|
|
10-07-2017, 08:31 AM
|
#46
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,047
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker
Fantastic.
We are talking about gun control and semi-auto and all that.
Why would a gun registry scare any law-abiding citizen? Other than the time and BS they have to go through?
There are massive amounts of gun laws across every state.
What are the Dems wanting other than bleeding heart normal Bullshit?
Where was this divisive anger when OCrappa was in charge with the Orlando incident?
By the way, is it just crazy Dems that decide to kill a bunch of people or is it just me?
|
It's just you....and Johnnie Walker.
Every time there is a mass shooting the same arguement is had. Some call for stricter gun laws and some say it wouldn't matter. The body count keeps piling up.
reminds me of the definition of insanity.
Last edited by Dahoss9698; 10-07-2017 at 08:35 AM.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 08:50 AM
|
#47
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Beaverdam Virginia
Posts: 12,396
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dartman51
Nobody knows for sure what would have stopped it. What MIGHT have helped would be a NATIONAL gun registry, that throws up a RED FLAG when the same person tries to buy his 4th weapon in a 6 month period. I know there will be those that will figure a way around it. Outlaw the manufacture of 'bump stocks', and ANY other mechanism that transforms a semi auto to auto. Again, there are those that can, and will, get around that too, but it's a start.
|
Most of these mass murderers send up plenty of red flags along the way to committing their crimes. Nothing is ever done for various reasons.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 09:17 AM
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,036
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss9698
It's just you....and Johnnie Walker.
Every time there is a mass shooting the same arguement is had. Some call for stricter gun laws and some say it wouldn't matter. The body count keeps piling up.
reminds me of the definition of insanity.
|
I just don't see how you legally stop something like this or Sandy Hook.
If you had a national database of firearm purchases (sorta a registry but not really). Whenever you purchase a firearm from a dealer they run you and the firearm being purchased, serial number, etc (this already happens). Just simply store that information. Then as a way to make revenue have Police Departments or Licensed dealers act as agents in every private to private sale. Then enact some laws that if random Joe, that I sold a gun to, gets busted using it to commit a crime I face criminal charges as well if I didn't use a agent for the sale. Same for if its ever stolen and I don't report it.
That would cut down on gun related crime heavily by going after the black market on them. As I said I don't see a way you can stop a guy like the one in Vegas who had tons of resources at his disposal or one like Sandy Hook where the shooter actually murdered the gun owner before going on a rampage.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 09:35 AM
|
#49
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 11,474
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
Many consider it a precursor to confiscation. I'm not really in that boat but also on the flipside handguns already are registered and used in homicide by a staggeringly larger amount.
I think purchase records though and certain person to person sale legislation would be fine.
|
While I don't think anybody has a real clue on the number, there are supposedly 300 million or so guns in America.
OK, fine. Lets work with that number.
Lets say we have a buy back program like Australia. The Aussies bought back 700K in 1996 which was roughly 20% of their guns.
20% of 300 million is 60 million. What do people get for turning in their guns? $100 per? $200? $500? I know people that have at least a dozen guns/rifles etc. and they wouldn't part with them for less than likely $2,500 per on the bottom end. So, even if we get 20%, it would be responsible people turning in their guns, not the crazies we are trying to keep them away from. And even if we get 20%, who pays for the buy back?
We already have a ban on automatic weapons since 1986. I'm fully on board with banning semi-automatic, assault type weapons, and what have you. But again, there are already so many in circulation, how do you retrieve all the ones already out there?
Yes, we have a "gun" problem. But like drunk driving, you don't take away cars from everybody, you take them away from the dipshits who do.
How do we identify the crazies before it happens? The lone wolf renegade is always the toughest to find, and seems to always do the most damage. Unfortunately, this ass had the resources, time, and somewhat sanity to put it all together.
There are just so many guns out there right now that whatever legislation comes about, a black market would still exist and would likely grow even bigger with tougher legislation like we witnessed in the '20s with prohibition.
I know I'm not answering anything, and have as many questions as anybody. I just don't see a whole lot of good answers right now, and to put in knee jerk legislation is likely that last thing we need to do to try and "correct" this problem.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 09:43 AM
|
#50
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,036
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDH
...
|
A buy back wouldn't work. Banning assault style weapons is simply an emotional reaction because you are banning something for looking scary.
I'd support something like what I outlined above.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 09:56 AM
|
#51
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 11,474
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
A buy back wouldn't work. Banning assault style weapons is simply an emotional reaction because you are banning something for looking scary.
I'd support something like what I outlined above.
|
I hear ya.
I agree with a lot of what your saying, but it just seems expensive and time consuming with little reward on the back end while punishing people that aren't the real criminals.
I think we all want to try something. Anything. Yes, even the NRA. I mean, you look at Chicago with maybe the strictest gun laws in the country.
We have to get people out of poverty. We have to get people happy. Our culture is just rancid right now. Everybody is tired of praying. We're all tired of hoping.
Maybe Ted Kaczynski was right...
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 10:21 AM
|
#52
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 314
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
I just don't see how you legally stop something like this or Sandy Hook.
If you had a national database of firearm purchases (sorta a registry but not really). Whenever you purchase a firearm from a dealer they run you and the firearm being purchased, serial number, etc (this already happens). Just simply store that information. Then as a way to make revenue have Police Departments or Licensed dealers act as agents in every private to private sale. Then enact some laws that if random Joe, that I sold a gun to, gets busted using it to commit a crime I face criminal charges as well if I didn't use a agent for the sale. Same for if its ever stolen and I don't report it.
That would cut down on gun related crime heavily by going after the black market on them. As I said I don't see a way you can stop a guy like the one in Vegas who had tons of resources at his disposal or one like Sandy Hook where the shooter actually murdered the gun owner before going on a rampage.
|
Very Good idea there
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 10:37 AM
|
#53
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,047
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
I just don't see how you legally stop something like this or Sandy Hook.
If you had a national database of firearm purchases (sorta a registry but not really). Whenever you purchase a firearm from a dealer they run you and the firearm being purchased, serial number, etc (this already happens). Just simply store that information. Then as a way to make revenue have Police Departments or Licensed dealers act as agents in every private to private sale. Then enact some laws that if random Joe, that I sold a gun to, gets busted using it to commit a crime I face criminal charges as well if I didn't use a agent for the sale. Same for if its ever stolen and I don't report it.
That would cut down on gun related crime heavily by going after the black market on them. As I said I don't see a way you can stop a guy like the one in Vegas who had tons of resources at his disposal or one like Sandy Hook where the shooter actually murdered the gun owner before going on a rampage.
|
You can't stop crazy.
Just to clarify, I'm not looking for drastic measures. Your suggestion here is a good one.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 12:43 PM
|
#54
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Beaverdam Virginia
Posts: 12,396
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
I just don't see how you legally stop something like this or Sandy Hook.
If you had a national database of firearm purchases (sorta a registry but not really). Whenever you purchase a firearm from a dealer they run you and the firearm being purchased, serial number, etc (this already happens). Just simply store that information. Then as a way to make revenue have Police Departments or Licensed dealers act as agents in every private to private sale. Then enact some laws that if random Joe, that I sold a gun to, gets busted using it to commit a crime I face criminal charges as well if I didn't use a agent for the sale. Same for if its ever stolen and I don't report it.
That would cut down on gun related crime heavily by going after the black market on them. As I said I don't see a way you can stop a guy like the one in Vegas who had tons of resources at his disposal or one like Sandy Hook where the shooter actually murdered the gun owner before going on a rampage.
|
Like a lot of laws and regulations states very greatly on gun laws. They are very lax here in Virginia. To sell a gun between private parties all the buyer needs is a valid I.D. showing they live in the state of Virginia. The seller doesn't even have to register the transfer. I sold a handgun to a trucker who contacted me through the gun trader I met in a MacDonald's parking lot to complete the transaction, perfectly legal here.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 01:09 PM
|
#55
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
Whenever you purchase a firearm from a dealer they run you and the firearm being purchased, serial number, etc (this already happens). Just simply store that information.
|
Unless things have changed recently, no information about the gun goes to the feds. The background check just does an automated look-up to see if your name in on the list of people that are prohibited to buy. The feds don't even know if the purchase was actually made, only that a check took place. And they are forbidden by law to store that data.
Also, if a state requires a state permit to purchase (some states only require it for hand guns), no federal background check is required.
Attempts to strengthen the requirements, such as background checks for private sales, have always died a quick death in Congress. A Dem proposal a few years back was so draconian it would have required a father to get a background check on his son before giving him a gun.
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 01:36 PM
|
#56
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,036
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker
Unless things have changed recently, no information about the gun goes to the feds. The background check just does an automated look-up to see if your name in on the list of people that are prohibited to buy. The feds don't even know if the purchase was actually made, only that a check took place. And they are forbidden by law to store that data.
Also, if a state requires a state permit to purchase (some states only require it for hand guns), no federal background check is required.
Attempts to strengthen the requirements, such as background checks for private sales, have always died a quick death in Congress. A Dem proposal a few years back was so draconian it would have required a father to get a background check on his son before giving him a gun.
|
And ultimately that's why this stuff is always destined to fail. It becomes a emotional issue vs. a practical common sense one.
I'm aware the feds don't keep the record on the gun but the dealer is required to so why not just stick it into a database or worst case allow the justice to work backward. Firearm sales records are accessed by investigators all the time already. They talked to the gentleman that sold Paddock the guns in a matter of a couple days.
I recall that law and it was absurd. I have a lot of hand me downs and I wouldn't expect to have to go through loopholes for it. Thats why you create something voluntary and not draconian. Gun ownership is a right but it can also be a responsibility. Most leftist ideas though simply harm law abiding citizens while largely neglecting the larger issue of how bad people get them.
(I do realize we are on the same side of this issue and probably don't disagree on nearly anything.)
Last edited by elysiantraveller; 10-07-2017 at 01:38 PM.
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 02:10 PM
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elysiantraveller
(I do realize we are on the same side of this issue and probably don't disagree on nearly anything.)
|
The 2nd Amendment was written because the people did not trust their government. The same reasoning is behind objections to such things as gun owner data bases. It's none of the government's business if I am a law-abiding gun owner.
And gun owner databases are of no use if criminals avoid them to begin with. I recall a study some years back where people convicted of crimes involving guns were asked where they got the gun. Something like 90% said they got them in ways that didn't get their name recorded. That includes from friends and family, street purchases, or stealing them.
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
|
|
|
10-07-2017, 04:41 PM
|
#58
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,446
|
That is a damn good idea - no problem with gun rights in that.
SO I have to ask....when the DEMS had both house and the WH, and the RAMMED ACA down our throats, why did THEY not do something like that? Oh, because ACA was a source of money and
protecting people was not, and it whining about it is always a good way to try to paint the right as non-caring bastards.
What say you, UpChuckie, you whining little puke?
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
10-08-2017, 01:09 PM
|
#59
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
|
The leading gun grabber in Congress, Diane Feinstein, has drafted a bill to ban bump stocks. On "Meet the Press" today, she was asked if any law could have prevented the Las Vegas shooting.
Quote:
“I’m not sure there is any set of laws that could have prevented it,” Feinstein said.
|
Not sure? How about clueless.
https://www.redstate.com/jon-street/2017/10/08/423845/
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
|
|
|
10-08-2017, 11:07 PM
|
#60
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,951
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss9698
You can't stop crazy.
|
Maybe not. But a surprising number of mass shooters have a history of taking psychotropic drugs, namely SSRIs. And after a mass shooting, there are never calls to regulate the doctors more closely that prescribe them, or make mental health checks more stringent when purchasing a gun. Why? 'Cause that's too hard.
On the other hand, if Paddock had hot-wired a cement truck, drove it into the concert crowd at 50MPH, and killed 58 people, this thread would be shorter. And cement trucks, at least in red states, would still be legal.
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Rate This Thread |
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|