Sarah Brady has died

[2aguy]

Are you saying the militias at the time the Constitution was written registered their guns. Doubt it.

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

I'm still trying to grasp what's the leftist fascination with guns? Seems they're obsessed by such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things

-Geaux

It has something to do with assasinations, massacres and the highest murder rate in the industrialized world

And of course you forget that guns are used to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives 1.6 million times a year on average..........while gun murders in the U.S. are only 8-9,000 generally in isolated, small, multi block areas in inner cities, committed by criminal gangs..........

And if the left would stop killing politicians, and if left wing nuts would stop doing mass public shootings we would have an even lower gun murder rate.....

Tell a lie often enough and others will begin to believe it

That is why we dislike the left so much....they tell so many lies so often.......

 

[Conservative65]

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

The People are the Ultimate Militia and, as such, should not begrudge the registration of firearms and the licensing of owners, and standards for vetting and usage-training and storage and transport and carry and sale and transfer and disposal.

None of that detracts from one's right to own them, so long as they meet society's standards for ownership.

It is clear to even the worst dullard that we need to find a way to reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals and the incompetent or dangerous amongst us.

There is no way other than to set national standards and to employ centralized data management and to enforce them.

Done right, such changes are likely to greatly reduce the number of sources for illegal (un-registered or stolen) firearms and to greatly improve the gun-ownership climate for ordinary citizens, under circumstances where the public-at-large may rest easy that sales, transfers, training, registration, licensure, transport, etc., are all being done right.

Very little difference, in the long run, from registering your vehicle and obtaining a license for it and yourself, and undergoing initial and/or refresher training, and undertaking periodic competency testing, and having all that registered in a centralized database.

If we can do that with our road-vehicles (and airplanes and boats, for that matter), there is no reason why we cannot do the same with firearms, which pose a mortal danger when used improperly or when fallen into the wrong hands.

There are a variety of rights and privileges outlined or implicit or derived from the verbiage in the US Constitution, which are reasonably-well regulated, through registration and licensure and the like.

It's time to stop freaking-out and being paranoid about The Gubmint taking our guns, and acknowledging the sanity and higher degree of safety that such an approach brings.

The Second Amendment - in its current mode of interpretation - should be allowed to stand indefinitely.

The Gun-Grabbers cannot have the guns.

But the Gun-Rights folks need to budge, as well, in order to keep the peace, and to put this matter to rest, once and for all.

And, frankly, that 'budge' is going to consist of a better approach, at the national level, and integrating the work of the States, to register and license firearms and owners.

That's just the way it's going to be.

It's not a question of "IF".

It's merely a question of "WHEN".

Might as well bite-the-bullet and get this over with, rather than spend more years pointlessly burning-up energy, trying to sweep back the sea with a broom.

Registration is the step necessary for confiscation.

You want a really bloody civil war in this country, start trying confiscation.

I register my car every year

Hasn't been confiscated

how much does that cost you and what part of the constitution has owning a car in it

moron

Maybe the part that requires a well regulated militia

How do we regulate a militia without knowing who has guns and what type of gun they have

The second amendment encourages gun registration and licensing

The 2nd encourages that only in the minds of gun haters.

 

[BlackSand]

My goodness ... I just cannot understand why we don't assign a National Holiday in honor of Sarah Bailey for her efforts to better address the gun control issue.
A true American patriot because she helped give us legislation that wilted on the vine and expired ... What better way to remind folks what happens to knee-jerk legislation?

.

 

[Conservative65]

Are you saying the militias at the time the Constitution was written registered their guns. Doubt it.

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

I'm still trying to grasp what's the leftist fascination with guns? Seems they're obsessed by such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things

-Geaux

It has something to do with assasinations, massacres and the highest murder rate in the industrialized world

And of course you forget that guns are used to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives 1.6 million times a year on average..........while gun murders in the U.S. are only 8-9,000 generally in isolated, small, multi block areas in inner cities, committed by criminal gangs..........

And if the left would stop killing politicians, and if left wing nuts would stop doing mass public shootings we would have an even lower gun murder rate.....

Tell a lie often enough and others will begin to believe it

Believe a lie long enough and you're called a Liberal.

 

[rightwinger]

...So, you immediately concede that registration will lead to house to house searches of citizens...

