Gun Control question for liberals?

[BULLDOG]

I don't think gun registration makes any sense in a nation with more guns than there are people. Countries that were success with gun registration were countries where very few people own guns. I think the emphasis should be on background checks.

And why do you think some countries were successful with background checks?
If a person fails a background check, what is to prevent them from obtaining a gun illegally, just like people obtain drugs illegally?

All background checks do is cost money and deny some people who likely should not be denied.
For example, the main people denied by background checks are convicted felons, but what right does a democratic republic have to make people into less then full rights, especially since convicted felons likely end up living in poor and dangerous neighborhoods.

Another ridiculous straw man argument. Most people would have no idea where or how to obtain a gun illegally.

That is easily proven false.
All drug dealers have to be armed because they can't rely on banks or police to protect their profits.
All drug dealers I have ever know will sell you a firearm just as easily as drugs.
There is no one who does not know where to get a firearm without a background check.
Heck, most people can easily make on in a few hours.

What is really ironic is that actually a fully automatic blowback is MUCH easier to make than a single shot.

Not really. A single shot has fewer parts.

Have you ever looked at a Sten gun?
A single shot need a means of locking the chamber bolt closed.
The full auto does not, and relies only on weight and spring tension.
There is not even a separate firing pin or hammer.
The firing pin is fixed on the front of the bolt.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fl27V10Vwyg/VYx05HH_gVI/AAAAAAAAAv0/W08_YfxGypQ/s1600/sten4.gif

Yes, I know, but the bolt is a pain in the ass to get to load without hanging up. Took me three tries to get one that would work consistently. The magazine height is pretty touchy too. A single shot is much quicker and easier. Scrap metal .guns aren't as easy as that book leads you to believe they are.

 

[Blues Man]

Why?
You wanna keep guns outta the hands of criminals right?

Universal background checks won't do this.

And why not?

- It's unenforceable
- People who knowingly sell guns to criminals are already breaking the law ans will not obey THIS law.

Not uninforcable. Register all guns. One turns up in a criminals possession find out who the owner was. Chain of custody.

Also, that's a ridiculous straw man. If laws didnt prevent crime why have any at all?

And if that gun was sold to a criminal by another criminal who got it from another criminal who stole the gun a year ago and the owner reported it as stolen how does that stop a single crime?

There is absolutely no reason to register the personal property of any law abiding citizen and don't start with the car analogy again because we all know that if you don't drive a car on public roads you don't have to register it

 

[Blues Man]

With registration you could background check the gun.

And there we have it.... registration
"Well shucks - to make universal background checks work, we need universal registration!!!"
Which was the objective all along.

No one wonders why the anti-gun loons wants universal registration.

Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

No it's not we need to enforce the laws we already have on the books before we pass any more laws.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You made this up - no state requires a drivers license for the purchase, sale, or ownership of a car.

A dealership MAY require a license, but not as a matter of law, and if you do not have a license, a state ID will do -- the fact you BUY a car does not in any way necessitate that you will drive it - and, of course, cars can be bought outside a dealership.
But not to own it, keep it at your house/on private property, or to use it on private property.
I ask again - and maybe this time you'll answer:
When do you think a license for gun ownership would apply?

I did not make it up.

You did - you cannot cite any state law that requires a DL for a transfer. Not one.

-You don't need a license to buy a car, own a car or sell a car
-You don;t need a license to keep that car at your house/on private property, or to use it on private property.
I ask AGAIN - and maybe THIS time you'll answer:
When do you think a license for gun ownership would apply?

First, I did not make it up. As I said, and you removed from your quote (which is kinda dishonest), try to transfer a title without a DL. You will find you cannot.

Second, I really don't care what you've got in your house, just like I don't care who you sleep with or who you marry. As soon as you take that weapon out on the street you better be licensed. That's when the license comes into play.

If you take your weapon out on the street, it means you already are licensed with the exception of a few states and those with open carry.

No, all states are required in their constitutions to allow anyone to carry a weapon to a range.
Remember that cars are modern, and going to the range for weekly practice used to be much more of an obligation.
The most the law can require is that it be unloaded.

And almost all states now allow open carry.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NA-CB946_OPENCA_G_20140714180304.jpg

Out in the streets is different than transportation of a firearm. Even here, unless you have a CCW, the gun and ammo cannot be together and not in reach of the driver or passenger.

We had a guy here who made the news. He walked into a Taco Bell with a gun in a holster. A customer got excited and called the police who surrounded the restaurant. Turns out he was from Arizona where according to him, a lot of people walk around like that. He checked our laws to make sure we have open carry which we do, so he didn't think much of it during his visit. Little did he know that even though we have open carry, nobody open carries around here.

 

[IM2]

The tenure among most Liberals is that they don’t like private citizens owning guns. Yet, if you had your way and everyone turned over their guns, that would leave police and criminals having guns. Liberals are also the first to attack the police. How is it you are okay with police having guns and how would you get guns from criminals?

That's not the tenor and criminals are private citizens.

