By golly, the NRA may be right!

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@solosam

Registration is a necessary precondition to confiscation, in case you haven’t been paying attention.

No its not.

Maybe we could try enforcing the existing laws instead of punishing all gun owners everywhere.

requiring registration is “punishing” Thats a little thin skinned isn’t it?

@solosam

If I legally own a gun and sell it to someone I know cannot have one, I have committed a crime.

And without a background check for all sales, how would you know?

If I legally own a gun and it is stolen from me, I am the victim.

Yes, you are a victim but if there is a steady stream of stolen guns coming from you and showing up at crime scenes, I’m not so sure anymore.

@ChickenLegs

It’s already against federal law to knowingly supply a firearm to a prohibited person, which includes felons.

How would you know without a background check? Or is willful ignorance a defense here?

@Absolute

This is why many opponents of additional gun restrictions ask “Shouldn’t we try enforcing the existing laws before we add new ones?”

Let them appoint a director of the ATF and maybe we could get something done.

Second, the NRA does not want guns used in crime. Are you fucking serious? Do you really think the NRA’s goal is really “More gun crime, more violence, more better!” No!

Of course not, they just don’t seem to be bothered by it a whole lot.

[levdrakon]

@Absolute

This such bullshit.

First, yes, a large source of guns used in crime are licensed “dealers” that are in fact corrupt and route guns to criminals under the table, then report them as stolen. This is a major problem. Yet for some reason, very few of these “dealers” are ever prosecuted. Why? Fuck if I know. This is why many opponents of additional gun restrictions ask “Shouldn’t we try enforcing the existing laws before we add new ones?”

An excellent example of NRA lies and distortions. The reason the current laws don’t get enforced is because the NRA uses its congressional stooges to put riders all over the ATF making it almost impossible to prosecute a dealer. That’s on the NRA. Try this:

The ATF’s appropriation statute includes a variety of proscriptions on its power, known as “riders.” Here’s what the significant ones do.

Prohibits the Justice Department from consolidating or centralizing records regarding federal firearms dealers.

Prevents electronic retrieval of names or personal identification codes of gun buyers from out of business records maintained by ATF.

Exempts federally licensed gun dealers from being required to maintain inventories.

Requires destruction within 24 hours of FBI data from Brady Law “instant checks’ for gun purchases

Restricts ATF’s right to disclose firearm trace information and data maintained by firearms dealers; trace data is immune from legal process, not subject to discovery, inadmissible as evidence in any state or federal civil action (except actions brought by ATF) or administrative proceeding. Use of trace data is thus limited in litigation and is off limits to the Freedom of Information Act.

States that trace data cannot be used to draw broad conclusions about gun-related crime — a frequent NRA contention that is disputed by researchers.

Bars the transfer of ATF functions to any other agency.

Broadens allowable import of guns more than 50 years old – so-called curios and relics for “sporting purposes.” Passed in response to ATF efforts to tighten the definition of these weapons, which include semiautomatic military-surplus rifles.

Allows importation of shotguns ATF had determined to be “non-sporting” —and thus ineligible for import—because they had features such as pistol grips, folding or collapsible stocks, laser sights and the ability to accept large capacity magazine feeding devices.

Allows an individual with a federal firearms dealer’s license to purchase guns at wholesale prices for personal use or to sell to friends, neighbors or other individuals even when they are not operating what would normally be considered a “business.”

Fucking A. The NRA claims it’s against any rules and regulations, and itself slaps an unending stream of rules and regulations all over the ATF preventing it from fulfilling its mandate. Then they say, “they can’t fulfill their mandate. No more laws if they can’t even enforce the current ones!”

They’ve made sure the ATF is tiny, underfunded, and unable to do its job. Attempts have been made to combine the ATF into the FBI or other agency big enough to defend itself, and they’ve expressly forbidden it. By law, the ATF must remain unable to enforce gun laws and be used as an example for why we shouldn’t have gun laws or regulations because they are unenforceable.

The NRA needs to be wiped off the face of the planet, and then maybe we can start to have a conversation reflective of reality.

Second, the NRA does not want guns used in crime. Are you fucking serious? Do you really think the NRA’s goal is really “More gun crime, more violence, more better!” No! For all their faults, the NRA exists to promote legal gun ownership by law-abiding citizens. Gun owners don’t want criminals to have guns, because that removes their advantage! Dealers selling guns illegally is not in anyone’s interest, regardless of whether you are pro or anti gun control.

Baloney. They’ll require fetuses to buy guns if we let them. Everyone gets a gun. The best way to make sure criminals can buy all the guns they want is to make it impossible for them to break any laws that would make them a criminal.

