Here's my ideas on gun control

[SHRED]

I'd start here with Federal law:

Limit bullet clips on all firearms to 5.
Strong background checks on all sales no exceptions.
Mandatory 10 day waiting period.
All firearms must be registered and owners must pass a proficiency test.
All firearms must be insured.
Assault weapons banned with no "grandfather" clause. You turn them all in or lose your right to ever own a firearm again.
Anyone caught with an unregistered firearm forfeits current and future firearm ownership plus 1 year in jail.

Just a few thoughts for starters.

[Phoenix61]

1. Caught with an unregistered firearm

mandatory 1 year prison sentence. No gain time allowed. Add that and count me in.

[SHRED]

2. 👍

[SHRED]

3. Changed it

[mentalslavery]

30. Like the brain storming here...but could I suggest a longer sentence

.....considering the horrible consequences. One year is light....Im not much for jail, but it would be nice to require these people to contribute to society instead of detract....

[C_U_L8R]

4. A "lives matter" tax

One dollar on every bullet sold with the proceeds going to support victims and their families.

Do I hear five dollars?

[SHRED]

5. Good idea

[mentalslavery]

36. Gun violence is expensive...

Say for example a parent, making 50K, who has 20 years of employment left is killed. With the average cost of living increases and maybe a raise here and there, that family is financially devastated due to the loss of life. On top of the human tragedy....what about the chances for children to go to college, play sports...etc.

[spanone]

6. K&R...

[Mister Ed]

7. Excellent. I would have been delighted to face these requirements when I bought my gun.

They would in no way have been an infringement on my freedom. And they would have gone a long way toward preserving the freedom of schoolchildren to live.

[mentalslavery]

31. They also encourage me (not a gun owner) to support gun owners

cuz in the climate we have now...I think a lot of us are thinking all of yall are craaaaa....

[Mister Ed]

45. I can only speak for myself.

In a time and place where I calculated, that, despite the gun's inherent risks, it provided a net increase to the safety of those in my household, I bought it.

When the situation changed (safer neighborhood, children in the house), I got rid of it.

If the situation changes in the future, and I once again see a benefit to having one, I'll buy one again. And it will please me greatly if I find that the requirements for my purchase have become quite stringent.

No crazy here.

[hunter]

85. Never thought to buy a gun while I was living in rough neighborhoods.

Never had a confrontation where a gun might have been useful.

Most especially when my kids were small. Bad enough that they'd play with matches if they could get them. I was like that too as a kid. The pyromania gene is strong. My grandpa was an engineer for the Apollo project. He liked fire and rockets too. His parents were so unable to deal with him as a teen they sent him off to the big cosmopolitan city of Cheyenne Wyoming to live with a similarly incorrigible uncle.

Statistically, owning a gun does not improve outcomes but it does increase the odds someone will be shot in the house, usually not a "bad guy."

Excuse me, Mr. Home Invader, while I go fetch my gun from the safe...



You don't keep your guns in a safe? Bigger

When my kids were teens we always had strangers in our house at all hours, sleeping on the sofa, rummaging through the refrigerator or cupboards at two in the morning... I always figured if the family dogs were okay with 'em, so was I. Go back to sleep, Hunter. Every night is strange noises in the house. Tonight's nothing special.

We don't live in a majority white community, my wife's not white, and my kids' friends reflect that.

The house I grew up in was even crazier. My parents are artists. They had a mess of kids and some very eccentric friends, but none so eccentric as my grandma. She'd been removed by police and paramedics from the house she owned as a danger to herself and others. No assisted living place would hold her for long, even with her money, so she'd land with my parents. I'm pretty sure she was steely-eyed James Bond competent with guns to her last breath, but my mother didn't allow her guns. We're pacifists in my family, not by natural inclination, but by necessity. My dad and my wife's dad chose not to bear arms in their military service. My dad was a nearsighted Army medical clerk like Radar O'Reilly and my wife's dad was a Marine medic.

My parent's house, like ours, was also that house where LGBT and other misfit kids found refuge from unaccepting families. You never knew who you might run into waiting to use the bathroom.

I don't let anyone I'd care to shoot live in my head so why would I ever need a gun?

[Mister Ed]

89. I offer you neither explanation nor apology.

I was there, and knew the specifics of my fiance's situation as you do not.

[WillowTree]

8. What's with this obsession around here with insurance in the context of gun control?

What kind of insurance are you talking about and what purpose do you think it would serve in the interest of gun control?