 

[2aguy]

You made this up - no state requires a drivers license for the purchase, sale, or ownership of a car.

A dealership MAY require a license, but not as a matter of law, and if you do not have a license, a state ID will do -- the fact you BUY a car does not in any way necessitate that you will drive it - and, of course, cars can be bought outside a dealership.
But not to own it, keep it at your house/on private property, or to use it on private property.
I ask again - and maybe this time you'll answer:
When do you think a license for gun ownership would apply?

I did not make it up.

You did - you cannot cite any state law that requires a DL for a transfer. Not one.

-You don't need a license to buy a car, own a car or sell a car
-You don;t need a license to keep that car at your house/on private property, or to use it on private property.
I ask AGAIN - and maybe THIS time you'll answer:
When do you think a license for gun ownership would apply?

First, I did not make it up. As I said, and you removed from your quote (which is kinda dishonest), try to transfer a title without a DL. You will find you cannot.

Second, I really don't care what you've got in your house, just like I don't care who you sleep with or who you marry. As soon as you take that weapon out on the street you better be licensed. That's when the license comes into play.

Never known a state that ever required a driver's license for anything but driving.
Never lived in a state that required licensing any firearm.
The only time I got a license for a firearm was when I wanted to carry concealed.
That was $75 and a short test on the law.

Try to open an account at a new bank without a driver's license, or a state issued ID. Let me know how far you get.

A bank account is not a Right......gun ownership is.

 

[2aguy]

They get them from private owners

That is why we need to register all guns

Gun registration doesn't do anything....all it does is lead to the next step, gun confiscation and banning.....it doesn't prevent gun crime, or mass shootings, and it doesn't help solve crime........

Canada tried to register 15 million long guns...and failed..

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

15 million guns.....1 billion dollars...and it didn't work....



The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast) Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

The registry was plagued with complications like duplicate serial numbers and millions of incomplete records, Mauser reports. One person managed to register a soldering gun, demonstrating the lack of precise standards. And overshadowing the effort was the suspicion of misplaced effort: Pistols were used in 66% of gun homicides in 2011, yet they represent about 6% of the guns in Canada. Legal long guns were used in 11% of killings that year, according to Statistics Canada, while illegal weapons like sawed-off shotguns and machine guns, which by definition cannot be registered, were used in another 12%.

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

There was also the question of how registering guns was supposed to reduce crime and suicide in the first place. From 1997 to 2005, only 13% of the guns used in homicides were registered. Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

Finally in 2011, conservatives led by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper voted to abolish the long-gun registry and destroy all its records. Liberals argued the law had contributed to the decline in gun homicides since it was passed. But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.

Gun registration would help us track straw man purchases, unregulated private sales, and thefts.

And just because Canada failed doesn't mean we would.

I don't think gun registration makes any sense in a nation with more guns than there are people. Countries that were success with gun registration were countries where very few people own guns. I think the emphasis should be on background checks.

And why do you think some countries were successful with background checks?
If a person fails a background check, what is to prevent them from obtaining a gun illegally, just like people obtain drugs illegally?

All background checks do is cost money and deny some people who likely should not be denied.
For example, the main people denied by background checks are convicted felons, but what right does a democratic republic have to make people into less then full rights, especially since convicted felons likely end up living in poor and dangerous neighborhoods.

Another ridiculous straw man argument. Most people would have no idea where or how to obtain a gun illegally.

If you know someone who sells drugs or uses drugs, you have a path to an illegal gun.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Registration is necessary....

You cannot demonstrate the necessity for the state to have on record the owner of every firearm within its jurisdiction.
Except in the case of the state enforcing the confiscation of same, of course.

No one wonders why the anti-gun loons want universal registration

 

[M14 Shooter]

I did not make it up.

You did.
No state requires a DL for transfer of title - they require ID, which does not have to be a DL

Second, I really don't care what you've got in your house....

As you want to require a license for simple ownership/possession of a firearm, and you seek universal registration of all firearms so owned, your statement, above, is a lie.

As soon as you take that weapon out on the street you better be licensed.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity of this.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Another ridiculous straw man argument. Most people would have no idea where or how to obtain a gun illegally.

Anyone who knows someone who can legally obtain a gun can illegally obtain a gun.

 

[M14 Shooter]

He part of the organization charged with public safety.

Why does a police officer need a assault rifle with 30rd magazines to ensure public safety?

Also most of the time those weapons are locked up, not riding around with the officers.

Most of the time, police officer carry an AR15/M16 in their squad cars.

 

[Rigby5]

You did - you cannot cite any state law that requires a DL for a transfer. Not one.

-You don't need a license to buy a car, own a car or sell a car
-You don;t need a license to keep that car at your house/on private property, or to use it on private property.
I ask AGAIN - and maybe THIS time you'll answer:
When do you think a license for gun ownership would apply?

First, I did not make it up. As I said, and you removed from your quote (which is kinda dishonest), try to transfer a title without a DL. You will find you cannot.