Until they actually get caught.

[China_Guy]

@solosam

Registration is a necessary precondition to confiscation, in case you haven’t been paying attention.

Not much room for compromise is such a stance. No registration and no funding to enforce the laws on the books. :dubious:

[solosam]

The NRA needs to be wiped off the face of the planet, and then maybe we can start to have a conversation reflective of reality.

If the NRA was eliminated, there would be no one to have a conversation with. You’d be left with Feinstein, the Brady Campaign, and the rest of the anti-gun groups who are ideologically opposed to all guns anywhere. I did not realize a one-sided monologue qualified as a debate.

If anything, the ATF has proven itself to be corrupt and arbitrary. Most of the criticisms posted above are attempts to prevent a *de facto *gun registration scheme, because (all together now) registration is a necessary precondition to confiscation.

Some of them I don’t even understand:

Broadens allowable import of guns more than 50 years old – so-called curios and relics for “sporting purposes.” Passed in response to ATF efforts to tighten the definition of these weapons, which include semiautomatic military-surplus rifles.

If an M1 Garand is legal to own, why shouldn’t I be able to import one? If the weapon is semiautomatic and therefore legal to own in the US, how is it different from any modern gun? Who even gives a shit?

Allows importation of shotguns ATF had determined to be “non-sporting”

And again, who gives a shit? These weapons are available domestically and legal to own. Why does the government get to decide what country I buy my guns from? If the imported gun is no different from a legal domestic gun, what business do you have telling me I’m not allowed to buy one?

Bars the transfer of ATF functions to any other agency

…because doing so would allow them to circumvent the limits that have been placed on their powers. If I passed a law telling the ATF they are not allowed to do something, why should they be allowed to circumvent the law by outsourcing to another agency?

Allows an individual with a federal firearms dealer’s license to purchase guns at wholesale prices for personal use or to sell to friends, neighbors or other individuals even when they are not operating what would normally be considered a “business.”

This makes no sense to me. If they have an FFL, they can buy from the factory. What price they pay is between them and the manufacturer… it is NONE of the government’s business. If the FFL sells to their friends, neighbors, or other individuals, they are bound by the same laws and regulations as any other FFL, and their records are subject to strict inspection by the ATF. An FFL is not a free pass to do whatever they want. I have seen FFLs screw up their records, and get damn near destroyed by the ATF… as they should be.

If you don’t want them to have an FFL, why would you give it to them? You have no right giving someone an FFL and then complaining that you don’t like how they are using it.

All of these riders and criticisms circle the same fundamental point: The government has no right to know what guns I keep in my closet. They are my private property, I paid for them, and I may use them, sell them, bury them, or even destroy them if I so choose because they belong to me. The only thing I may NOT do is sell them to someone who is prohibited from owning one, and shoot someone who doesn’t have it coming. Until I do one of those two things, the government can stay out of my closet and out of my life.

I don’t paw through your personal belongings looking for things I don’t like, and I hope you have enough respect for your fellow man to give me the same consideration.

For the nine billionth time (because you people are apparently hard of hearing) I have not committed any crime, have not transferred a gun illegally, and have not shot anybody, so you have no business telling me what I can and cannot own.

[China_Guy]

@solosam

For the nine billionth time (because you people are apparently hard of hearing) I have not committed any crime, have not transferred a gun illegally, and have not shot anybody, so you have no business telling me what I can and cannot own.

We have zero accountability or proof from you that you have not transferred a gun that was later used in a crime. The fact that you can claim that you didn’t know someone you sold to was a felon is a poor excuse. Even if it is currently legal, it ain’t right.

And right now no one is telling you what you can or can’t own. There are discussions about it. Certainly, you and others have convinced me that the assault weapon is a diversion. We need to start with registration, and if registration does not fix the problem of a firearm murder rate 4x our nearest comparable country, well then maybe we have to look at more.

Lalalala fingers in the ear, I’m a legal owner not doing anything to help the problem doesn’t make you a patriot big buddy.

[Kable]

@China_Guy

We need to start with registration, and if registration does not fix the problem of a firearm murder rate 4x our nearest comparable country, well then maybe we have to look at more.

If registration is where you want to start, where do you want to finish?

[levdrakon]

@Kable

If registration is where you want to start, where do you want to finish?

Concentration camps, of course. Don’t you listen to the NRA?

[Lumpy]

@China_Guy

if registration does not fix the problem of a firearm murder rate 4x our nearest comparable country, well then maybe we have to look at more.

My state of Minnesota has a homicide rate comparable to Canada’s; we could fix the firearm murder rate tomorrow by seceding from the United States. By comparison, Louisiana has a murder rate comparable to a Latin American narcostate. Maybe we could expel Louisiana from the Union?

