jlf1961
Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
|
Heavyblinker
1) I have no problem with a firearms safety course requirement for purchase.
2) I have no problem with trigger lock requirements since it would prevent most, if not all accidents
3) As I said before, at point of purchase, all the information that would be necessary for registering a gun is filled out on a required ATF form, so why not submit it to the ATF to register the firearm in a national database?
You have to register a vehicle that is used on the roads (granted for tax purposes, but still not much different)
4) Federal law already requires that a person that is the subject of a protective order remove firearms from his home, business etc. until the order is lifted.
5) in reference to this: but I still think that it's absurd that there are places where someone can get a gun almost immediately, simply because a database says they're good to go. If it was a mandatory requirement for courts to upload that data to the National Crime Information System, as well as mental health providers to do the same with people deemed a danger to themselves or others, that would not happen.
As for the mental health issue, the ACLU and Dems fight it on the right to privacy issue, which the courts have already ruled that the right to privacy does not outweigh the right of the general public to safety.
So in that respect, the libs are responsible.
As far as the input of data that would put people on the prohibited to purchase list, again, dems have argued cost, and other issues, and some GOP members argue that it violates the state's rights citing the 10th amendment.
However, and this is the fucked up part, every law enforcement agency in the country accesses the same database to get information on suspects.
6) as for the license requirement, in essence there already is one, for concealed or open carry, every state basically makes a person pass the same requirements for carrying concealed to open carry.
As to the claim there are too many guns in circulation, consider this, an estimated 300 million plus privately owned firearms in the US.
Yes that is a lot, but, on the other hand, with the often quoted number of 30000 gun deaths in the US a year, that means either 30000 of those legally owned guns are used, or the way some put it, each of those people were killed by all 300 million.
So, we are looking at less than 1% of the legal guns involved in these deaths.
Some are accidents, some are suicides, and some are police doing the shooting.
That leaves just over 11000 gun related homicides a year.
Of those, over 60% are not legally purchased and owned firearms.
Those fall under stolen, illegally purchased or other (I have yet to figure out what the DoJ considers 'other')
Gun theft can be prevented, simply by requiring adequate storage of firearms, but some gun owners feel that means that some cop or ATF agent can drop by unannounced and inspect how the weapons are stored.
I disagree.
I would suggest that the theft of a firearm or the discovery of a missing firearm should be reported immediately to police. Logical.
When the officers arrive to investigate and find that the weapon was improperly stored, the owner should be cited or charged. Hell a person can already be charged with improper storage of various items anyway, so why not add guns to the list?
Parents who's children take a gun and shoot up a school are already liable for civil charges, but how about adding criminal charges as well?
The laws covering straw purchases are there, but honestly, I cant see how they can be stopped prior to the weapon being used in connection with a crime, at which point the purchaser should be charged as an accessory, as it stands they are only guilty of making an illegal purchase.
Then we come to the Vegas guy.
I read a news article that questioned why no flags were raised with all his recent gun purchases.
Well, the ATF is supposed to check multiple purchases.
But then we go back to the system.
When a background check is run, there is no requirement for the retailer to record a sale on that system, in fact there is no way to do so. The retailer fills out the sale paperwork and sticks it in a filing cabinet, so on the offhand chance that some law enforcement officer comes in to check on a gun used in a crime, he can produce it.
Which of course is no help before the fact.
Now, the kicker is, and I have experienced this personally.
When I buy bulk ammonia nitrate fertilizer, such as used by Timothy McVeigh to make his truck bomb, I get a visit by an ATF agent.
Why? because I do not make the purchase regularly, since I only fertilize maybe once ever two years. So they get a bit concerned at the purchase of 5000 pounds of the stuff.
When that purchase coincides with a purchase of bulk diesel, they get really concerned.
Finally, combine that with the fact I own two NFA weapons, and they go batshit.
However, I buy 5 or 10 thousand rounds of ammo, and I dont see anyone.
You see, I have not problem with reasonable and enforceable gun regulations. But I will insist that until the problem is fixed with the present laws and regulations, any new laws are simply bullshit.
And the simple fact is that, and the article I cited earlier seems to agree, that the present laws, IF they some things were changed, would prevent a lot of the gun crimes in the United States.
And the evil satanic NRA supports that. Hell, you talk to an NRA board member straight up and listen to what they say, instead of what the media pulls out of context, you would be surprised to learn that, if the present limitations in the present regulations are dealt with and they prove ineffective over a reasonable amount of time after implementation, the NRA would support readdressing the issue.
There is another point, a former NRA director stated in interviews and in hearings, that the unrestricted carrying of firearms was a bad thing. Dont believe me, google it.
Charlton Heston has even said the same thing.
But, when you depend on a biased news media for information, you are not going to get the entire picture. News outlets supporting more gun laws are only going to present a statement that promotes the idea that the NRA is opposed to more gun laws, without the caveats.
And if you really think the NRA is the evil voice of the gun owners, consider this, the NRA supports either stronger regulations on bump stocks or an outright ban.
There is another group that is opposed to it, the Gun Owners of America, with a membership comparable to the NRA. In fact, the GOA is opposed to any gun regulations.
And they are throwing more money at congress than the NRA.
However, the NRA is the evil one, even statements from GOA are attributed to the NRA even when it is clearly not the NRA
_____________________________
Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?
You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.
Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
|
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread