Vote on this survey

[RED333]

http://blog.ctnews.com/connecticutpostings/2013/03/08/take-our-gun-survey/

[Oh Shoot]

Note that all the gun restrictions are strongly "no" except universal background checks. All polls show same, even in the most conservative districts in US. We're gonna have that.

 

- OS

[East_TN_Patriot]

Why all the support for a gun offender registry???  What exactly is such a registry supposed to accomplish except create another meaningless government program that needs to be funded.  Add on that the sex offender registries have caused more harm than good.  Yet another thing that boggles my mind.

[kieefer]

I did your poll just so I could share this photo.  :D

 

 

[billyscott]

What's with the gun offender registry? Aren't convicted felons already there. And the powers that be can't enforce that. 

[LagerHead]

What's with the gun offender registry? Aren't convicted felons already there. And the powers that be can't enforce that. 

 

There's not really anything to enforce. It just creates a special class of criminal because as we all know being killed with a gun is much much worse than being killed with a knife or a car. If you're killed with a gun you're not just dead, you're super-secret-double-indemnity-with-a-side-of-fries dead. And nobody wants to be that dead.

Edited March 12, 2013 by LagerHead

[TMF]

Why all the support for a gun offender registry???  What exactly is such a registry supposed to accomplish except create another meaningless government program that needs to be funded.  Add on that the sex offender registries have caused more harm than good.  Yet another thing that boggles my mind.

I know it'll hijack the crap outa this thread, but I'm curious as to how the sex offender registry has made anything worse. Seems like a pretty good tool to identify potential threats to your kids, especially since sex offenders tend to repeat.

[battleop]

"Why all the support for a gun offender registry???"

 

I am confused as to anyone would have a problem with this one.  If you are a lawful gun owner this should have no effect on you what so ever.

[Superman]

"Why all the support for a gun offender registry???"

 

I am confused as to anyone would have a problem with this one.  If you are a lawful gun owner this should have no effect on you what so ever.

Yeah until you walk past a sign that you didnt see and someone spots your gun, calls the law. Now your on the registry.

[Paladin132]

You forgot so that they know where to go to take weapons when they take them all.

 

 

 

Why all the support for a gun offender registry???  What exactly is such a registry supposed to accomplish except create another meaningless government program that needs to be funded.  Add on that the sex offender registries have caused more harm than good.  Yet another thing that boggles my mind.

[.357SIG]

Voted NOs. No way to have a gun offender registry without a national gun registry which as we all know equals national gun registry and turns into national gun confiscation. So my answer will continue to be NO to any new gun control or compromise.

Edited March 12, 2013 by .357SIG

[Guest Cami]

Just look at history.  A national gun registry will just be a convienient way for the government to start confiscation.  Remember kids, we still have a long way to go until the next election.  :puke:

[Guest Cami]

Gee, thanks, so much for eating breakfast!

 

I did your poll just so I could share this photo.  :D

 

 

 

I bet she thinks she looks good.  EWWWWWWWWWW!  What a fine upstanding mom and first lady (representing US) dressing like that in public, with her children! 

[Dennis1209]

That was painless. No straight across the board.

[ttocswob]

Done. I've wasted mouse clicks for lesser reasons.

 

IMO the only thing accomplished is that the anti's have to bury the poll, rather than crowing over an anti-gun win.

[East_TN_Patriot]

I know it'll hijack the crap outa this thread, but I'm curious as to how the sex offender registry has made anything worse. Seems like a pretty good tool to identify potential threats to your kids, especially since sex offenders tend to repeat.

Because numerous studies have found that registries have caused offenders to "disappear" thus keeping them from being monitored. It also requires them to meet a multitude of requirements related to residency as it relates to sex offender "buffer zones" and residence restrictions (an even bigger issue) that makes it very difficult for an offender to stay in compliance. Criminal justice agencies that are already stretched thin are required to dedicate personnel and resources to maintaining the registry, providing it to the public, monitoring offenders, and prosecuting those that are not in compliance. All that for a policy that has not been shown to have any positive impact on sex offenses.

To put it simply, sex offender registries and buffer zones are no different than gun registries and gun free zones. Edited March 12, 2013 by East_TN_Patriot

[Paladin132]

On top of this, it overburdens an overwhelmed system to the point to be useless and tag folks with another reason for them to recidivate since they are no longer back in the mainstream of society. It also puts silly things out there like peeing on a wall making an 18 year old a registered offender.

 

Nope, it’s a bad idea. Not only that but anyone who thinks that this will not be used to take weapons away from them needs to take a look historically at both what has happened elsewhere and what folks who have said who sit in legislatures around the nation. We need fewer restrictions on firearms so people can defend themselves if they choose to and are attacked.

[Oh Shoot]

Higher % of people agree on importance of universal background checks than they do on capitalism, vacations, or even Italian food. Seriously. Even the most conservative pols' districts run in the 80% range, nationally is closer to 90%.

 

We gonna have it. Only question is the permanent database thing. That's the fight that needs to be concentrated on.

 

- OS

[TMF]

Because numerous studies have found that registries have caused offenders to "disappear" thus keeping them from being monitored. It also requires them to meet a multitude of requirements related to residency as it relates to sex offender "buffer zones" and residence restrictions (an even bigger issue) that makes it very difficult for an offender to stay in compliance. Criminal justice agencies that are already stretched thin are required to dedicate personnel and resources to maintaining the registry, providing it to the public, monitoring offenders, and prosecuting those that are not in compliance. All that for a policy that has not been shown to have any positive impact on sex offenses.
To put it simply, sex offender registries and buffer zones are no different than gun registries and gun free zones.

Huh, never looked at it like that. I just kinda liked knowing who the bad guys were. I realize, as it relates to the subject of gun owners, we will soon be the "bad guys".

[LowBb]

I think many politicians and bean counters see the "gun permit for all who possess" as a way to generate revenue. it will also deter some who may be on the fence. Then, of course that money will go to some sort of welfare system (said in a grouchy tone). I don't think it will pass though.

Universal background checks will pass. I'm afraid the database will exist too. This will help them track areas that may be more prone to gun violence and who may be selling the guns in certain areas. There is a lot of info they can get with that database.

[Guest Bassman17SC]

I voted 'no' on all of the questions for what good it may do.  After all, the poll is for legislation being considered in Connecticut.  I laughed at some of the comments from the LO-VOs (LOw information VOters).  

[quietmike]

One question that will always get a blank stare in return:

Why do liberals prefer restrictions, waiting periods, background checks, and user fees for the second amendment, but squeal like schoolgirls at the mention of merely showing an I.D. to vote?

[TMF]

One question that will always get a blank stare in return:

Why do liberals prefer restrictions, waiting periods, background checks, and user fees for the second amendment, but squeal like schoolgirls at the mention of merely showing an I.D. to vote?

 

Ohhhh, you know the answer to that question.