Such as…?
You’ve been attacked without provocation in a coffee shop. Your opponent is just pommeling you without mercy. You’re completely outmatched. Would you like for him to slow down? Hit you only with his weaker hand? Or would you like him to stop hitting you?
Well, to start with, I don’t know that I have a problem with a national firearms owners purchase license. I don’t remember who proposed it. Obviously, many safeguards would have to be out into place to insure that there was no hassles towards an otherwise qualified individual from getting one.
For example, in my state concealed weapons permits were recently issued only by county sheriffs. Iowa has 99 counties so 99 different offices issued 99 different permits. My county essentially was a shall issue county, anyone without a criminal record could easily get one. Other counties only issued to politically connected folks, and even others issued permits, but only after safety classes were passed that were held once a month on Monday mornings, if the moon was full and the sheriff could be bothered to show up. This sort of thing would need to be locked down tight for any Federal license.
This license would supersede all state and local purchase restrictions. As a compromise, by creating this license, the NFA laws would need to be reworked to treat suppressors, short barreled rifles and shotguns and those defined as “any other weapon” as a regular firearm and not take a $200 tax stamp and a year for paperwork to process. There is the win win for both sides.
There you go. I’m not going to go point by point for each off the wall proposal some of them have proposed but like I said if someone wants to actually discuss these things short of compulsory turn ins (Booker) or blanket bans I’d be happy to play along.
Just don’t call me out on my typos, I’m still pretty pissed off about that…
What kind of license should the school children get?
A learners permit. [rimshot]
I agree. It’s what I’ve been saying the whole time. They should learn to respect life.
Many of them do. And would like to not be killed by classmates who decide to shoot up the school they attend.
You get the same win I do, a country with 10,000 fewer gunshot deaths a year. A country where the police don’t have to approach every traffic stop with their hand on their gun because they don’t even need a gun to be safe. That’s the win, a safer, less violent society.
The fact that you won’t trade your handgun for 10,000 lives a year is on you, not me.
I’m willing to have home defense and hunting exceptions, both of which can be ably covered by non-semi-automatic shotguns and rifles. That concession isn’t good enough for you, of course, because they’re not fun, and you won’t get to walk the streets with a pocket sized weapon powerful enough to kill a dozen people. But, a concession it is, it’s a compromise, the admission that firearms have a valid purpose, and allowing firearms that fulfill that purpose to be owned. It’s a compromise, restricting the ban only to firearms that are not strictly necessary for these purposes, and are used to commit thousands of crimes a year, including mass murders.
Are you going to respond to my post #260? Or are we just moving on?
You seem to have this mistaken notion that if all semi auto guns were waved away that would solve the problem. Here is an article from 1995 that discussed guns used by criminals in '83. There were plenty of semi autos out there but the majority of criminals were still toting revolvers, mostly 357s, and 38 special revolvers and .22s which were probably split 50/50 or so.
Looking at this article, it appears that there were roughly the same number of homicides committed with handguns in the early 1980’s as now. Considering there were far more revolvers in circulation at the time, I think you really need to consider if your super plan to ban semi auto will really change anything, or just shift the violence back to revolvers, which, by the way are far more reliable and will last even longer than semi autos without any significant maintenance issues.
Regarding semi auto rifles and shotguns, banning them is hardly worth the effort or the political capital it will take to ban them (handguns for that matter too). They are hardly used in crimes in the big picture, and they can be easily replaced by pumps and lever actions which can cause just as much mayhem or more by a determined individual, but now we are back to that whole “learning” thing that was discussed earlier.
I won’t support your ban, and I simply won’t even try to compromise on it as you clearly have no inclination to do the same. Feel free to bring it up again if you’d like however. I’ll make another post based upon a proposal from a Democrat later that is actually based upon reality instead.
For the record “I don’t want to take ALL of your guns, just some of them” is not a compromise.
You seem to think that a person can’t hunt or defend themselves without a gun. That’s is incorrect.
No, he’s right. Before guns were invented, no human beings ever defended themselves or hunted for food.
During a speech recently, Harris mentioned her plan if elected to implement a few executive orders since Congress has been shirking its gun control duties in her opinion. From the speech:
There is something to work with here, but it seems Harris might need a refresher on the responsibilities of a dealer. If one is a Federal Firearms Dealer, ALL sales that they perform must include a Federal NICS background check or equivalent. There is no minimum sales number that forces this requirement. The checks are required whether the dealer sells from his kitchen, a shop, or even a gun show. It is his or her responsibility to have the NICS check and a form 4473 for every sale completed (unless they are selling their own personally held firearms that are documented appropriately)
Perhaps, she is suggesting that is someone is engaging in the business of selling firearms without a license, that a threshold be implemented of 5 sales annually in order to trigger the need for some sort of new license, I’m not sure.
What is known however is that there are individuals who purchase new guns, complete with NICS checks and form 4473’s and quickly sell these guns to folks in huge numbers “off the books” as since they are not FFL dealers, they have no responsibility to document the sales. This is a large contributor to the illegal trafficking of firearms, and the perpetrators are often quite well known the law enforcement and even the ATF.
There is no need for compromise on this one. The Feds know who are doing it, they have the paperwork, yet these sales, along with those folks who lie and fail NICS checks are almost NEVER prosecuted, and that is putting it mildly.
If Harris wants to pick up the enforcement of the prosecution of these sales, I would have no issue at all. the penalty is 10 years/$10k so it is not an insignificant amount. It’s anyone’s guess as to why this low hanging fruit is not being exploited.
Is this illegal?
I didn’t see it. I agree, something changed, I’m not sure what, I have this notion of the “greatest generation” thinking they were so great that it influenced cultural norms for decades in both positive and negative ways, that led us to where we are today but I don’t want to be called an ageist.
Throw in a country full of guns, the war on drugs, other cultural factors that I’m sure we would disagree about, as well as the pride of kicking ass in two world wars and that train of change was inevitable. (Think Billy Joel’s We Didn’t Start the Fire…) I don’t think the guns led us here, but if there were no guns at all there would be no gun homicides. I can’t argue that. That is also not reality, nor is getting rid of them.
Many of the sales in question are. They are straw purchases where a person with a clean NICS record buys a gun for someone without a clean history;
Second, there is a Federal provision and most states have laws that the seller must ascertain that the buyer is legal to purchase a firearm via a permit or other means.
Third, it is illegal to cross state lines to sell handguns (Chicago vs Indiana for example) without going through an FFL on one side or the other. Some states may include long guns in that as well.
Fourth it is illegal to lie on the form 4473 in order to purchase a firearm. If one fails a NICS check, this failure is rarely followed up on yet there is typically something on the form that was completed incorrectly to game the system.
Those are the big ones.
Is this true? I was under the impression that the seller has no obligation to actually ask if the buyer is legal to purchase a firearm.
sorry, double post.
In Iowa, to sell someone a handgun the buyer must also have one of two permits issued by the state for example.
Actually, there have been quite a few. It’s not rare here.