———————————————————————————————————————————————-
Response?
87 Thoughts to “Are guns part of the discussion?”
Comments are closed.
Archives
Categories
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
All contents copyright Moonhowlings.net
Blogroll
- 9500Liberty
- Bacons' Rebellion Blogspot
- Bearing Drift
- Blue Virginia
- Citizen Tom
- Counts of Monte Cristo. The
- Derecho, The
- Dixie Pig, The
- My Side of the Fence
- My Star Journey
- NARAL Pro-Choice VA Blog
- New Dominion Project
- Nova Common Sense
- NovaTownHall Blog
- One Libertarians's Point of View by Al Alborn
- Pete Candland's Blog
- Potomac Local
- Prince William Muckraker
- PW Conservation Alliance
- PWC Moms
- PWCPolitics.com
- PWCPolitics.com
- Red NoVA
- Shad Plank, The
- She the People
- State of NoVA, the
- The Jeffersoniad
- Townhall
- VEA Daily Reports
- VivianPaige
- WDGolden.com
- You, Me and the Lamp Post
Yes, guns should be a major part of this discussion. The shooter did his work using a civilian version of the army’s M16 rifle, along with several 30 round magazines. Evidently he stole them from his mom who bought them legally. I dare say that the carnage may not have been so high had these items not been so easily available. These weapons were built for warfare and have no place in our communities.
Guns should be part of the discussion and I completely agree with Starry. It’s interesting to realize the requirements associated with a Drivers license vs a gun. Vehicle inspections, eye exams…. Training paid by schools. Thereis a permit process for a concealed weapon. Is that process the same when buying a gun?
The permit process for carrying a concealed weapon is not particularly rigorous in Virginia or anywhere else that I’m aware of. Virtually anyone can get a permit. I am a gunowner, but have never had the slightest idea that I needed to carry a weapon out into the world to go about my daily business. This past weekend I did any number of errands all over Fairfax County and was not involved in any situation where having my Sig would have improved my circumstances. And, in fact, this has been my experience for many decades. If I really need to transport the weapon somewhere outside my residence, I can, under Virginia law, carry it openly without a permit. I’d feel kind or weird doing that, however, and I think the fact that it is alarming and would reflect oddly on the bearer is one of the reasons so many people are enamored of the concealed carry option. Without it, their fearful, over-dramatized view of the world would be on public display.
This Connecticut is one of those tragedies that could not have been solved or avoided by any one measure. There are about as many guns as there are people in this country, and the right to bear arms has fairly recently been confirmed by the Supreme Court to be a personal right not linked to military service. But this instance (and Virginia Tech) say as much about how we deal with the mentally ill as it does about how we deal with guns. The guns were legal here. How they were used was not.
There’s nothing in the Constitution that prohibits a high degree of regulation of dangerous products. If we’re going to have three hundred million guns, rigorous training and testing, periodic site visits to ensure that the weapons are properly secured, and a mandatory open carry requirement might help. I continue to be appalled that at any given time, I could be with my children or grandchildren in a public place where a lot of people think they need to be carrying deadly force and I don’t even know who they are or where they are. It, of course, would have made no difference in Connecticut, where the shooter stole the weapons and shot his way into a kindergarten. But it would make people think about why they feel compelled to arm themselves when going about their daily business and give those of us who aren’t as frightened of the world a chance to avoid environments where firearms are abundant.
Thank you, Scout. You have given us much to think about.
By the way, the most immediate result of something like this is that we will need to harden up our schools. It’s a shame. But young children attract violence from certain disturbed people because of their innocence. As long as we have commonly available weaponry capable of blowing away lots of people in a short time (I heard estimates that all the Sandy Hook killings took place in about three minutes), the most logical protective measure that can be taken in the first instance is make it very difficult for these guys to get into places where children are going about the business of being children.
I heard the same time frame. Unbelievable. The school had a fairly new security system. The shooter blasted his way in. He killed 28 people Would a cop in every school have stopped the shooter?
I think we need to start talking about gun sense, not control. We also need to look at ammo. You shouldn’t be able to tape 2 mags to get more kill power.
Just curious–why do you think people who open carry are less likely to commit violence than those who carry concealed?
I don’t know.. I know that I don’t like seeing someone I don’t know carrying around weapons. If I catch sight of someone’s hand gun in a hostler on their body, it is less alarming.
Face it you can’t remove guns from the hands of those who want to commit mass murder unless you can determine who those individuals are. In this case there didn’t seem to be any indicators, which is what makes this all the more haunting. The mere thought that any ‘slightly strange’ person (of which the world is full of) could one day commit acts of mass murder with no warning is very unnerving. God forbid we apply a little ‘profiling’ (you can thank the ACLU) to help keep innocent people safe. So you either remove all the guns from everyone leaving everyone defenseless, or you arm everyone to provide a defense if it is ever needed. Next we’d have to remove knives from society, and so on and so forth. Drawing a parallel, if you can solve this problem, then solving the national debt or illegal immigration would be a piece of cake.
The 2nd Amendment requires a good deal of subsequent responsibilities that aren’t in place. It’s a pretty high price to pay.
I don’t think open carry-ers are categorically less dangerous than concealed carry-ers. My only point is that if we lived in a heavily armed society, law enforcement personnel and the average citizen are better off knowing exactly where the weapons are. If I go into a public place with a lot of folks carrying weapons, I can at least make a decision to go elsewhere. If they are concealed, I don’t have enough information.
and I think the fact that it is alarming and would reflect oddly on the bearer is one of the reasons so many people are enamored of the concealed carry option.
Actually, I’ve open carried and I get absolutely no reaction from those around me, and I was looking for it.
Concealed carry is more popular for a variety of reasons. Some tactical, some because the bearer, as you say, is more comfortable. Some, because the bearer thinks that people will react.
My experience is that no one reacts. Others that do it….same. Remember, it was only recently that those eating in restaurants that serve alcohol COULD conceal. It used to be mandatory to carry open.
Maybe they are too polite to react to you.
I would just leave. Most of us have an aversion to being around someone we don’t know carrying a visible weapon.
You know…and this isn’t rocket science….how do we know you aren’t Adam whatever his name is?
I live in a civilized country. If I see some dude walking around with a rifle I know I don’t live in some nation where this is the norm. I am going to assume he is getting ready to blow someone’s brains out.
That is not what 2A is all about.
And that’s absolutely ridiculous. Can’t drive after a certain amount of drinking – but you can carry a weapon.
Treating guns like cars can have some unintended consequences: http://reason.com/archives/1999/11/01/taking-it-to-the-streets
Of course, I have a way to ensure that citizenry are better prepared for guns and safety and will put all of them into a proper mindset.
Bring back the militia as a first responder group. There won’t be 100% participation…but a huge section of the population would be trained to respond appropriately to problems. And if they are allowed to respond to crime…. crime would drop precipitously.
Most people don’t want to be bothered with that crap…most of us don’t want to play militia games. We want to pay our taxes and get a good police force to take care of stuff like that. The fact that a small percent of the public wants to play like that….doesn’t represent all of us. Maybe there should be some reinactment societies for this kind of thing. Leave the rest of us and our reality out of it.
Excellent point. Problem in the US is the wrangling over jurisdiction – I.e. control of intelligence. A national law enforcement system such as in Canada, Australia and Europe should be implemented.
I wouldn’t mind American Mounties as a clearing house for information. Maybe something a little less than the FBI and more than state police.
Then everyone would hate big govt.
As a nation we have completely failed managing the impact of the second amendment. We should no longer willing to support it without restrictions – the status quo. The lives of those precious babies far outweighs my right to bear arms. This is a turning point folks.
Lack of Mental health care and the growing number of military weapons has hopefully changed the minds of ardent supporters – as Joe Scarborough said – “good luck NRA”.
I sure hope this transcends party – if you think it doesn’t you’re the problem.
Totally agree, Lyssa. We have failed.
I give mine up right now if it saves other children from what happened to those darling little kids.
Did you see that little girl singing at the piano with her brother? These kids just tear your throat out.
What happened to that poor crazed bastard that created the monster that did that.
Even a poor substitute teacher got blasted.
Here is the reality, if a disturbed person can only get a handgun, the damage they can inflict is reduces. Put an m-16 assault like weapon in their hands, you get 20 dead little children, shot multiple times, in a mere few mintues.
Gun control is absolutely a part of this debate and we as a society need to take a long hard look. Obama was fabulous in his speech. I for one have no interest in saying we are powerless to at least attempt to try and prevent yet one more tragedy.
