Should it be a legal requirement to earn a minimum amount before you're allowed to own a gun?

[purplepoppy]

The most common argument for gun ownership is "I need a gun to protect myself against criminals". Now since the poor make up the vast majority of criminals, it makes sense to ban poor people from owning guns. Poor people are usually poorly educated and often make bad choices.
If you set a fixed income level for gun ownership you immediately take them out of the biggest risk group. Without the risk of being a victim the level of gun ownership will naturally drop at higher levels.

[PositiveNote]

My lovely purplepoppy, I would certainly would hope that you don't really believe that those who make a minimum wage would be less intelligent than those making double or triple!

My lord, Lady! I had more sense about what to do with a gun when I was 10 than some who make a good living, like the guy shooting people from a hotel window in Las Vegas. He owned a gazillion guns, and had to have money from hell, but he went and killed dozens and dozens, wounding even more.

Love to you!
More here

[MuddyMole]

There's a Douglas Adams quote that goes like this:
"It is a well-known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”

I feel like the same applies to gun ownership. The sort of people who want to own a gun, are exactly the sort of people who should under no circumstances be allowed to own one.

[mermaidcancermoon]

Definitely no. Poor people deserve protection as well. Basic education is free. Just because they can't afford college doesn't mean they lack the desire to go or aren't overall a contributing upstanding citizen. Highly flawed

[Anonymous]

Yes, because we all know that criminals follow the law.

[MCheetah]

Guns are expensive as f*ck, although you live outside of America, so you don't know this. So the problem solves itself and criminals are not going to buy most of the guns they get from legal marketplaces anyway, so your "solution" solves nothing. It'd be wanting to pass a law asking criminals to report their crimes before committing them. Not to mention, that's classist as f*ck and would just increase the Black Market. You'd be creating MORE criminals with this stupid idea.

[Pyrofox]

Too many idiots selling illegal guns dirt cheap. Most people with a gun if they hear you wanna go to jail over shooting someone they like 9/10 times gonna just hand you the gun to watch what chaos you bring about. I think its like almost a badge of honor at this point for fluffing anarchists to have them.

[jshm2]

... except most drug dealers and smugglers aren't' poor. Not to mention most criminals don't legally own their gun. It's either stolen, or bought by someone else.

The problem isn't guns - it's ammo and clip/magazine sizes.

A gun without ammo and mag is just an expensive cudgel.

[TheMajesticKing777]

A criminal doesn't use legal firearms for crimes, there's this thing called ghost guns which are guns either crafted, stolen, found or bought illegally and they are untraceable because they have no serial number, your whole logic behind your question is wrong, I have owned several ghost guns in my life and none of them were purchased at a gunshop

[bolverk]

Sorry, but you are wrong in the majority of cases where the poor own firearms, they own them to put meat on the table, until you have lives and worked in countries where the word poor means someone on a lower income than what we call poor in the UK then you have nothing to compare it with.

[Staximus]

This is the most idiotic statement ever. People who commit crimes don't care about laws. It's already illegal to kill people. Making guns illegal is just going to disarm law abiding citizens, like in Mexico where the cartels rule because they don't care if guns are illegal. Meanwhile the law abiding citizens with no guns get walked all over by the criminals with guns. Wake the fuck up.

[exitseven]

You make a compelling argument but it is a slippery slope. The next thing we know you will need a certain income level to have kids, or vote in an election. Besides, who decides how much money people need to make?

[IsoUser]

The minimum age limit for US citizens should be 21 years of age or older and for freaking dumbass parents they should have to take a rudimentary gun safety class including how to put a TRIGGER LOCK ON an How To Store Ammunition Properly. Otherwise these Stupid F'ing Supposed Parents should be sued for everything they have and will have in the future for being complete F'ing Morons and allowing a child access to a weapon and Ammunition.

[Lliam]

GUNS! GUNS! GUNS! GUNS! We must ban them by hook or by crook!

Let's make ownership as expensive as possible and limit ownership to the wealthiest percentile of the population. "Embrace the New World Order."

[Sargentcaptain]

Human rights behind a paywall. Mask off moment for the libs.

[AviatorTom]

Interesting idea. Not sure liberals would ever implement it because they'd claim it's discrimination against minorities.

[JamesDiaz11]

Sure, poor people make bad choices- they should also not be allowed to vote- let's keep going with this.

[Anonymous]

That doesn't change the argument for protection against criminals. All that does is put poor people at a disadvantage of protecting themselves. I know you're a troll but at least make a relatively intelligent argument.

[trumpets310]

No, I don't support taking rights away from people with less money

[Sixgunsound]

I put your argument to the test of drug dealers, who tend to out earn the majority of the population.

[OldWorldOrder]

Actually it would make a lot more sense to simply ban black men from owning guns.

[NaultD]

Having more restrictions on financing on firearms might be a better way to get the same effect.

[maximumpower]

no.
like other rights afforded our constitution, the option is open to everyone - with exception of those who have forfeited the right due to legal issues.

[Hanrej]

No. What will happen then is that you create a new aritocrate where not just the financial power but actual power resides with the rich. It will be an incentive for a violent revolt.

[MannyFrs]

are you using drugs derived from the poppy plant? you're high or else ignorant af with that stupid question

[ArtemisSilver]

Yes, mustn't let the serfs take up arms against their betters eh?

[Waldoe]

nope,,, if you hunt to feed your family and live simply, then you don't need to work for anyone else...

[bamesjond0069]

It is already a legal requirement to have enough money as a gun costs to buy a gun. Is that not sufficient?

[TwoToTooTutu2]

Stealing $100 from a rich man is a drop in the ocean. From a poor man that is a week's meals.

[PatriceONeal]

No. Income shouldn't be a factor in whether or not someone can defend themself.

[Frio33]

Should be forbidden to own a gun, like in many other countries

[CAPTAIN-OBVIOUS]

This is discrimination

[joeldalton]

So, then the poor will just steal guns. Good job.

[anylolone]

Due process and equal protection clause.

[rebeliouse]

won't it just increase the black market

[jimmy2]

Cash is king on many sells on gun

[bean2k21]

Agree 100%.

[bean2k21]

Ok haters. In my hometown, there was a plantation where a slave earned enough money to buy his own woodworking tools. His master demanded to use the tools one day and the slave refused. The master beat him and the slave struck back with his tools. The moral of the story is: don't let your slaves have their own tools.

[Andres77]

🤦🤦🤦

[Pterodon]

Nope