It is well that you edited your post.
The next time you try that in GD, you will get a Warning regardless of editing.
[ /Moderating ]
Americans have a long and hallowed tradition of saying “**** your goddamned law”. I am confident this will also be the case with any gun restrictions.
I’m sure many don’t respect the constitution. We have prisons for them.
You’re assuming new laws will get passed. Until people actually begin to care that does not seem likely.
I’ve been a voting member since the early 90’s, though I’ve gone inactive the last few years… The system does not seem particularly rigged to me. In any electoral system that does not enforce mandatory voting, only the most involved fraction of the potential voters will actually cast a vote. Over the years, there have been a couple high profile board members who I wished would just go away (Ted Nugent and, to a lesser extent, Robert K. Brown) because I thought their public personae were damaging to the NRA’s image. They didn’t get elected through rigging anything, though. They got elected because they were relatively famous names in a sea of candidates who were unknown to most of the voters even in their home areas. The NRA elections are no more rigged than any other system where fame and money can influence results.
Well, you really do. The last time gun control proponents had any real victories on a national scale was with the assault weapons ban that was attached to the 1994 Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act. It’s been a while, but I recall that a lot of congresspersons who supported the ban ended up losing their seats in the next election. In recent years there have been attempts to revive the ban following Sandy Hook but those have failed to get anywhere. Also, consider that in recent decisions, Heller vs. The District of Columbia and McDonald v. Chicago specifically, that the Supreme Court has ruled that firearms are an individual right that is incorporated by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.
Now you might be thinking to yourself, “Odesio, that really doesn’t have anything to do with background checks, does it?” Well, no. But it seems to me that gun control proponents are in a much weaker position today than they were in the mid-1990s and their opponents are in a much stronger position. With that in mind, yeah, I kind of think you do need us if you want to pass any meaningful legislation.
That said, I’m not actually opposed to the idea of more comprehensive background checks when it comes to purchasing firearms. We might disagree on how to best implement such a program but, for now at least, we’ve at least got some common ground on what direction to go in. And I do believe that compromise is pretty much how we get things done.
As a gun owner, what can I expect in return for supporting a more comprehensive system for background checks? Is there anything at all you’re willing to compromise on?
Fewer criminals and crazy people with guns. How’s that work for you?
This. I simply don’t get this “what are you gonna give me for it” attitude. I never said anything like, “As a car driver, what are you gonna give me in exchange for making me wear a seatbelt?”
It’s a bizarre mentality.
Because the “compromise” is simply the gun control crowd not getting everything they want (yet), while for gun owners it’s not losing everything they want (yet). This after previous one-sided compromises in the past.
Here’s an example of the same kind of “compromise” from the other side of the equation: gun owners demand a complete lifting of all restrictions and requirements for owning full-auto machine guns and heavy explosive ordnance- anyone can plunk down cash and walk away with a grenade launcher and grenades. After gun control advocates scream about this, we compromise: you’re required to show proof you’ve passed a class in handling explosives safely to buy grenades. There, now see, we’re willing to compromise.
This seems to be framed around the idea that gun registration is some kind of end unto itself. Do you really think I give a shit about gun registration in and of itself? Really?
If so, even after all this time, you have no idea what this whole discussion is about. The world is bigger than just you and your gun.
I presume you believe that gun registration will prevent needless deaths with little or no infringement on the lawful owning and carrying of guns. There’s doubt about the first, and the second, harmless enough in itself, plays into the hands of those openly calling for Australia-type gun roundups. If all you want is registration and no more, will you help gun owners oppose further requirements?
You still don’t get it. We’re not trading baseball cards. I explicitly said that I don’t give a shit about gun registration in and of itself. Given that, reread what you wrote and see if it still makes sense.
Rather than start a new thread, I’ll float this here.
As a gun owner many times over, I’d like to sell some of my guns, for various reasons. It concerns me that I might end up selling some to people not legally allowed to own them. And there is currently no way to KNOW that a buyer is not a convicted felon or whatever.
It shouldn’t be hard to set up an internet site that would allow a perspective buyer to supply me with an ID code, and me to check that code and get a yes or no answer along with a name and photo of the person that code belongs to, and a confirmation code that I checked them out. Make it a smart phone app, and it can be used at gun shows.
I can see some objections…in many ways this would make it easier to buy a gun. It takes 10-15 minutes to fill out the current forms, and for the FFL to read the info over the phone and get an answer. This should take that down to 2-3 minutes. It might also expand the used gun market, if sellers could be assured they were going to good homes.
And there would be a data-base with info on gun owners, so the NRA won’t like it.
Enforcement? hell, I think it could be voluntary. At least for a start.
So what laws regarding guns do you give a shit about in and of themselves?
The ones that reduce firearms- related death and injury. So, the short answer would be none of them.
Well now I’m thoroughly confused. Why then is it bad if gun owners oppose universal background checks or registration laws? “[Proposed gun control law] won’t do anything to reduce firearms-related death and injury, so we shouldn’t pass it!” is a quite standard hard-line pro-gun argument.
And anti-vaxxers assert that vaccines cause autism. Why should the ignorant assertions of zealots have bearing?
Further, why should I care about gun regulations that don’t ultmately reduce gun injuries? I care about the outcomes; I’m empirical and pragmatic.
But that’s your assertion, apparently:
Unless you’re just being sarcastic here, I really don’t understand the argument you’re trying to make.
Okie doke. When you’re ready to try to understand, you just let me know, and we can pick this up again.
The title of the thread is “Common sense gun legislation?”
What kind of gun legislation do you, Hentor the Barbarian, think would reduce firearms-related death and injury?