quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I'm npt exactly anti gun and don't want to change the Constitution but I'll tell you what I want. Fewer killings and less insanity like George Zimmerman.

To do that make a CCW permit very hard to get. Make them pass a psych test, a drug screening, a firearms safety/competence test and thorough background check. Take a CCW permit away for any infraction of the law more serious than a parking/speeding ticket. Get rid of SYG and make self defense an affirmative defense in which ever states have changed that rule.

Shut down the gun dealers who knowingly sell to straw purchasers. Institute a computerized gun tracking system at the ATF (right now the law forbids them putting the data on a computer thanks to the NRA). Find and prosecute the people who divert guns into the blackmarket at the wholesale and manufacturer level and shutter companies that knowingly did so.

Treat all gun charges (menacing, assault with a deadly weapon etc.) as attempted murder which is what they are.

That's all well and good, and I agree on some of your points, especially the safety and compliance testing. I have an issue with the psych screening, because it then becomes too subjective and would hinge too much on the screeners own biases. Drug screening as well could be manipulated to effect an outcome. Remember David Lewis? I actually know him, and the state tried to use him as a test case to randomly pull permits here. They withdrew when he lawyered up, and they're really in a quandary because a sizable fraction of LE here take anti-psychotic meds to cope with stress.

There are very standardized personality tests that are very effective at screening for the types of people that should not carry a weapon. The military and most major LE organizations have been using them to screen recruits for decades.

Not sure what a clerical error has to do with anything. It looks like the guy got inconvenienced but that sort of stuff happens. No system is perfect.

quote:

I agree, go after straw purchasers with a vengeance, as well as sellers who don't perform due diligence over profit. But remove the ability to defend yourself? If someone comes into my house with nefarious intent, I honestly can't "retreat" more than a few feet. I live on the second floor, I have medical issues, and frankly, I won't do it. Does that mean I'm a potential criminal simply for not wanting to be victimized? I should just humbly give whoever my hard-won cash and property and patiently await for the police to show up? I have a bad back, and I can't carry a cop on it in order to protect me. Which, by the way, is not in their job description.

I thought you knew the difference between SYG and the castle doctrine. I encourage you to become familiar with them both.

quote:

And on the subject of a thorough background check, last time I looked into it, every state with a concealed carry permit required one done through the FBI, so it's already in place. It took me a year and a half to get my target and hunting permit here, and two more years before I got my unrestricted. And this is after I possessed a concealed carry permit in Utah. I was going through the process of the multi-state permit (which includes Florida) and it required a Federal background check and fingerprints (which ARE in a national database already). And guess what? Zimmerman passed all of this, so whatever was in his background that everyone rails on and on about didn't rise to the level of turning him down.

No. There are several states that allow concealed carry without a permit, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont and Wyoming, and a number of other states are considering it.

quote:

What you're asking for is to establish a nearly impossible set of condition to fulfill for an average citizen, in effect denying them the right to possess the means with which to defend themselves. You're also asking to so regulate the channels by which to acquire these instruments and accessories to the point no one except the criminals and the politically-connected and wealthy can possess them (check out Mexico's gun laws and compare and contrast the level of violence there to here).

No. I'm not. I'm saying the dirty little secret of the gun world. There are guns out there that got into criminal hands because the gun manufacturers or distributors sold them to black marketeers and the NRA protects them. Why else fight tooth and nail to prevent the ATF from being able to make unannounced inspections of gun inventory records? Or make more than a single inspection of any gun dealer a year?

quote:

If they ban handguns, I do hope folks like you can wrap your heads around the idea that people like me will be walking around with rifles and shotguns on their shoulders. It should make everyday life here so much more interesting. I'm also quite sure that you'll jump up on your soapbox and refute with excruciating detail and vitriol each and every point I've made.

I'm sorry that you're so afraid but it is long past time to view the real world and not the fear filled vision you've been fed. Violent crime is now far lower than it has been in our lifetimes. You do not need to carry a handgun to be safe. Being moderately careful minimally aware of your surroundings will suffice (it has for me for my entire life and for most of it I have lived in Chicago).

quote:

The only reason "new" gun laws are enacted are merely to keep politicians in office, to "prove" to the mindless herds that keep re-electing them they're "doing something" about the "madness". Now if they'd only "use" the ones they already have on the fucking books, we wouldn't have these problems, but that's not how you get to keep your cushy job in the circles they run in. Believe it or not,GCA 68 already contains most, if not all of the provisions you want. It's just that the current crop of lawmakers can't put it on their resumes, nor can they use the already extant state laws regarding firearms ownership and usage.

You must know that the NRA's pet politicians have systematically emasculated the ATF to prevent those laws from being enforced. Do you know the last time the ATF was allowed an increase in personnel? (not since 1973). The ATF has not actually had a full time director since 2006 when the NRA got the position made to require Senate confirmation (Even Bush's nominees didn't get confirmed) which means there is no full time boss of the operation so it is unable to make strategic plans.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
There are very standardized personality tests that are very effective at screening for the types of people that should not carry a weapon. The military and most major LE organizations have been using them to screen recruits for decades.

quote:


You must know that the NRA's pet politicians have systematically emasculated the ATF to prevent those laws from being enforced. Do you know the last time the ATF was allowed an increase in personnel? (not since 1973). The ATF has not actually had a full time director since 2006 when the NRA got the position made to require Senate confirmation (Even Bush's nominees didn't get confirmed) which means there is no full time boss of the operation so it is unable to make strategic plans.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

After what we've gone through the last 6 years you still so we need less regulation?