[SHRED]

9. Call it what you want

A victim pool then.

Some way victims, no matter if an accident or illegal shootings, get compensation.

[WillowTree]

10. No form of insurance covers illegal acts of the insured.

None. Never has. Never will. So I fail to see any function toward gun control.

[SHRED]

12. You sound pretty cut and dried on this

Like you've argued this before...with passion.

Just looking for ideas. That's why I said call it what you want but there will be a tax to cover what I mentioned if I had my way.

[WillowTree]

17. Not 'passionate' really. I just understand how insurance works.

And what it will and won't do.

I like your style, SHRED. Have a really nice evening. I mean that.

[SHRED]

20. Thank you...back at ya

[Skittles]

16. if you own a deadly weapon

you may kill or injure someone, on purpose or accidentally.....YOU SHOULD HAVE INSURANCE

it may be TOO PRICEY for some gun humpers

[WillowTree]

18. Insurance is available for accidents. Not for "on purpose". If on purpose, you're on your own.

[Skittles]

21. so you accidentally kill another wannbe hero

gun humping "accidents" need to be in a class on their own

[mentalslavery]

32. The issues is insurance in case someone is harmed by a gun...no different than the medical

aspect of car insurance.

[X_Digger]

46. If you mow down pedestrians on purpose, your insurance will not pay.

Why do so many seem to get wrapped up on this silly notion?

[WillowTree]

47. Exactly. Like auto insurance.

I'm just wondering what people think any kind of insurance has to do with gun control. Yes, firearms liability provides protection if someone is accidentally injured, just as auto liability will provide coverage if you accidentally injure someone with your car. But it has nothing to with illegal use of a gun, just as your car insurance would not cover you if you kill or injure someone while committing a crime. So what does that have to do with gun control?

[SunSeeker]

11. How about requiring 2 references vouching that you're safe with a gun, like in Canada?

That's along with a Certification of gun safety training, a Canadian Firearms Safety Course Report, a MINIMUM 45-day in-depth background investigation, a minimum 28-day waiting period, and sign offs from both current AND former spouses or conjugal partners.

Check out what you have to fill out to get a license to buy a gun in Canada:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/form-formulaire/pdfs/5592-eng.pdf

On top of that, Canadian civilians aren't allowed to possess automatic weapons, handguns with a barrel shorter than 10.5 cm or any modified handgun, rifle or shotgun. Most semi-automatic assault weapons are also banned.

And people wonder why Canada doesn't have mass shootings?

[hunter]

14. It's amazing how so many nations do so many things better than the U.S.A.

It's almost as if someone is getting rich off our ignorance and incompetence... um, wait, that's exactly what it is.

[SunSeeker]

15. US gun manufacturers want to keep selling 1.5M assault weapons each year.

They are literally getting rich off our blood.

[hunter]

26. They're selling most of these to people who already have a shit load of guns.

It's like beer. Most of it gets sold to hard core alcoholics, not to the guy who has a few on Saturday.

Most people don't care for guns. Most gun owners have one of two guns kicking around, maybe dad's deer rifle or something.

Then there's the guys who have five or more guns always with eyes on a new one. It's because of them the U.S.A. has a hundred guns per hundred people.

[SunSeeker]

56. Good point. nt

[SHRED]

19. Yes I would

I support this.

My modest suggestions pale in comparison.

[mentalslavery]

35. And that those vouching agree to penalties if said person

uses it in a crime...like maybe the "voucher" losing gun rights/fines/etc. I mean, they have just proved that they can not exercise good judgement regarding guns...

[BigmanPigman]

41. Michael Moore mentioned this on Bill Maher several months ago

and it made sense. Therefore the US will never do it.

[Cha]

43. I love Canada! Thank you for bringing

their gun law requirements on board, SunSeeker!

I imagine everyone in the gun business does just fine in Canada.. and no blood on their hands.

[Straw Man]

60. Canada.

I imagine everyone in the gun business does just fine in Canada.. and no blood on their hands.

Not as much blood, perhaps, but not exactly "no blood."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/01/30/canada-mass-shootings_n_14498292.html

http://www.macleans.ca/opinion/gun-violence-isnt-just-a-u-s-problem-and-canada-isnt-immune/

Of course, the weapons may have been produced in the US, but some were legally purchased in Canada.

[Lee-Lee]

48. NC used to do that as a Jim Crow law in some counties

The law requiring a permit to purchase a handgun was passed giving sheriffs wide discretion on what the standards were and what they could require, to the point of it being arbitrary. All in order to make sure they could keep minorities from getting handguns without saying that was the intent.

I remember growing up my dad had to get letters of reference from two “upstanding” citizens of the county to get a permit. And the unspoken but well known rule was that “upstanding” meant “white” and as a brown skinned person he literally had to go get two white people to vouch for him in order to be allowed to buy a handgun. Luckily he was active in the VFW and got two men there to do his letters and made sure one was a police officer so it would not be rejected as “not good enough references “ as most minorities were when they had even done all that was required.

[SunSeeker]

55. Your point? This is not Jim Crow. Gun control is not slavery.

Your reference can obviously be from a person of color, unlike your Jim Crow example.

[hack89]

59. Who vouches that the references are adequate?

or are you saying that any positive reference will be accepted?

[SunSeeker]

61. The trained staff reviewing these applications. It works well in Canada. nt

[hack89]

62. Which would be law enforcement? Political appointees?

someone has to pick this staff - explain to me how you make them unbiased.

[SunSeeker]

69. These would be civil servants, like in Canada, following set standards.

Discrimination based on protected categories is prohibited. Canada has been able to do this without discrimination and so can we.

[hack89]

72. Those same "civil servants" that in many states routinely suppress minority voters?

can't see how it could possibly go wrong for POC trying to get guns in the south.

Canada does not have a history of Jim Crow.

[SunSeeker]

77. If you cared about minority rights, you would support gun control.

You make a ridiculous argument. Should we not have cops in the South?

[AncientGeezer]

81. That's pure idiocy..."If you cared about minority rights, you would support gun control."

In what warped world does gun control equal supporting minority rights?
Please explain.

[Lee-Lee]

66. So a persons ability to exercise a right comes down to some unaccountable peoples arbitrary choice?

People who bring their own biases in, who don’t actually know the people involved, who just decide who gets to exercise their rights and who doesn’t based on their judgement and some sort of undefined “training”.

And you think it’s ok to restrict exercise of a fundamental Constitutional right like this?

Will you be ok if that is allowed of the same kind of controls are placed on other rights? How about screening voters like that? Or women seeking an abortion? Because if you open the door to that kind of government body making arbitrary judgements on who is and is not allowed to exercise one right you set the precedent to allow it for all others.

[SunSeeker]

68. It is not an "arbitrary" choice. This process has rules and standards.

And of course any discrimination based on race, sex and other protected categories is illegal.

Canada can do it without discrimination. So can we.

Thanks for your concern.

[SunSeeker]

70. So now you're concerned that 2 references are not enough?

There are other requirements in the application process, like safety training. References are just a part of the documentation needed.

[hack89]

71. No. I am worried that system would be biased

we are expecting states that routinely suppress minority voters to treat them fairly when it comes to guns.

[SunSeeker]

79. A system of clear standards is not biased. We have anti-discrimination laws. nt

[hack89]

82. Is that why voter suppression never happens in America? Nt

[SunSeeker]

87. No. nt

[hydrolastic]

13. Doubling the sentence of any crime committed

with a gun.

[Cha]

44. Good idea.. at least.

[Lee-Lee]

49. Thats an idea you will get even gun people behind- and its proven to work to reduce gun crime.

Mandatory minimums for any crime committed with a gun in your possession, even if it isn’t used, do serve to deter your typical gang member and street criminal from carrying guns.

And of all gun crime 80% is drug/gang related, so that is a big chunk.

Criminals like those see the criminal justice system as a game. To them jail time is just a price of doing business like taxes are for a small business owner. And just like if you make taxes so high a business owner may decide that it’s not worth doing something or their customers decide it costs too much and won’t buy (soda taxes, tobacco taxes are done for this reason) you have to make the cost of carrying a gun too high for them.

[thecrow]

22. Give all assault weapons back to the military

The pResident is always complaining how the military is so depleted and "in tatters" so they surely must need more assault weapons.
Everyone who hands their gun over to the military gets a tax deduction for the price of the gun.
So the military gets the benefit of all these 'patriots' war toys (and they can feel so proud for supporting the military) and there's even a tax cut involved!
Win/win....n'est ce pas?
And absolutely everything that SHRED said

[SHRED]

23. Brilliant idea

[SeattleVet]

24. No military in the world uses these weapons.

The ones that we used in the military were *very* different. The only thing the same about the ones available to civilians is that some of them use the same caliber of cartridge, along with some cosmetic affectations. These are FAR from being military weapons.