[Kable]

@levdrakon

Concentration camps, of course. Don’t you listen to the NRA?

I’ve been listening to the Canadians:

[levdrakon]

[quote=“Kable, post:129, topic:650605”]

I’ve been listening to the Canadians:

[/QUOTE] Listening to loonie Canooks isn't the same as listening to Canadians. We've had strict gun registration since 1934, with the National Firearms Act. People register their weapons, they're entered into a database of weapons owners, they're happy with the system and most importantly, the registered guns are virtually never used in crime.

Registration and accountability work fine, and have been working fine for 80 years. So, the idea that registering weapons will lead to confiscation and tyrannical overthrow is not only false, it’s ridiculous. More NRA bullshit.

[China_Guy]

@Kable

If registration is where you want to start, where do you want to finish?

Wherever necessary. If universal registration, tracking, penalties and funding to enforce the laws on the books (hopefully combined with safety nets for those with mental illnesses) brings the firearm related murder rate down to an “acceptable” level, I’d be perfectly fine finishing there.

No hidden agenda. Put me in the camp of guns are fun to shoot off (responsibly of course. ). I’ve got 3 kids with one on the autism spectrum. The only way I can ensure there will never be a firearm accident in my house is to never have a gun on premise. I’m fine if you choose to be a legal responsible gun owner with a firearm in your house.

[Human_Action]

@ChickenLegs

It’s already against federal law to knowingly supply a firearm to a prohibited person, which includes felons.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/ut/psn/documents/guncard.pdf

See number II.

Good to know. As usual, enforcement is the key, not the statutes.

@levdrakon

An excellent example of NRA lies and distortions. The reason the current laws don’t get enforced is because the NRA uses its congressional stooges to put riders all over the ATF making it almost impossible to prosecute a dealer. That’s on the NRA.

All of those are reasonable limits on the agency’s powers.

@levdrakon

Fucking A. The NRA claims it’s against any rules and regulations, and itself slaps an unending stream of rules and regulations all over the ATF preventing it from fulfilling its mandate. Then they say, “they can’t fulfill their mandate. No more laws if they can’t even enforce the current ones!”

They’ve made sure the ATF is tiny, underfunded, and unable to do its job. Attempts have been made to combine the ATF into the FBI or other agency big enough to defend itself, and they’ve expressly forbidden it. By law, the ATF must remain unable to enforce gun laws and be used as an example for why we shouldn’t have gun laws or regulations because they are unenforceable.

The NRA needs to be wiped off the face of the planet, and then maybe we can start to have a conversation reflective of reality.

The NRA is not and does not claim to be against any rules and regulations, that’s a caricature. See this for documentationof their support for the NICBC system, for one such example.

Further, you write above as though the NRA had the power to legislate the ATF’s conduct, powers, and budget. They do not.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@solosam

If the NRA was eliminated, there would be no one to have a conversation with.

As an NRA member, I have been disappointed with how far right the NRA leadership has gotten in the last few decades. I was especially bothered when they started taking positions on political issues other than gun rights. We need a more rational moderate advocate for gun rights.

If anything, the ATF has proven itself to be corrupt and arbitrary.

How so?

[Quote]
(All together now) registration is a necessary precondition to confiscation.

It doesnt matter how many times you repeat this. It wont make it true. You are simply wrong or misinformed.

The only thing I may NOT do is sell them to someone who is prohibited from owning one, and shoot someone who doesn’t have it coming. Until I do one of those two things, the government can stay out of my closet and out of my life.

And without a background check, how would you know if you are selling your gun to someone who is prohibited from owning one? Without registration, how would we ever know if you have ever sold the gun to someone who is prohibited from owning one.

I have not committed any crime, have not transferred a gun illegally, and have not shot anybody, so you have no business telling me what I can and cannot own.

And how do we know you havdnt transferred a gun illegally?

[JXJohns]

@levdrakon

Listening to loonie Canooks isn’t the same as listening to Canadians.
We’ve had strict gun registration since 1934, with the National Firearms Act. People register their weapons, they’re entered into a database of weapons owners, they’re happy with the system and most importantly, the registered guns are virtually never used in crime.

Speaking of bullshit… care to cite that gun owners are “happy” with the way NFA firearms are treated? I know that this gun owner and thousands more just like me are anything but “happy” about it. Are they happy that it can take up to six months to purchase a title II firearm? Or perhaps are they happy that the full auto version of a gun that costs $1000 like and AR15 will cost them $25,000 in the case of an M16? Maybe they’re happy that their “new” M16 that they just got a steal for at $25k is actually a minimum of 27 years old due to the registry being closed in '86?