Second, I really don't care what you've got in your house, just like I don't care who you sleep with or who you marry. As soon as you take that weapon out on the street you better be licensed. That's when the license comes into play.

Never known a state that ever required a driver's license for anything but driving.
Never lived in a state that required licensing any firearm.
The only time I got a license for a firearm was when I wanted to carry concealed.
That was $75 and a short test on the law.

Try to open an account at a new bank without a driver's license, or a state issued ID. Let me know how far you get.

It used to be easy before 9/11, but after that, the Homeland Security regulations did make it a lot harder.
However, a social security card is actually all that can be required by law for opening a bank account.
They still may not do it these days however.
Have no tried.

I tried to open a construction account in two different banks in a little town, and neither of them would accept cash or a check to open the account because I was in my car, but I had left my license on the sun visor of my truck. They said federal law wouldn't let them.

Probably is from the War on Drugs more than anything else. Try to take out more than $10,000 in cash, like to buy a car from craigslist, and they give you all sorts of flack.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

First, I did not make it up. As I said, and you removed from your quote (which is kinda dishonest), try to transfer a title without a DL. You will find you cannot.

Second, I really don't care what you've got in your house, just like I don't care who you sleep with or who you marry. As soon as you take that weapon out on the street you better be licensed. That's when the license comes into play.

Never known a state that ever required a driver's license for anything but driving.
Never lived in a state that required licensing any firearm.
The only time I got a license for a firearm was when I wanted to carry concealed.
That was $75 and a short test on the law.

Try to open an account at a new bank without a driver's license, or a state issued ID. Let me know how far you get.

It used to be easy before 9/11, but after that, the Homeland Security regulations did make it a lot harder.
However, a social security card is actually all that can be required by law for opening a bank account.
They still may not do it these days however.
Have no tried.

I tried to open a construction account in two different banks in a little town, and neither of them would accept cash or a check to open the account because I was in my car, but I had left my license on the sun visor of my truck. They said federal law wouldn't let them.

Probably is from the War on Drugs more than anything else. Try to take out more than $10,000 in cash, like to buy a car from craigslist, and they give you all sorts of flack.

It's amazing the level of authoritarian bullshit "OUR" federal government has done in the hopeless War on Drugs.

90% of our problems have some relationship to that totalitarian, 1984ish pursuit of subjugation.

.

 

[Flash]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

 

[Pogo]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

Izzat right.

How come cars haven't been "confiscated"? They've had over a century to do it.

Yanno what, this is a perfect illustration of why I compare gun fetishists to babies with their pacifiers.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

Izzat right.

How come cars haven't been "confiscated"? They've had over a century to do it.

Yanno what, this is a perfect illustration of why I compare gun fetishists to babies with their pacifiers.

Why confiscate cars? Our government needs its little slaves to drive to work and do its bidding.

Firearms are a direct threat and check on government power. Cars serve the almighty government.

.

 

[Blues Man]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

Izzat right.

How come cars haven't been "confiscated"? They've had over a century to do it.

Yanno what, this is a perfect illustration of why I compare gun fetishists to babies with their pacifiers.

you do know that you do not have to register a car if you are not going to drive it on public roads don't you?
Do you understand that driving a vehicle on public roads is not a protected right but rather a privilege that can be revoked by the state at anytime for any reason?

If you don't like the fact that the second amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms then I suggest you follow the procedures set in the Constitution that are necessary to amend the Constitution.

And good luck with that

 

[Blues Man]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

Izzat right.

How come cars haven't been "confiscated"? They've had over a century to do it.

Yanno what, this is a perfect illustration of why I compare gun fetishists to babies with their pacifiers.

Why confiscate cars? Our government needs its little slaves to drive to work and do its bidding.

Firearms are a direct threat and check on government power. Cars serve the almighty government.

.

Not to mention all the taxes and other revenue states get from vehicle owners

 

[Pogo]

[Q


Registration is necessary for enforcement of many needed reforms.

You are confused. Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation. It is none of the government's business what guns I own. It is none of your business. If I use a gun in a crime then it becomes a law enforcement issue. Until then mind your own business.

Izzat right.

How come cars haven't been "confiscated"? They've had over a century to do it.

Yanno what, this is a perfect illustration of why I compare gun fetishists to babies with their pacifiers.

Why confiscate cars? Our government needs its little slaves to drive to work and do its bidding.

Firearms are a direct threat and check on government power. Cars serve the almighty government.

Why indeed.

Let's watch an instant replay.
HIM: "Registration is not necessary for anything except as a step towards confiscation."
ME: "Then why haven't they confiscated cars?"

Let me know if what I just did there begins to sink in.

 

[Bush92]

The tenure among most Liberals is that they don’t like private citizens owning guns. Yet, if you had your way and everyone turned over their guns, that would leave police and criminals having guns. Liberals are also the first to attack the police. How is it you are okay with police having guns and how would you get guns from criminals?

They are clueless on this issue. Gun ownership helped build this country and is a basic right as a citizen.