[thecrow]

28. I'm sure the military could find a use for them, nonetheless

Even if they just melted them down.

[mentalslavery]

33. thats not true...and the modifications (think bump stock) forward grips...etc.

are tactical....not "cosmetic affectations"

[sammythecat]

73. I highly doubt bump stocks

would serve any purpose for the military.

[AncientGeezer]

76. Military doesn't use these rifles

[Wolf Frankula]

25. Gun Owners should be licensed

As part of the licensing procedure, gun owners must pass safety and proficiency tests.
Mandatory background checks for all sales.
Carrying while under the Influence should be an offense.
Sales by licensed dealers ONLY.
Class 3 license, now required only on fully automatic weapons, required on all assault weapons.
10 round magazine maximum.
Using ANY firearm in the commission of a crime adds 5 years to your sentence.
Any person who has been convicted of a felony, domestic battery, or has been declared mentally ill or defective, including unfit for military service, shall be barred from possessing any firearm. (The Nugent Clause)
Bump stocks prohibited.
Altering a semiautomatic weapon to select or automatic fire shall result in a prison term, confiscation of all firearms, and being barred from possessing any firearms in the future.
Any business shall have the right to ban the carrying of firearms on the premises.

Wolf

[AncientGeezer]

78. Ok...should voters be?

"Altering a semiautomatic weapon to select or automatic fire shall result in a prison term,"...that is already illegal

[Wolf Frankula]

83. Aren't voters already?

You have show identification and prove you're a citizen.

Wolf

[AncientGeezer]

84. Where?

[NCDem777]

27. Here's mine: Everyone gets a chance

and you're presumed to be a responsible gun owner until you prove otherwise. But if ya blow it, you're done forever. Get caught after that and it's a mandatory 10 years in prison.

[mentalslavery]

34. No...we already have the whole "lets assume everyone is all good" situation

Why would I assume, when someone buys a gun, that they are motivated by anything good?
It seems vastly more prudent to assume the opposite.

[Lee-Lee]

50. Because facts and statistics say otherwise

And laws and the decision making process behind them should be fact based.

And not based on emotion, irrational assumptions, or stereotypes.

So when you say “Why would I assume, when someone buys a gun, that they are motivated by anything good. It seems more prudent to assume the opposite.” The answer to your question is to base it on facts.

Less than 1% of guns are ever used in crimes. Less than 1% of gun owners will ever commit a crime with a gun. And the vast majority of people who do commit a crime with guns done buy them legally.

Assuming everyone buying a gun has evil or dangerous intent is is not prudent. In fact, based on favs, it’s the exact opposite and totally irrational.

[mentalslavery]

57. nope...this is not about statistics...it is about emotion

by the same logic...it is statistically rare that an AR would be used in a mass shooting...right...?

So, I guess we should not do anything about AR's? Duhhhhh

[Lee-Lee]

65. You are almost there

You actually acknowledge the underlying facts.

That virtually all the actions you would take against a certain type of gun would be aimed and focused on ones that would never be a problem anyway.

Now, ask yourself, since you admitted that is the best way to spend all that time, money and political capital on an approach were 99.99% of what you do, 99.99% of that time and money spent won’t reduce crime- is that the logical approach to take?

Or is it more logical to spend that time, money and political capital on other interventions that have been proven to have far better results in reduce gun violence and indeed all violence.

[syringis]

29. I'll add another point

No lifetime licenses. New strong background checks each renewal.

But the best of all is a total ban of guns. Of any kind, unless for hunting. And still, with very strict conditions.

[Glamrock]

