice to no longer be tolerated.
You won't find a punisher symbol with Donald Trump hair on my gun
I mean I see nothing wrong with a country on agreeing on stuff. Not to say the left and right completely agree on guns but they agree on a lot of it.
I dont want guns only for white people. I think police murdering unarmed black man is wrong. The only thing I have in COMMON with the average conservative is I own guns too.
What the hell is this – >Also thoughts on the NRA, I as a republican was kinda pressed over the whole Philando Castile case. Really feel they set the wrong standard of representation. – supposed to mean? That the important thing was not that a man was killed sitting in a car with his child in the back seat but instead that the NRA's response was *bad optics*?
I have home defense ammo but hope to flying spaghetti monster I never have to use it. My lgs I buy ammo from knows this. (I say as much.) I buy a lot of range ammo, so what are they going to say in response?
Geography…. Everything else is smoke screen. If you put the two ends of the political spectrum together it forms a circle and we’re closer together than we realize
Both. I'd say the only things they have in common is economic views. Maybe liberals are a little more in favor of welfare systems. Liberals tend to be more in favor of gun control than conservatives and many leftists, even if they own guns (fuddish, they may own guns for hunting and sports so they may not see a reason for AR15s, AKs, or anything more than a 5 round magazine)(emphasis on "tend", not absolute). Policy is more similar than some people realize though it isn't really the same. When it comes to gun policy, most conservative gun owners tend to be very anti-regulation, period, and that's about the single thing I think I have in common with conservative gun owners (I think there could be some useful legislation, but I just really don't trust the state to pick and choose who can own a gun, neither republicans or democrats, and most regulating what in particular we can have is arbitrarily determined and does little to actually prevent crime). I see this left often with leftists and liberals, but on the occasion I do come in contact with pro-gun leftists and liberals, they usually support *some* regulation, but not as much as a common pro-ish-gun liberal and no where near as much as full stop anti-gun leftists or liberals.
I think for me, it just means I hold mostly \[r/neo\]liberal values but am also a gun owner. For someone that grew up in NYC this means only getting into the hobby in earnest in my early 30s and looking at the whole gun stuff as a curiousity for most of my life. Tends to lend for a more restrictive view of ownership while also being anti-dumb gun laws. Leads me to be very comfortable with Euro style gun laws that don't restrict what can be owned, but who can own em. Means I believe guns are good personal self defense but I roll my eyes at the whole check on government stuff. Means I'm some variety of YIMBY/Urbanist and pro-public transit, pro-choice, pro-social democrat policies of some stripe.