The twists and turns of this example of paranoid and convoluted logic are far too tortuous for a sane man to want to bother trying to untangle.

Not to mention the juvenile attempt to put words into the mouth of a colleague, who neither articulated such a thing, nor established conditions implying such a thing, to a reasonable man.

Violators of Registration and Licensing laws will become known over time as those arms are detected on their persons when out-and-about in the world, and, of course, existing records of sales and transfers and - in some jurisdictions - existing registration and licensing databases - and reports to authorities - will serve to unmask a great many violators.

There is neither a need nor a mandate nor an empowerment to conduct house-to-house searches for firearms, and, under any circumstance wherein there is sufficient evidence of violation to merit a search warrant, that would be undertaken in a manner identical to any other legal home search already provided for in the Constitution and subsequent statute.

...You have now relegated yourself to person unworthy of reply (except maybe by accident, I don't use the IGNORE feature)...

Suit yourself. No skin off my nose.

...Have a Happy Deluded Easter.

You too.

sadly you appear to be a fascist

How so?

What aspect of advocacy for Gun Registration and Gun Owner Licensure and the establishment of National Standards or any related enforcment in accordance with the Constitution and through the Rule of Law strikes you as Fascist in nature?

I really wanna know.

There is no need for gun registration......if someone commits a crime with a gun you arrest them....if you catch a felon in possession of a gun, you arrest them....no registration needed......

What don't you understand about that simple process....

Why are you so obsessed with registration? It is not needed and doesn't stop crime or mass shootiings....so why do it at all.....?

We have a death penalty and the largest prison population in the world. Still we have the highest murder rate in the free world

Doesn't seem to be working

The rest of the world uses prevention not punishment after the fact

 

[2aguy]

...Is your right to operate a car on a public road mention in the Constitution?

How does requiring you to register your firearms and license yourself infringe upon your Constitutional rights?

Unless you are being denied the Right to Bear Arms for no good reason, nobody is infringing upon such rights.

Merely requiring that you exercise that Right in a safe and sane fashion, according to the standards set by society for a well-regulated Ultimate Militia.

I agree.....to keep you from causing trouble with the First Amendment....we will regulate it to mean you may only speak in government approved locations in the janitors closets of government controlled buildings at a time of the governments choosing....no one is infringing on your right to free speech...they will simply regulate it.....

 

[Kondor3]

...You are so wrong......there is no way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, they can't do it in Europe or even Japan when their criminals decide they want guns...

True. You cannot prevent someone from obtaining a gun, when they are so fiercely determined to do so. But what you CAN do is to slow 'em down and make it vastly more difficult to do so, by several orders of magnitude, so that FAR FEWER asswipes get their hands on guns than they would in a wide-open environment. Which is what we see over there.

...And as to gun registration....there is absolutely no need for it.....criminals are not legally required to do it according to the Supreme Court,and if they don't have to then law abiding citizens don't have to either...

The point behind registration is to show a paper trail of ownership and possession, so that if-and-when a gun gets into the hands of a criminal we know who from.

...And we are the owners of this country....we pay for the police and military, not the other way around....if we give our employees guns, then we get to own those same guns....

Nolo contendere.

No contest,.

No objection.

Just register your guns, and obtain a license for them.

Problem solved.

...And registration will lead to confiscation and banning once the anti gunners get the political power and the right number of people murdered that they can drag in front of cameras.....and then like Britain and Australia...they will collect the guns.... No fucking way.......

Rubbish.

We have the Second Amendment to protect our Right to Bear Arms.

 

[Kondor3]

...I am not registering jack shit.

You will if it becomes law.

I absolutely will NOT do that.

Yes you will, if it becomes law, all protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

And, if by some odd chance, you actually keep your promise and fail to comply, you will bring down upon your head a world of trouble, pointlessly, and needlessly.

Time to take a chill-pill.

You realize you just answered the question.....and do you realize that convicted felons do not have to register their illegal guns....by Supreme Court decision....the Haynes decision stated that requiring a felon to register an illegal guns would go against their right to self incrimination....

How nuts is that...criminals would be protected from registration of their illegal guns....the ones you say you want to disarm...but law abiding citizens would be arrested if they did not register their legal guns........that is what you are supporting....

Any nationwide reform of firearms laws would involve burning down to the ground, any existing law along those lines, and the establishment of national standards that will negate such foolish scenarios - if We The People - including, most specifically, the Gun Rights folks - fully participate and do their part to ensure that we (collectively) get it right.

 

[2aguy]

...You are so wrong......there is no way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, they can't do it in Europe or even Japan when their criminals decide they want guns...

True. You cannot prevent someone from obtaining a gun, when they are so fiercely determined to do so. But what you CAN do is to slow 'em down and make it vastly more difficult to do so, by several orders of magnitude, so that FAR FEWER asswipes get their hands on guns than they would in a wide-open environment. Which is what we see over there.

...And as to gun registration....there is absolutely no need for it.....criminals are not legally required to do it according to the Supreme Court,and if they don't have to then law abiding citizens don't have to either...

The point behind registration is to show a paper trail of ownership and possession, so that if-and-when a gun gets into the hands of a criminal we know who from.

...And we are the owners of this country....we pay for the police and military, not the other way around....if we give our employees guns, then we get to own those same guns....

Nolo contendere.

No contest,.

No objection.

Just register your guns, and obtain a license for them.

Problem solved.

...And registration will lead to confiscation and banning once the anti gunners get the political power and the right number of people murdered that they can drag in front of cameras.....and then like Britain and Australia...they will collect the guns.... No fucking way.......

Rubbish.

We have the Second Amendment to protect our Right to Bear Arms.

The point behind registration is to show a paper trail of ownership and possession, so that if-and-when a gun gets into the hands of a criminal we know who from.

Doesn't mean a thing.....they report the gun stolen if they knowingly purchased it for a gang member, and if it is stolen....then what....it doesn't matter who owned it since they didn't use it for a crime.......again...pointless and useless...

And on top of all of this....actual police say that the cost, the lost man hours and the infrastructure would be so vast to keep track of 320 million guns through all the hands they would pass that it would be impossible to do....and cost too much money to do......

So this is a fail on all levels......

 

[2aguy]

...You are so wrong......there is no way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, they can't do it in Europe or even Japan when their criminals decide they want guns...

True. You cannot prevent someone from obtaining a gun, when they are so fiercely determined to do so. But what you CAN do is to slow 'em down and make it vastly more difficult to do so, by several orders of magnitude, so that FAR FEWER asswipes get their hands on guns than they would in a wide-open environment. Which is what we see over there.

...And as to gun registration....there is absolutely no need for it.....criminals are not legally required to do it according to the Supreme Court,and if they don't have to then law abiding citizens don't have to either...

The point behind registration is to show a paper trail of ownership and possession, so that if-and-when a gun gets into the hands of a criminal we know who from.

...And we are the owners of this country....we pay for the police and military, not the other way around....if we give our employees guns, then we get to own those same guns....

Nolo contendere.

No contest,.

No objection.

Just register your guns, and obtain a license for them.

Problem solved.

...And registration will lead to confiscation and banning once the anti gunners get the political power and the right number of people murdered that they can drag in front of cameras.....and then like Britain and Australia...they will collect the guns.... No fucking way.......

Rubbish.

We have the Second Amendment to protect our Right to Bear Arms.

Just register your guns, and obtain a license for them.

Problem solved.

There is no problem to solve....there is no need to register guns.....at all for any reason.....you have yet to show how it would do anything to solve or stop a crime or a mass shooting......on top of it being unConstitutional.....

If a criminal is caught with a gun...you arrest them...no need to register the gun....if a felon is caught in possession of a gun, they are breaking the law and can be arrested...no registration needed...

The only reason to register guns is to set up future confiscation and banning of guns.........of law abiding citizens.....and no way is that happening....we own the police and military.......we say what guns they carry...not the other way around....

 

[Conservative65]

You can't have well regulated militias without gun registration

Are you saying the militias at the time the Constitution was written registered their guns. Doubt it.

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

The People are the Ultimate Militia and, as such, should not begrudge the registration of firearms and the licensing of owners, and standards for vetting and usage-training and storage and transport and carry and sale and transfer and disposal.

None of that detracts from one's right to own them, so long as they meet society's standards for ownership.

It is clear to even the worst dullard that we need to find a way to reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals and the incompetent or dangerous amongst us.

There is no way other than to set national standards and to employ centralized data management and to enforce them.

Done right, such changes are likely to greatly reduce the number of sources for illegal (un-registered or stolen) firearms and to greatly improve the gun-ownership climate for ordinary citizens, under circumstances where the public-at-large may rest easy that sales, transfers, training, registration, licensure, transport, etc., are all being done right.

Very little difference, in the long run, from registering your vehicle and obtaining a license for it and yourself, and undergoing initial and/or refresher training, and undertaking periodic competency testing, and having all that registered in a centralized database.

If we can do that with our road-vehicles (and airplanes and boats, for that matter), there is no reason why we cannot do the same with firearms, which pose a mortal danger when used improperly or when fallen into the wrong hands.

There are a variety of rights and privileges outlined or implicit or derived from the verbiage in the US Constitution, which are reasonably-well regulated, through registration and licensure and the like.

It's time to stop freaking-out and being paranoid about The Gubmint taking our guns, and acknowledging the sanity and higher degree of safety that such an approach brings.

The Second Amendment - in its current mode of interpretation - should be allowed to stand indefinitely.

The Gun-Grabbers cannot have the guns.

But the Gun-Rights folks need to budge, as well, in order to keep the peace, and to put this matter to rest, once and for all.

And, frankly, that 'budge' is going to consist of a better approach, at the national level, and integrating the work of the States, to register and license firearms and owners.

That's just the way it's going to be.

It's not a question of "IF".

It's merely a question of "WHEN".

Might as well bite-the-bullet and get this over with, rather than spend more years pointlessly burning-up energy, trying to sweep back the sea with a broom.

Registration is the step necessary for confiscation.

You want a really bloody civil war in this country, start trying confiscation.

Who the hell is talking about Confiscation?

We're talking about National Standards, Centralized Databases, Licensure, Registration, Education/Training, and Sales, Transfer, Possession, Transport and Carry.

With or without such an approach, if the Gubmint ever moved to confiscate en masse, I'll pick up a rifle myself, and stand alongside you on the barricades.

But that's not going to happen.

The Gubmint doesn't confiscate your Cars or Boats or Airplanes when you register and license them (and yourself).

It's not going to confiscate our Guns, either.

Not without Revolution - of the sort that most of our very own Armed Forces would join, in order to preserve the Republic and The People and their Rights.

But that's an Alternative Universe, or something long ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

Hell, the gun-phobic Euros regulate guns much more vigorously than any such approach being proposed in this country, and their governments have never made a move to seize guns en masse from their citizenry, so, given that precedent in a far more heavily regulated environment, and given our own tradition of a Right to Bear Arms, there is no rational basis for believing that it would happen here.

That so-called 'barrier' comes off looking weaker and weaker, and more and more lame, with each passing year and decade, as the Nation continues to suffer greatly from the misuse of firearms in the wrong hands, with nothing getting done about it.

Gun-Grabbers aren't going to get the guns.

But Gun Owners would be well-advised to contemplate the very real possibility that The People at-large have grown weary and disheartened over rampant gun crime and gun-centric acts of terror and that The People are fast approaching the point where they want something done about it.

Why not be 'smart' about it and get out in front of the problem and be seen to be proactive, and better control the message and control the outcomes, rather than sitting back and spouting the same tired old protestations year-after-year, in what is fast beginning to look like a losing battle?

Done right, from a Gun Owner's perspective the cup would be 9/10 full, not 1/10 empty, and it would put the matter to rest for decades, or generations, or forever.

"But Gun Owners would be well-advised to contemplate the very real possibility that The People at-large have grown weary and disheartened over rampant gun crime and gun-centric acts of terror and that The People are fast approaching the point where they want something done about it."

Those of us who don't commit crimes with our guns are weary and disheartened over such things. We are the ones that will be affected and are smart enough to know the laws that others wants placed on our ownership won't do a damn thing about controlling the CRIMINALS that misuse guns.

 

[whitehall]

Lost in the rhetoric is the fact that Hinckley intended to murder the president of the United States, Ronald Reagan. If Sara Brady wanted to take up an issue it should have been the ludicrous insanity defense that got Hinckley off the hook. The media loved the image of the alleged fascination Hinckley had with actress Jodie Foster but it may have been fabricated by the defense. Hinckley may have suffered from depression and he may have abused drugs but the guy was elected president of his high school twice and was as sane as the high school golf coach who threatened to burn the pizza place because she was angry about the Indiana religious preservation law.

 

[Conservative65]

Are you saying the militias at the time the Constitution was written registered their guns. Doubt it.

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

I'm still trying to grasp what's the leftist fascination with guns? Seems they're obsessed by such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things

-Geaux

It has something to do with assasinations, massacres and the highest murder rate in the industrialized world

Perhaps you should focus on those who assassinate, massacre, and murder. I've owned and been around guns as long as I can remember. I have no intention of doing any of that yet the laws you support would affect me as if I was one of them.

Maybe we already do

We have the largest prison population in the world, a death penalty and still boast the highest murder rate in the free world

Doesn't seem to be working does it?

It works on those getting the death penalty as they can't do again what they did to earn that punishment. It would work if the prisons were run like prisons and people that receive a 20 year sentence did 20 years instead of being paroled early because they suddenly reformed themselves.

 

[2aguy]

...I am not registering jack shit.

You will if it becomes law.

I absolutely will NOT do that.

Yes you will, if it becomes law, all protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

And, if by some odd chance, you actually keep your promise and fail to comply, you will bring down upon your head a world of trouble, pointlessly, and needlessly.

Time to take a chill-pill.

You realize you just answered the question.....and do you realize that convicted felons do not have to register their illegal guns....by Supreme Court decision....the Haynes decision stated that requiring a felon to register an illegal guns would go against their right to self incrimination....

How nuts is that...criminals would be protected from registration of their illegal guns....the ones you say you want to disarm...but law abiding citizens would be arrested if they did not register their legal guns........that is what you are supporting....

Any nationwide reform of firearms laws would involve burning down to the ground, any existing law along those lines, and the establishment of national standards that will negate such foolish scenarios - if We The People - including, most specifically, the Gun Rights folks - fully participate and do their part to ensure that we (collectively) get it right.

How long have you been alive...government never gets it right.....they just fail less badly at some things than others....

You guys wanted background checks...we gave them to you...it didn't stop criminals from getting guns and it only made it more irritating for law abiding people to get guns....

Now you want Universal background checks because the first background checks that you said would stop criminals from getting guns didn't stop criminals from getting guns......and the same things criminals did to get past the old background checks will work to avoid the new universal background checks, making them pointless and useless the minute they are created....

And then when they don't stop criminals from getting guns...you will push for registration...and when that doesn't work...you will push for bans and confiscation....

We know how you nuts think, we know what you nuts want, and we know the tactics that you nuts use......

We will not surrender one more gun, bullet or piece of equipment to you anti-gun nuts....ever......

 

[2aguy]

Lost in the rhetoric is the fact that Hinckley intended to murder the president of the United States, Ronald Reagan. If Sara Brady wanted to take up an issue it should have been the ludicrous insanity defense that got Hinckley off the hook. The media loved the image of the alleged fascination Hinckley had with actress Jodie Foster but it may have been fabricated by the defense. Hinckley may have suffered from depression and he may have abused drugs but the guy was elected president of his high school twice and was as sane as the high school golf coach who threatened to burn the pizza place because she was angry about the Indiana religious preservation law.

They don't care about gun crime....you can tell this is true because nothing they propose would actually deal with actual gun crime.....they care about guns.....that is why everything they propose is directed at gun ownership and not gun crime......

 

[rightwinger]

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

I'm still trying to grasp what's the leftist fascination with guns? Seems they're obsessed by such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things

-Geaux

It has something to do with assasinations, massacres and the highest murder rate in the industrialized world

Perhaps you should focus on those who assassinate, massacre, and murder. I've owned and been around guns as long as I can remember. I have no intention of doing any of that yet the laws you support would affect me as if I was one of them.

Maybe we already do

We have the largest prison population in the world, a death penalty and still boast the highest murder rate in the free world

Doesn't seem to be working does it?

It works on those getting the death penalty as they can't do again what they did to earn that punishment. It would work if the prisons were run like prisons and people that receive a 20 year sentence did 20 years instead of being paroled early because they suddenly reformed themselves.

Hasn't done a thing to reduce our horrific murder rate

 

[2aguy]

...So, you immediately concede that registration will lead to house to house searches of citizens...

The twists and turns of this example of paranoid and convoluted logic are far too tortuous for a sane man to want to bother trying to untangle.

Not to mention the juvenile attempt to put words into the mouth of a colleague, who neither articulated such a thing, nor established conditions implying such a thing, to a reasonable man.

Violators of Registration and Licensing laws will become known over time as those arms are detected on their persons when out-and-about in the world, and, of course, existing records of sales and transfers and - in some jurisdictions - existing registration and licensing databases - and reports to authorities - will serve to unmask a great many violators.

There is neither a need nor a mandate nor an empowerment to conduct house-to-house searches for firearms, and, under any circumstance wherein there is sufficient evidence of violation to merit a search warrant, that would be undertaken in a manner identical to any other legal home search already provided for in the Constitution and subsequent statute.

...You have now relegated yourself to person unworthy of reply (except maybe by accident, I don't use the IGNORE feature)...

Suit yourself. No skin off my nose.

...Have a Happy Deluded Easter.

You too.

sadly you appear to be a fascist

How so?

What aspect of advocacy for Gun Registration and Gun Owner Licensure and the establishment of National Standards or any related enforcment in accordance with the Constitution and through the Rule of Law strikes you as Fascist in nature?

I really wanna know.

There is no need for gun registration......if someone commits a crime with a gun you arrest them....if you catch a felon in possession of a gun, you arrest them....no registration needed......

What don't you understand about that simple process....

Why are you so obsessed with registration? It is not needed and doesn't stop crime or mass shootiings....so why do it at all.....?

We have a death penalty and the largest prison population in the world. Still we have the highest murder rate in the free world

Doesn't seem to be working

The rest of the world uses prevention not punishment after the fact

We are the country with the most guns, but our violence rate only takes us to 90 on the most violent countries list....so please...try to be more accurate......

 

[rightwinger]

Lost in the rhetoric is the fact that Hinckley intended to murder the president of the United States, Ronald Reagan. If Sara Brady wanted to take up an issue it should have been the ludicrous insanity defense that got Hinckley off the hook. The media loved the image of the alleged fascination Hinckley had with actress Jodie Foster but it may have been fabricated by the defense. Hinckley may have suffered from depression and he may have abused drugs but the guy was elected president of his high school twice and was as sane as the high school golf coach who threatened to burn the pizza place because she was angry about the Indiana religious preservation law.

They don't care about gun crime....you can tell this is true because nothing they propose would actually deal with actual gun crime.....they care about guns.....that is why everything they propose is directed at gun ownership and not gun crime......

Guns don't kill people....people with guns kill people

 

[Roadrunner]

Are you saying the militias at the time the Constitution was written registered their guns. Doubt it.

They knew everyone who was in their militia and what weapons they had

What we call....well regulated

The People are the Ultimate Militia and, as such, should not begrudge the registration of firearms and the licensing of owners, and standards for vetting and usage-training and storage and transport and carry and sale and transfer and disposal.

None of that detracts from one's right to own them, so long as they meet society's standards for ownership.

It is clear to even the worst dullard that we need to find a way to reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals and the incompetent or dangerous amongst us.

There is no way other than to set national standards and to employ centralized data management and to enforce them.

Done right, such changes are likely to greatly reduce the number of sources for illegal (un-registered or stolen) firearms and to greatly improve the gun-ownership climate for ordinary citizens, under circumstances where the public-at-large may rest easy that sales, transfers, training, registration, licensure, transport, etc., are all being done right.

Very little difference, in the long run, from registering your vehicle and obtaining a license for it and yourself, and undergoing initial and/or refresher training, and undertaking periodic competency testing, and having all that registered in a centralized database.

If we can do that with our road-vehicles (and airplanes and boats, for that matter), there is no reason why we cannot do the same with firearms, which pose a mortal danger when used improperly or when fallen into the wrong hands.

There are a variety of rights and privileges outlined or implicit or derived from the verbiage in the US Constitution, which are reasonably-well regulated, through registration and licensure and the like.