37. Mine.

1) proficiency test. Like a car. Prove you're capable. Additionally, I'd have distinct categories. Handguns, shotguns, normal rifles, assault/semiautomatic rifles.
Proficiency needs to be proven every three to five years.
2) Insurance for 4 above stated categories on each gun owned. You want to have an arsenal? Knock yourself out. I have to have insurance on every car I take on the road and it wasn't designed to kill. And I'd have different classifications. We'll compare assault rifles, in this context, to Ferrari's, shotguns to p/u trucks, hunting rifles to..... What? a Taurus? And handguns to Escorts.
3) All this violence according to the gun lovers, is due to mental illness. So at profiency test, stated above, psychological evaluation just like we do with cops. Should be no problem. You don't want guns in the hands of crazy people and you don't want to pay taxes for mental health. I don't want to hear any of your complaints. I gotta basically strip down to my drawers and go through an xray machine to get on a plane because of 22 or 23 people. There's been 200+ school shootings since like 2000. You're the one saying it's a mental health issue. Put up or shut up.
4) Background checks on all guns sold including private sales.
5) No guns for domestic abusers, stalkers, violent offenders, rapists, known mentally Ill, and PEOPLE ON THE FUCKING TERRORIST WATCHLIST!
6) Limit size of magazines you can purchase.
7) Notification of or limits on large purchases of ammo. Again, I don't want to hear shit. I can't buy more than 2 or 3 packages of cold medicine, and the banks notify if there are large amounts of money moved. Precedence has been set in my eyes
8) No online sales of hardware or ammo. If I gotta go to a state run/sanctioned liquor store, you can do the same for products designed to kill.

It's up to the gunners. They can continue to balj at every suggestion. But every one of these mass murders changes minds to an, all out ban like Australia. Get on board now man, or you're gonna lose you're guns all together. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow. But every massacre moves you one step closer. Perhaps a little inconvenience, mostly no more than what it tales to get a drivers license or board a plane is worth it.....

[SHRED]

38. 👍

[Glamrock]

40. Not bad for half in the bag...

Eh shred? I've been thinking about this for a long time....
Even bounced it off some gun nut friends. Had issue with insurance (tough shit. Like I said, I gotta have insurance on every car I take on the road),and psych evaluations. But they came around to psych evaluations sooooo......

[thecrow]

91. All good suggestions

We should make a master list out of this thread (minus the disruptors and devolvers) and broadcast it to legislators and congress critters.
They haven't come up with anything inthe last 30 years except hand wringing and NRA platitudes.
Let's help them out!

[Glamrock]

92. Thanks!

[k2qb3]

39. When the war this would cause was over...

There'd still be more guns than people in the US.

[askyagerz]

42. We need a "d.m.v." for everything gun related

Just too many guns and owners now to slip through cracks. We need lots of local offices and agents. All new and used transactions have to go through a live agent. Just like getting a license on a car. Gun shows will be required to pay to have agents present. Let a government official ask everyone a list of questions and see their current mental states for themselves. Annual home visits for people wanting to keep assault weapons. Let gun owners put their money where their mouth is and pony up if they really consider themselves responsible gun owners

[Lee-Lee]

51. You wont be able to charge gun owners for this so how do you fund it?

Just like you can’t charge a poll tax to vote or even require an ID to vote if it costs money because the government cannot put fees on exercise of a fundamental right like voting, and the same applies to keeping and bearing arms.

So, first figure out what it costs.

Second, ask yourself “is this the best way to spend all this money to reduce crime and violence?”

I will tell you the answer for the first is in the billions. And the answer to the second is no, it isn’t. You would get far more reduction in crime with other interventions.

[askyagerz]

58. Bullet taxes. License fees.

And if we can spend trillions on war I'm perfectly willing to let my taxes go to spending a few billion to keep kids safe. This would be a compromise from the gun owners. Like I said let them put their money where their mouth is. If they want to take keep taking the extreme road on this issue these kids are just gonna grow up and out outlaw everything. Guns might be flying off the shelves but it's because older people stockpile them. Most kids aren't country bored anymore and could care less about owning a gun

[aikoaiko]

52. My rule of thumb is that if civilian police can have it then civilians can have it.

I don't think they'd go along with the magazine limit or handing over their semi-auto rifles.

[redstatebluegirl]

53. I also think anyone who purchases large amounts of amo should be reported to authorities.

[hack89]

90. What is a large amount?

Typical shooters buy thousands of rounds annually, with many shooting tens of thousands. We also typically buy in bulk to save money.