With all of this happiness going around, even a few cites should be easy to find.

[solosam]

@Damuri_Ajashi

As an NRA member, I have been disappointed with how far right the NRA leadership has gotten in the last few decades. I was especially bothered when they started taking positions on political issues other than gun rights. We need a more rational moderate advocate for gun rights.

Crazy as it sounds, I kind of agree with this.

How so?

Remember the time the ATF sold all those guns to Mexico, with no idea how they were going to control or recover them, and ended up getting Americans shot? Yeah. That.

(All together now) registration is a necessary precondition to confiscation.

It doesnt matter how many times you repeat this. It wont make it true. You are simply wrong or misinformed.

Saying “You are simply wrong” is not an argument. We can play the “Is not / Is too” game all day long, but until you actually explain your reasoning you have contributed nothing.

Here’s the bottom line: If the government doesn’t have a list of who own guns, they have no way to find the guns when/if they attempt to confiscate them, and have to go about searching for them the hard way. If the government has a handy-dandy registration list, confiscation becomes much, much easier.

I’m not saying the government is going to confiscate them today, or tomorrow. My point is that preventing registration is how we keep it that way.

And without a background check, how would you know if you are selling your gun to someone who is prohibited from owning one? Without registration, how would we ever know if you have ever sold the gun to someone who is prohibited from owning one.

And how do we know you havdnt transferred a gun illegally?

Okay, stay with me on this… because I know this is hard for some people…

In America we have this thing called a “Court” and a “Trial.” If someone gets caught illegally possessing a weapon, there are these people called “Police” who ask them where they got it. If the suspect names me, these “Police” people we hear so much about do this thing they call an “investigation.”

Associated concepts are “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion.” If any of this is strange and foreign to you, I recommend reading a CJ textbook. If you do not have one, any episode of “Law and Order” can demonstrate it.

If these “Police” people come to my door and ask questions about my guns, they need this incredible and under-utilized document called a “Warrant.” When they produce one of these documents, I will happily answer questions about my guns and who I have or have not sold them to.

This brings us back to the original point of OP, and the fact that the police don’t get to come pawing through my house (or asking me questions about my property) without a reason.

[levdrakon]

@Human_Action

All of those are reasonable limits on the agency’s powers.

Allowing gun manufacturers to put guns right into the hands of children and criminals is reasonable?

The NRA is not and does not claim to be against any rules and regulations, that’s a caricature.

That’s funny, because they say they are. Weird.

See this for documentationof their support for the NICBC system, for one such example.

Only after they made sure it would allow untold thousands of disqualified criminals to buy guns anyway. Duh. And it’s the only example. Barely works, hardly any funding, states don’t bother inputing more than a fraction of the data needed, and forget about the dangerously mentally ill with documented court-ordered institutionalizations. Nope. They get guns.

Further, you write above as though the NRA had the power to legislate the ATF’s conduct, powers, and budget. They do not.

You write as if the NRA is really just a harmless sub-set of the Boy Scouts.

[Kable]

@levdrakon

Registration and accountability work fine, and have been working fine for 80 years. So, the idea that registering weapons will lead to confiscation and tyrannical overthrow is not only false, it’s ridiculous. More NRA bullshit.

So there were no gun confiscations in Canada?

[Kable]

@China_Guy

Wherever necessary. If universal registration, tracking, penalties and funding to enforce the laws on the books (hopefully combined with safety nets for those with mental illnesses) brings the firearm related murder rate down to an “acceptable” level, I’d be perfectly fine finishing there.

And if registration etc., didn’t bring deaths down to an “acceptable” level, what would be your next step? What’s an “acceptable” number of firearm related murders anyway?

[levdrakon]

@JXJohns

Speaking of bullshit… care to cite that gun owners are “happy” with the way NFA firearms are treated? I know that this gun owner and thousands more just like me are anything but “happy” about it. Are they happy that it can take up to six months to purchase a title II firearm? Or perhaps are they happy that the full auto version of a gun that costs $1000 like and AR15 will cost them $25,000 in the case of an M16? Maybe they’re happy that their “new” M16 that they just got a steal for at $25k is actually a minimum of 27 years old due to the registry being closed in '86?

With all of this happiness going around, even a few cites should be easy to find.

Their weapons don’t get used by criminals, and that’s the most important thing to responsible law-abiding patriotic gun owners who don’t hate America and side with terrorists.

[levdrakon]

@Kable

So there were no gun confiscations in Canada?

What? Guns are banned in Canada? Since when?