It's time to stop freaking-out and being paranoid about The Gubmint taking our guns, and acknowledging the sanity and higher degree of safety that such an approach brings.

The Second Amendment - in its current mode of interpretation - should be allowed to stand indefinitely.

The Gun-Grabbers cannot have the guns.

But the Gun-Rights folks need to budge, as well, in order to keep the peace, and to put this matter to rest, once and for all.

And, frankly, that 'budge' is going to consist of a better approach, at the national level, and integrating the work of the States, to register and license firearms and owners.

That's just the way it's going to be.

It's not a question of "IF".

It's merely a question of "WHEN".

Might as well bite-the-bullet and get this over with, rather than spend more years pointlessly burning-up energy, trying to sweep back the sea with a broom.

Registration is the step necessary for confiscation.

You want a really bloody civil war in this country, start trying confiscation.

Who the hell is talking about Confiscation?

We're talking about National Standards, Centralized Databases, Licensure, Registration, Education/Training, and Sales, Transfer, Possession, Transport and Carry.

With or without such an approach, if the Gubmint ever moved to confiscate en masse, I'll pick up a rifle myself, and stand alongside you on the barricades.

But that's not going to happen.

The Gubmint doesn't confiscate your Cars or Boats or Airplanes when you register and license them (and yourself).

It's not going to confiscate our Guns, either.

Not without Revolution - of the sort that most of our very own Armed Forces would join, in order to preserve the Republic and The People and their Rights.

But that's an Alternative Universe, or something long ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

Hell, the gun-phobic Euros regulate guns much more vigorously than any such approach being proposed in this country, and their governments have never made a move to seize guns en masse from their citizenry, so, given that precedent in a far more heavily regulated environment, and given our own tradition of a Right to Bear Arms, there is no rational basis for believing that it would happen here.

That so-called 'barrier' comes off looking weaker and weaker, and more and more lame, with each passing year and decade, as the Nation continues to suffer greatly from the misuse of firearms in the wrong hands, with nothing getting done about it.

Gun-Grabbers aren't going to get the guns.

But Gun Owners would be well-advised to contemplate the very real possibility that The People at-large have grown weary and disheartened over rampant gun crime and gun-centric acts of terror and that The People are fast approaching the point where they want something done about it.

Why not be 'smart' about it and get out in front of the problem and be seen to be proactive, and better control the message and control the outcomes, rather than sitting back and spouting the same tired old protestations year-after-year, in what is fast beginning to look like a losing battle?

Done right, from a Gun Owner's perspective the cup would be 9/10 full, not 1/10 empty, and it would put the matter to rest for decades, or generations, or forever.

"But Gun Owners would be well-advised to contemplate the very real possibility that The People at-large have grown weary and disheartened over rampant gun crime and gun-centric acts of terror and that The People are fast approaching the point where they want something done about it."

Those of us who don't commit crimes with our guns are weary and disheartened over such things. We are the ones that will be affected and are smart enough to know the laws that others wants placed on our ownership won't do a damn thing about controlling the CRIMINALS that misuse guns.

If true, why is the public at large better armed than ever?

Why does 1,000 rounds hit the shelf at Wal-Mart, and two guys are there to split it the second it comes out of the boxes?

 

[Conservative65]

I'm still trying to grasp what's the leftist fascination with guns? Seems they're obsessed by such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things

-Geaux

It has something to do with assasinations, massacres and the highest murder rate in the industrialized world

Perhaps you should focus on those who assassinate, massacre, and murder. I've owned and been around guns as long as I can remember. I have no intention of doing any of that yet the laws you support would affect me as if I was one of them.

Maybe we already do

We have the largest prison population in the world, a death penalty and still boast the highest murder rate in the free world

Doesn't seem to be working does it?

It works on those getting the death penalty as they can't do again what they did to earn that punishment. It would work if the prisons were run like prisons and people that receive a 20 year sentence did 20 years instead of being paroled early because they suddenly reformed themselves.

Hasn't done a thing to reduce our horrific murder rate

It has for those being executed. They can't do it anymore. If those that don't learn from it do it, executing them will provide the same result for them. Making people do the full sentence instead of letting them out early will make a difference. We've tried the bleeding heart way of letting people out before their full sentence. It's time to try it a different way.