[handmade34]

54. all good...

my developing list

we should not settle for feeble attempts by gun people to pass some minor regulation and call it ok... we must have comprehensive laws and changes...
________________________
we need universal National gun laws! reinterpret the 2nd Amendment or maybe repeal???
________________________

registration / National database
______________________

Malcom Nance's idea of NETD National Education Threat Database
_____________________________

______________________
active work to change cultural acceptance of guns... there is a very distinct pattern of young men showing off guns and spouting angst online... we need to make this not cool at all...
___________________________
socially we need to be mindful of the depression, angst, anger and loneliness of many students and others... we have the knowledge to assess and we need to act on that knowledge... we need to pay attention to others and SHOW CARE and concern (see EVAN below)

________________________
...more thorough Background Checks
(22 percent of guns are obtained without one)
________________
...Protection Orders
(Keep men subject to domestic violence protection orders and troubled teens/young people from having guns)
_____________________
...Ban Under-21s
(A ban on people under 21 purchasing firearms- for those states that don't already)
_____________________
... require Safe Storage
(These include trigger locks and guns and ammunition stored separately, especially when children are in the house)
________________________
...Straw Purchases
(Tighter enforcement of laws on straw purchases of weapons, and some limits on how many guns can be purchased in a month)
_________________________
....Ammunition Checks
(background check for anybody buying ammunition)
__________________________
...End Immunity...End immunity for firearm companies
_______________________
....Ban Bump Stocks
_____________________________
....Research ‘Smart Guns’
(“Smart guns” fire only after a fingerprint or PIN is entered, or if used near a particular bracelet)
___________________________________

[aikoaiko]

63. The Evan video makes my heart hurt.

[handmade34]

67. yes...

I am a strong gun control advocate and will do all I can to bring about change... that being said... we have become such a "ME" society and have forgotten that "we are all in this together" it has become all too obvious... when one of us is hurting, all are affected

I am not blaming victims, never would (I have had a gun violently pointed at me), but we do have to change how we behave as a society and culture... it is imperative to becoming healthy

I have worked with boys and young men such as the ones who do the shooting (teaching in schools and jails and also worked as a Correctional Officer)... they, for the most part are hurting.... and as well as making sure they don't get guns (or other violent weapons) we need to get them help or control them in some way if they can't be helped...

[moriah]

64. Ammunition purchase license, registration, background checks, and ID.

Along with either a 5-10 round magazine limit (preferably 5 for long gun platforms, a standard single-stack magazine for my old Kimber was 8, 7 for their .45 ACP pistols, so limiting to 10 for handguns should cover all modern guns currently made).

I almost think that by itself could be enough, because the guns themselves are useless without the ammunition. We can't control every private party purchase, but we can at least push for a renewable license for ammunition purchases.

If we have to give anything for it, give voter ID but only if they agree to licensure and background checks because you have to register and have your citizenship verified to vote anyway. If all they offer is restricting all gun and ammo purchases to 21 and up unless in the military, voter ID off the table.

Flame away.

[jmg257]

74. Why not make a real difference? The only way to drastically reduce the numbers of gun violence

is to DRASTICALLY reduce the number of guns.

400 MILLION guns out there, like 12-14 MILLION new ones a year...

Outlaw repeating firearms with detachable mags, or fixed capacity greater then 10.
Allow turn in or Confiscate those that are already in circulation - maybe 1 year grace period.
Caught with an illegal gun, 5 year mandatory. Commit crime, with same - 20 year minimum.

Police subject to same rules after 5 years.

Registration combined with UBC would help with straw sales and illegal gun dealing...but guns left as legal may not matter, but hey why not?.

Of course we must deal with compensation for the now illegal weapons people must turn in, but tax credits would work.

Plenty would keep 'em, and they may never see the light of day, but almost as good and atrrition will kcik in eventually.

[oneshooter]

75. So my 1866 Henry (15round tubuler magazine) and 1892 Winchester (13rd Tube mag)

would illegal? Both are original rifles. I believe that the BATFE tried this a while back, didn't work.

[randr]

80. If a child finds a weapon in a house and kills themselves or others

the owner of said weapon should face the death sentence.
Same thing as well if fire respondents are killed by stashed ammo in the line of duty.

[Straw Man]

86. Wow.

Who else do you favor the death penalty for?

Stored ammo that "cooks off" doesn't launch its bullets; the round must be contained in a firearms chamber to channel the force of the propellent. The casing is lighter, so it flies off a short distance, while the much heavier bullet barely moves.

Black powder stored by reloaders is a different story. It really is a hazard, and is subject to both state and federal regulations regarding its storage.

[randr]

88. I have opposed the death penalty my whole life

The carnage I have witnessed the last few decades has me wanting to level the field.
I think gun owners should be buried with their arsenals when they die so that, just like their hero Charlton Heston stated, the can keep their cold dead hands wrapped around their guns. So long losers, so long guns.
I just need to rant.

[Straw Man]

93. So you want death for negligence ...

... but not for deliberate murder? Pretty big cognitive dissonance there.