@Starryflights
The significance of the shooter having access to the civilian version of the M16 with 30-round magazines has been somewhat exaggerated (in my opinion). He also carried a Glock 10mm handgun, which could have been just as deadly. There are 30-round magazines for handguns including the Glock that are easily accessible. The Glock is also a semi-automatic weapon, just like the Bushmaster rifle, so the killer could have achieved the same rate of fire with the handgun.
So the fact of the matter is that an assault rifle ban could not have really affected the outcome. Unless we are prepared to implement a total ban on all types of semi-automatic weapons and to require current gun owners to surrender all semi-automatic weapons currently in circulation, it is not clear how gun regulation would prevent future incidents.
My view is that we should go the other way. Gun-free zones should be dis-established so as to stop setting up clearly identifiable soft targets for killers. We should also create an “air marshall” concept for schools in which certain administrators, teachers, parents who have undergone a thorough background check can volunteer to be “deputized” and carry concealed weapons in schools for security.
Now I am going to become unglued. Absolutely not. That is the dumbest g-damned idea I have ever heard of. I am sorry. No. Teachers and administrators are not going to take on one more effen job that society isn’t willing to do. NO NO NO. Some of them already died for the children of America. Some of those dead now leave motherless children. Teachers aren’t the answer to everything that isn’t being done.
If the people of America want “air marshall” concepts for their schools then dig, and dig deep and pay for it. Throw your flat tax concepts out the window. Prepare to pay for it like you didn’t pony up for the 2 stupid ass wars that killed 6,000 Americans and debilitated 40,000 more with life altering injuries. Pay for that security.
Some of you thought nothing of rah rahing and going to war when planes crashed into the twin towers. What have we gotten out of that? We know what people look like naked at the airport. No. It will not be the teacher’s job. (nor the bus drivers, principals or janitors) Our soicety must pay for professional law enforcement.
Deputize my ass!
@kelly_3406
Disagree. We’re beyond that now.
@Lyssa
I am not sure what that even means — “we are beyond that now”, but I can tell you that a massive overreaction will not solve anything either.
Overreaction!? You’ve got to be kidding.
Massive overreaction – what would be worthy of one? We had one on 9-11. This is a domestic 9-11.
Why does anyone need a semi-automatic weapon?
What does “semi-automatic” mean to you? Just curious.
@Emma
I’d say a gun that doesn’t require each shell or bullet to be manually loaded.
I think if people want to fire semi-automatic weapons or military style weapons, they should rent them at a secure range and fire them there for their jollies. Everyone should be signed in and the range should be registered and insured.
Not single or double action, not pump or those that require some action to be ready to shoot. As you can see I am not an expert at this. Anything that lets you shoot 10 people in a minute without stopping. How’s that?
@Moon-howler
Just because you do not want to do this does not mean that no one else does. I think we could probably pay monthly stipends to people that completed training and underwent background checks to participate in such a program. There is no way that there could ever be enough police to prevent another tragedy.
In a few years (actually quite a few), I am considering a second career as a public school teacher as my retirement job. I can tell you that I would welcome the opportunity to volunteer to be able to defend my (future) students and myself. Rather than requiring heroic teachers to act as human shields, it would be far better to provide them with the means for self defense.
Instead of being so dismissive, we should investigate whether such an idea is feasible. I can tell you that it is probably more feasible than banning semi-automatic weapons from the entire population, which is really the only way to guarantee that mentally unstable people cannot get their hands on deadly weapons.
@Emma
A semi-automatic weapon is generally defined as a gun that can be fired without cocking the weapon between trigger pulls. It is distinguished from an automatic weapon in that it fires just once for each trigger pull.
@Lyssa
In retrospect, the country probably overreacted to 9/11 — look at all the money wasted and freedoms lost. Let’s not repeat the same mistake.
I don’t care who wants to or doesn’t want to. I don’t want people who WANT to be armed guards around my grandkids in a school setting. How about that. It is a bad bad combination. The educators are the educators. They have enough to do. They have a job. They do not need to take on another responsibility.
Today they are heroes. Next week when we have to set up some local budget someone will remember that the teachers are just the tools of the union.
Teachers have enough on their plate and they should not be armed. Packing heat and teaching are simply incompatible.
No one is going to send their kids to schools with armed guards. People leave Pakistan and places like that to not live that way. Moon is not alone.
If I see some dude walking around with a rifle
actually, i agree with you on that.
@Lyssa
actually, people already do send their kids to school with armed teachers.
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/12/14/4486271/texas-school-where-teachers-carry.html#storylink=cpy
but they admit its controversial to many people.
