Posted on 06/09/2022 7:44:09 PM PDT by DoodleBob
The terms of the gun debate have been set so firmly and for so long that any attempt to venture past the slogans employed by the respective sides is typically met with derision.
I suspect that, for many, there is very little thinking about this topic anymore; what is called argument is really just posturing or strategizing. Where there are no genuine questions being asked, there is no thinking.
The participants in the debate come largely from two camps: on one side there are the gun enthusiasts for whom guns are an expression of identity and who therefore regard any attempt to regulate guns as a personal attack; on the other side are the gun despisers who have never owned or fired a gun, live largely outside the gun culture, and who see guns only as a threat.
But there are many Americans — perhaps a quiet majority — who do not fit neatly into either camp. These are people for whom guns are tools, not symbols; they use them for hunting, shooting sports, self-defense or work. They are concerned about gun violence and dislike the aggressive posturing of certain gun enthusiasts. At the same time, they are skeptical about many of the proposals put forth by gun control advocates and tend to be wary of government overreach.
Their voices are often left out of the media representation of the gun debates. Moreover, they are reluctant to enter into those debates because they tend to be misinterpreted by both sides.
I decided to reach out to some of these people to see what they had to say. I contacted a dozen people who own several guns (most own more than 10). I wanted to hear from people who are comfortable around guns and shoot them regularly. All of them are longtime hunters.
I asked them a simple, open-ended question: Are there any gun restrictions you would find acceptable?
It surprised me to find that most had been thinking about this issue for some time but had rarely been asked for their opinions. They wanted to know if I would use their names. They were willing to share their views but were worried about repercussions from extremists.
“Oh, boy. I have to be careful,” is the first thing Tony said. He is a professional hunting guide and talked about the numerous close calls he has had with clients.
“As a guide I've had loaded guns with safeties off pointed directly at me numerous times by inexperienced hunters who claimed to have prior gun-handling experience. I believe having some sort of mandatory gun safety class prior to firearm purchase makes a lot of sense.”
Ray agreed: “Many states require gun safety classes for youth hunters and out-of-state hunting license purchases, but I think it’s even more important for people who purchase firearms and don’t hunt. Hunters quickly see and experience the lethal effects of a firearm when they are afield. Taking a life, any life, is a very serious event, even when hunting game.”
Most of the hunters I talked to think universal background checks should be implemented. Tom put it simply: “I have a problem with gun shows and private persons selling guns.” Keith added, “I have to wait every time I purchase a firearm from a dealer, and I am totally fine with that.”
Many favor eliminating high-capacity magazines. A few, like Chuck, even propose limiting the amount of ammunition a person can carry (outside of a gun range or private property): “Five rounds are adequate for self-defense and in line with the ethics of ‘fair chase’ while hunting.”
Several are in favor of raising the federal minimum age to purchase a gun from 18 to 21. “Being a teenager is just too damn chaotic these days,” Tony observed.
Some of them mentioned red flag laws, which would allow law enforcement to identify those who might be a threat to themselves or others and confiscate their weapons through a court order. Bill, who works for a large outdoors organization, is cautiously supportive: “I don't buy the argument that if you precipitated a mass shooting, you had to be mentally ill. Still, a red flag law might be of some value. If you have expressed yourself in a threatening way, the system might catch it and might take action to limit your access to firearms.”
What I found most interesting about the responses, however, were the feelings they expressed toward the most vocal participants on both sides of the debate.
They don’t like the exhibitionism of the gun extremists. Henry said, “I think the greatest threat to gun rights is overzealous enthusiasts using guns in a way that is offensive, like walking into a grocery store with an open-carry military-type assault rifle.”
They also worry that if the measures presently being considered do not stop all mass shootings and other gun violence, the gun control advocates will push for even more restrictions that violate the civil rights of law-abiding gun owners.
Greg said, “The problem is they can’t enforce the laws that are already on the books, and that’s just going to get harder if we pass more laws.”
There is often a deep irrationality to the public debate about guns that leaves reasonable voices on the sidelines. In private discussions, the tone and content of the debate can be altogether different. It’s time to encourage the quiet majority of gun owners to join the discussion.
And if you enter "hunters gun rights kyte" into a search engine, this article pops up EVERYWHERE.
What a coinkydink.
My response: that’s a big no can do.
And the 2nd Amendment wasn't really addressing any of these things.
“Five rounds are adequate for self-defense
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Abjectly false.
Kyle Rittenhouse would be dead today if he only had 5 rounds.
I figured “Hunters gun rights” had something to do with lying on your 4473.
Probably because it’s from AP:
“The Associated Press (AP) describes itself as the largest newsgathering organization in the world. Organized as a nonprofit cooperative, AP provides news and graphics by wire to over 1,700 member newspapers and 5,500 member television and radio stations.”
How ironic, I wouldn’t really care if hunting was outlawed.
Gun safety should be ongoing classes in public schools from about grade 5 on up. It shouldn’t be mandatory but it should require a parent’s signature to opt out.
Hunters have nothing to do with self defense or prevention of tyranny. It is a stupid diversion to constantly throw hunting out there, as if the 2A was protecting hunting. What garbage.
The Second Amendment isn’t about hunting.
These folks are focused on hunting. There is nothing in the second amendment that mentions hunting.
The right to have firearms for hunting, recreation, etc. is protected by the 10th Amendment rather than the 2nd.
When you enter part of the title of an article, specifically the basic premise of the article, and the author's last name what would you expect to come up in a search? lol
They had to find hunters who are also leftards for this obnoxious article. How nice.
I was itching to find something that reads “when we hunt, we have to think about climate change and the need to plant trees after shooting these poor cute animals..”
But...Pop up on a zillion news sites?
Wish i could remember the politician that said the 2A was not about hunting critters, but for hunting politicians.
Major crock of BS that reads like a psychology exercise.
Comprised of gun grabbing points all neatly packaged as coming from your average Joe hunter. It’s cobbled together very pretty for consumption by soccer moms who will then agree that something, these things, must be done.
The ammo limit and 5 round carry limit for self defense was too over the top to salvage any credibility.
I say it’s 100% fiction, and anonymous sources, really?
I think it’s entirely possible the author interviewed *no* gun owners for this article. Given that all the quotes are unattributed beyond a first name, it’s possible he just made up a bunch of quotes and put them in the mouths of his sock puppets.
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting, unless you include hunting tyrants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.