Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
by Underhill
I don't think it matters. This is my point.
There is a problem with criminals walking into gun shops and buying guns. But laws have been put in place that restrict what the authorities to the point where they can do nothing about it. And the NRA was the one writing the legislation under the guise of protecting our rights. In reality they were protecting the gun manufacturers so they could sell guns to literally anyone with no consequences.
Now I doubt their intent was to put guns in the hands of criminals. But even when we see the results, they refuse any change. And that is the point.
Regardless of what the legislation is, the gun lobby will fight it. And that is a recipe for failure.
If you want to see the smart play, look at the National Sheriffs Association. They have gotten behind some of the more reasonable gun regulations and will probably be at the table when they are written. While the NRA sits outside yelping about no new regulations...
So what you guys are saying is that there is literally nothing you would allow the government to do to curb the problem.
Well that is one way to go. I think it is the wrong way.
When you continually say no to everything, even the most mundane concessions, sooner or later they simply stop listening to you.
What, exactly, is the problem? Positing solutions before you define the parameters only makes sense if you think intentions trump results.
I don't think it matters. This is my point.
There is a problem with criminals walking into gun shops and buying guns. But laws have been put in place that restrict what the authorities to the point where they can do nothing about it. And the NRA was the one writing the legislation under the guise of protecting our rights. In reality they were protecting the gun manufacturers so they could sell guns to literally anyone with no consequences.
Now I doubt their intent was to put guns in the hands of criminals. But even when we see the results, they refuse any change. And that is the point.
Regardless of what the legislation is, the gun lobby will fight it. And that is a recipe for failure.
If you want to see the smart play, look at the National Sheriffs Association. They have gotten behind some of the more reasonable gun regulations and will probably be at the table when they are written. While the NRA sits outside yelping about no new regulations...
Specifically, what laws?There is a problem with criminals walking into gun shops and buying guns. But laws have been put in place that restrict what the authorities to the point where they can do nothing about it.
Ths is hogwash.
Gun manufacturers sell to wholesalers and dealers, not individuals.
More hogwash; the reason we have the NICS at all is because the NRA supported it.
Guns are not licensed nor are the people who own them. When you sold your car you should have filed a "report of sale" because it would have kept you from getting the purchasers tickets.
For the same thing to happen with background checks you would have to register the gun and the owner. That has already been ruled as unconstitutional by the supreme court.
Gabby's shooter wasn't yet a criminal - and he obviously passed his background check or he wouldn't have been able to purchase the gun. Unless he bought it from a private citizen, he would have undergone the background check.
You can't prevent crimes without removing, not only all individual rights, but all the freedoms as well. The best that we can do is to prosecute criminals to the full extent of the law.
How can you pass a law that makes it more difficult for a criminal to get a gun .... THEY don't obey the laws
You really can't prevent crime without removing all rights and freedoms enjoyed in a free society.
No. It is not like that at all. I suggest you reasd what I wrote more carefully.That is like saying that we should do away with automobile registrations, because it is unenforceable.
And I asked for specific laws. You may proceed.Here is an article for you...Specifically, what laws?There is a problem with criminals walking into gun shops and buying guns. But laws have been put in place that restrict what the authorities to the point where they can do nothing about it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/u...y-to-fight-gun-crime.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
More hogwash, What you said here is not what you said originally.You honestly think the manufacturers don't have anything to lose if this kind of regulation is passed? It means dealers will sell less guns. Of course they care.Ths is hogwash.
Gun manufacturers sell to wholesalers and dealers, not individuals.
You are right -- you have an example where the NRA does support restrictions on gun ownership. and the falseness of your claim that the NRA opposes all rewstrictionson guns is not up for debate at all.Read the artical and get back to me. These things are not really up for debate.More hogwash; the reason we have the NICS at all is because the NRA supported it.
How can you pass a law that makes it more difficult for a criminal to get a gun .... THEY don't obey the laws
You really can't prevent crime without removing all rights and freedoms enjoyed in a free society.
That is like saying that we should do away with automobile registrations, because it is unenforceable. If I were to argue the oppositions point of view, I would point out that I, myself, sold a car once, and the buyer never regisitered it under his name, and his parking tickets came to me. The counter argument is that every time he drove that car with an expired tag, he risked getting fined.
