|
jlf1961 -> RE: Questions about the recent bombings (9/20/2016 11:40:31 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
Mea culpa: I was aiming that one at Ron, who had admitted in the post above mine to be stockpiling terrorist pressure cookers for bombmaking*. Sorry that wasn't clear.
No argument that anybody with a basic knowledge of chemistry can build a bomb that'll kill way more people than a spree killing, though. I suppose the lack of gun control over there might be a tactic to keep the body count down in the hope that if somebody can just buy a gun and start shooting at random, they'll kill less people.
*(Hi, snoopy spook guy or bot.)
Lack of gun control?
Again, you, as every other person who has no experience in law enforcement or firearms, are missing the problem.
The problem is not the lack of gun control, but the lack of the ability of agencies to enforce the laws on the books.
To carry it further.
The database that is used in back ground checks is flawed in that participation by law enforcement agencies below federal level is purely voluntary.
For example, say a person was convicted of a felony (which by federal law prevents his legally purchasing a firearm) in one state. If that state does not fully participate in the data base, that conviction may or may not be in the data base. So that person could go to another state, buy a gun, and that conviction does not show up, and bingo he has a gun.
Protective orders are another good example.
If you have a protective order against you, you cannot legally buy a gun under federal law. If the court that issued that order does not want to put it in the database, that person can go to another state (sometimes just a few counties over) and buy a gun because the order does not show up.
Diagnosis of severe emotional or psychological disorders are another example. If diagnosed with such a problem, federal law would prevent you from buying a gun. However, there is no regulation stating that a mental health professional or institution has to report that fact to any state agency or the database.
Which is why Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter was able to buy a gun just hours before he went on his rampage.
In point of fact, the laws that are presently on the books would work, except for the simple fact that the very people calling for more gun laws are the same people screaming about invasion of civil rights which keeps the information that would allow those laws to work from working.
And the whole damn group are too fucking stupid to see that, so they start screaming GUN BAN.
Which is equally stupid since they are the same group that yells it is a violation of civil and human rights to condemn over a billion people for what a very small minority do.
So, if we are not supposed to punish every Muslim on the planet for what a few hundred do, why the hell should we punish every gun owner or future gun owner for what less than 1% of people who get a gun do with it?
Lets put it this way.
There are 271 federal gun statutes dating back to the first National Firearms Act of 1938.
So, 271 gun laws have been passed.
However, each statute covers a number of different regulations.
So, lets put in a very easily understandable number.
Currently the Federal Firearms Regulations covers 9000 printed pages, not counting subsequent addendums added by the passing of other laws or executive orders.
Those regulations cover who can buy/own a gun, sell a gun, manufacture a gun or gun parts, what kinds of guns are legal, what guns can or cannot be imported, what guns need special licenses to own, what guns are currently banned from sale or import.
They also cover what will keep a person from purchasing a gun if the information shows up on a back ground check.
If you were to cross reference those regulations with other independent regulations that the gun laws are dependent on, such as the national criminal data base, you triple the number of printed pages.
In point of fact, the current US gun laws are the most extensive and comprehensive set of gun regulations anywhere in the world, except they do not outright ban the private ownership of firearms.
And the problem is not that the NRA or gun owners dont want more gun laws, the problem is what the news media does not use in soundbites.
The problem is that liberal law makers, lobbyists, administrations have stopped or hamstrung every effort to make all those pages enforceable with the single goal of banning all guns.
They point to the Ruby Ridge incident where a shot gun with an illegally shortened barrel was sold to an individual by a fucking ATF agent, and scream entrapment.
They point to the release of mental health records to state and federal agencies as a violation of the right to privacy. While these same groups will go down to a courthouse and get the list of concealed carry permit holders and release that in the local paper.
These right to privacy idiots will release the names of sex offenders living in a neighborhood as "a matter of public safety."
However, a person diagnosed with a mental illness that often leads to violent episodes resulting in injury pr death to others should not be released to law enforcement agencies to keep these people from buying a gun, simply because it is personal information and should remain private.
You want to point a finger at the ones responsible for most of the mass shootings in the US? Then point it at the stupid fucks who have blocked every proposed law that would make those 9000 pages of gun regulations enforceable.
|
|
|
|
