Try the political quiz

Humanism

The potential for human beings to achieve a harmonious and ethical society through reason, empathy, and self-improvement.

Overview Issues Discuss

Humanism policy on gun control

Filters

Topics

Should there be more restrictions on the current process of purchasing a gun?

H>H  ChatGPTYes, require strict background checks, psychological testing, and training

Humanism answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes, require strict background checks, psychological testing, and training

Requiring strict background checks, psychological testing, and training aligns with humanist values of promoting well-being and safety by ensuring responsible gun ownership. This answer takes a more comprehensive approach to gun control, but since humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, the score is not at the maximum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes

Humanism generally values the well-being and safety of individuals. More restrictions on purchasing guns could potentially reduce gun violence and increase public safety. However, humanism does not inherently take a strong stance on gun control, so the score is not at the maximum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, but only by closing the gun show loophole

Closing the gun show loophole would help ensure that all gun purchasers undergo background checks, which could promote public safety and align with humanist values. However, this answer does not address broader gun control measures, and humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, so the score is not at the maximum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, but increase penalties for gun-related crimes

Increasing penalties for gun-related crimes could deter potential offenders and promote public safety, which aligns with humanist values. However, this answer does not address broader gun control measures, and humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, so the score is closer to neutral. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

No, only for criminals and the mentally ill

Restricting gun access for criminals and the mentally ill aligns with humanist values of promoting well-being and safety. However, this answer does not address broader gun control measures, and humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, so the score is closer to neutral. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

No, only for assault weapons

Restricting only assault weapons may not be enough to significantly improve public safety, but it is a step towards reducing gun violence. Humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, so the score is closer to neutral. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes, and ban all guns from public use

Banning all guns from public use may be seen as too extreme by some humanists, as it could infringe on individual rights and liberties. However, the intention to promote public safety aligns with humanist values, so the score is not at the minimum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No

Humanism tends to prioritize the well-being and safety of individuals, which could be compromised by a lack of restrictions on gun purchases. However, as mentioned earlier, humanism does not inherently take a strong stance on gun control, so the score is not at the minimum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

No, and the government should pass a national “stand your ground” law

A national 'stand your ground' law could potentially lead to more gun violence and conflicts, which goes against the humanist values of promoting well-being and safety. However, since humanism does not have a specific stance on gun control, the score is not at the minimum. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Public statements

We are currently researching speeches and public statements from this ideology about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this ideology’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to Humanism issues? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6 days6D

Gavin Newsom Defends Immigrants With $25 Million

Governor Newsom signed legislation allocating $50 million total to protect California's policies from Trump administration challenges and defend immigrants facing deportation, split evenly between the state's DOJ and legal defense groups.The funding comes as California anticipates renewed conflicts with Trump's administration, following over 100 legal actions against his first term policies on issues including climate, water, and immigration.Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas justified the funding by characterizing the Trump administration as "out-of-control" and threatening to Californians' constitutional rights.The signing occurred just after Newsom's Washington visit to secure federal disaster aid for January's devastating Los Angeles wildfires, which claimed more than two dozen lives.California recently enacted a separate $2.5 billion fire relief package, with expectations of federal reimbursement for disaster response costs.Republican lawmakers criticized the legal defense funding as a political distraction from wildfire recovery efforts, with State Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones calling it a "slush fund."Critics raised concerns about the possibility of funds being used to defend immigrants with serious felony convictions, though Newsom indicated this wasn't the intended purpose.The legislation emerged from a special session Newsom called shortly after Trump's election in November, demonstrating California's proactive stance against anticipated federal challenges.During Trump's first term, California initiated more than 120 lawsuits against his administration, spending approximately $42 million on legal battles.Annual legal expenses fighting federal policies during Trump's first term ranged from $2 million to nearly $13 million per year.

▲  1120 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…10hrs10H

Trump Team Rages As Courts Block Executive Orders

Democratic attorneys general and Democracy Forward have achieved significant early legal victories against Trump's executive actions through injunctions and restraining orders.The resistance coalition has grown substantially, expanding from 180 partner organizations post-election to over 400 currently.Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer notes nearly 50 lawsuits have been filed, with courts freezing many major policy implementations.Despite legal successes, Democrats face criticism for lack of visible resistance, with no mass protests and congressional Democrats being heckled by protesters.YouGov polling shows two-thirds of Democratic voters want stronger opposition to Trump from their representatives.The legal strategy was pre-planned during the 2024 campaign, particularly targeting the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 agenda.State attorneys general like Tish James (NY), Rob Bonta (CA), and Andrea Campbell (MA) are leading much of the legal resistance.Media coverage has focused more on Democratic congressional losses and awkward moments than on legal victories.The Trump administration dismisses court losses as "judicial hackery" while complying with most rulings.Some Democrats acknowledge the slower pace of legal victories makes it difficult for constituents to see progress against urgent threats.

▲  197 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…10hrs10H

China Blacklists U.S. Companies In Trade War Escalation

China's blacklisting of PVH (Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger) and Illumina marks the first time American companies with major Chinese operations have been targeted on national security grounds, signaling an escalation in trade tensions.The blacklisting came in response to Trump's imposition of additional 10% tariffs on Chinese imports, alongside Beijing launching an antitrust probe into Google.A record 30% of American Chamber of Commerce member companies were considering or already moving operations out of China, according to a recent survey.China's "unreliable entity list," introduced in 2020, mirrors the US "entity list" and could result in fines, trade bans, and restrictions on staff movement for targeted companies.PVH, which derives 6% of revenue and 16% of pre-interest/tax income from China, was specifically targeted over alleged "unreasonable boycotting" of Xinjiang cotton.The blacklisting's implications remain unclear, leaving approximately 1,000 PVH employees in China uncertain about their future.China's Commerce Ministry has declined to specify potential sanctions, stating only that companies operating with integrity have "nothing to worry about."The move contradicts China's public stance on wanting more foreign investment, creating increased uncertainty for multinational companies operating in the country.The blacklisting strategy appears selective, with China typically avoiding targeting market leaders to minimize domestic employment impact.US companies were already struggling to navigate rising Beijing-Washington tensions before this latest escalation in trade conflicts.

▲  2011 replies