Universal gun registration is something that we need.
And BTW, not all criminals get their guns illegally. The guy who killed 8 people, and shot Gabby Giffords, bought his weapon legally.
Specifically, what laws?There is a problem with criminals walking into gun shops and buying guns. But laws have been put in place that restrict what the authorities to the point where they can do nothing about it.
Here is an article for you...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/u...y-to-fight-gun-crime.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
You honestly think the manufacturers don't have anything to lose if this kind of regulation is passed? It means dealers will sell less guns. Of course they care.Ths is hogwash.
Gun manufacturers sell to wholesalers and dealers, not individuals.
Read the artical and get back to me. These things are not really up for debate.More hogwash; the reason we have the NICS at all is because the NRA supported it.
Here is another article that gets into it. It says,
"And ATF's mission has been undermined in myriad other ways by acts of Congress. For example, ATF is prohibited from creating a national registry of gun transactions. Its agents cannot make more than one unannounced inspection of a licensed gun dealer each year.
Records on background checks of gun buyers must be destroyed within 24 hours. ATF is limited in its ability to share tracing information on guns linked to crimes with local and state agencies.
Moreover, there is something terribly out of whack with an antiterrorism policy that creates a "watch list" of people who are considered too dangerous to board an airplane ... yet those same people can legally buy deadly weapons. And Congress has been too timid to confront that contradiction."
Read more: ATF left toothless on enforcing gun laws - SFGate
How can you pass a law that makes it more difficult for a criminal to get a gun .... THEY don't obey the laws
You really can't prevent crime without removing all rights and freedoms enjoyed in a free society.
If your argument is that there is no point in making it illegal for criminals to own guns, because they won't obey the law anyway, then why do we take driver's liceses away from alcoholics, who will drive anyway (and BTW, in my community, there is a guy which is packing for prison, after his 4th DWI).
I have no problem with registration. Registration is not a restriction of freedom. Even the NRA is saying that we do not enforce our present guns laws. Required registration would help us do that. It means that I, a good, law abiding citizen, will no longer be able to sell my 9MM to the first felon who walks up to me at a gun show and buys my gun for cash. If such felon knows that he will have to show proof of identity and undergo a background check, he will not buy his gun from me. Maybe the fact that he would have to go underground to buy a weapon would save someone's life. I have walked the earth for almost 70 years, and I have no idea where I would buy a weapon underground. If he is just some nut, and not a hardened criminal, he may be as ignorant of how to do that as I am. Be aware, I know that gang members wiould still be in the illegal weapons trade. That is a deeper problem, and would require a different solution.
How can you pass a law that makes it more difficult for a criminal to get a gun .... THEY don't obey the laws
You really can't prevent crime without removing all rights and freedoms enjoyed in a free society.
If your argument is that there is no point in making it illegal for criminals to own guns, because they won't obey the law anyway, then why do we take driver's liceses away from alcoholics, who will drive anyway (and BTW, in my community, there is a guy which is packing for prison, after his 4th DWI).
I have no problem with registration. Registration is not a restriction of freedom. Even the NRA is saying that we do not enforce our present guns laws. Required registration would help us do that. It means that I, a good, law abiding citizen, will no longer be able to sell my 9MM to the first felon who walks up to me at a gun show and buys my gun for cash. If such felon knows that he will have to show proof of identity and undergo a background check, he will not buy his gun from me. Maybe the fact that he would have to go underground to buy a weapon would save someone's life. I have walked the earth for almost 70 years, and I have no idea where I would buy a weapon underground. If he is just some nut, and not a hardened criminal, he may be as ignorant of how to do that as I am. Be aware, I know that gang members wiould still be in the illegal weapons trade. That is a deeper problem, and would require a different solution.
Nope, my arguement is that we already have many more laws than we need to prosecute criminals but we are not doing that. Prosecution for violent crime is down 40% according to the FBI crime statistics.
Registration is the first step that every country that has confiscated weapons has taken. I do not wish to repeat that history. We are even being warned by those in the UK and Australia not to give in - they did, at least in part and the process didn't work to reduce violent crime in England - in fact it has steadily risen to the point where there is more violent crime in the UK than in the US and they have completely bannedgun ownership.