@Censored bybvbl
Well, then you basically want a total gun ban.
Because ALL pistols, 99% of shotguns, and almost all rifles are semi-automatic, or similar. Revolvers are semi-automatic by your definition.
While you feel that its just ‘playing” with semi autos, most Americans do not feel that way and I, for one, would not turn in any weapons that I might have that match your definition. And neither would any criminals. I know too many people that have defended themselves and their loved ones with firearms, and some of them needed to fire more than one round at a time. And some of them were using long arms.
@Moon-howler
Hit submit too soon
If I see some dude walking around with a rifle
actually, i agree with you on that, depending upon where he/she is carrying.
As for the militia…. there’s the problem. You see a perfectly good, traditional, citizen empowering idea, as “playing,” even though it would solve much of the problems and satisfy the arguments of the the anti’s while living up to the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.
With rights come responsibilities. And the responsibility of the government to utilize a militia has been abrogated and mutated into turning the citizens’ militia into a standing army.
Of course, I know that in today’s responsibility adverse world, my idea will never be taken seriously by the powers that be, for many reasons. For one, an armed society, cognizant of its rights, organized to uphold those rights, is terribly hard to browbeat and abuse.
But our education system no longer teaches Americans about rights and responsibilities.
Cargo said:
Of course it does. Check out the SOL social studies objectives. From K -12 students are taught all about rights and responsibilities, both in their school settings and as it applies to be an American.
I don’t know why you would say that or think that.
So, cargo and Kelly, I guess, based on your attitudes, a couple dozen murdered women and children is a small price to lay for our 2nd amendment rights. Well I disagree strongly. The Constitution is not so sacrosanct as to be a suicide pact. There are limits on all of our constitutional rights, including the right to bear arms. Don’t give me excuses explaining why such wouldn’t work. There is n excuse for inaction. You NRA shills are the best friends of murderers, drug dealers and psychotic child killers.
@Starryflights
Nothing stops Americans from amending the Constitution. Go ahead.
But, while you’re acting so insultingly sanctimonious, please consider how you are going to answer the thousands of people that are SAVED by firearms. You can join with the many gun control people that wish innocents to die because they are unarmed or equate justified shootings as murder. If you wish to be insulting…I can join you. You have NO IDEA how much restraint I use when I comment on your inane ramblings and insults.
So….you want action….show me how it will work.
As for the limits…. we have limits. Please…explain what YOU mean by limits, how those would be implemented, and what the actual outcomes would be? You’re the one that’s talking about limits. Please…. tell us what you want to do, instead of “blah, blah, blah, NRA bad, blah blah suicide pact, blah inaction. Tell us what you want to do and how you are going to convince Americans to further restrict their rights. If you can convince enough Americans to do it…hey! You succeed.
Now…once you’ve succeeded…how do you get those millions of guns away from gun owners, especially the ones that refuse to give up their rights? Please, I’m all ears.
The writers of the constitution did not think they had just written the Ten Commandments. They wrote it to evolve.
When the constitution was written slavery was legal.
From Joe Scarborough today”
“I knew that day that the ideologies of my past career were no longer relevant to the future that I want, that I demand for my children. Friday changed everything. It must change everything. We all must begin anew and demand that Washington’s old way of doing business is no longer acceptable. Entertainment moguls don’t have an absolute right to glorify murder while spreading mayhem in young minds across America. And our Bill of Rights does not guarantee gun manufacturers the absolute right to sell military-style, high-caliber, semi-automatic combat assault rifles with high-capacity magazines to whoever the hell they want.
Perhaps the NRA puts out info that three US gun owners defended their lives and property each month. That pales in comparison to the people who die each month after being shot by “loved ones”, co-workers, the insane, a trigger happy robber, etc. The thought of every citizen carrying a gun to prevent the rare home invasion is crazy.
@Cargosquid
My guns have to be loaded manually and cocked. My father (past FED agent) didn’t have the firepower the average Joe Blow now has. I think it’s time that automatic weapons and semi-automatic weapons are rounded up. If people want to fire them, they should go to a specialized range which the Feds regulate. They can sign in and the range had damn well better be insured. Perhaps with enough regulations, they can keep a gun there.
Since the Arizona shooting of Gabby Giffords and others, 24,000 people have been murdered with guns. Our Law Enforcement people have been out gunned for years – constantly upping the ante.
We pay the ultimate price here for that 2nd Amendment.
@Elena – I watched him give his statement this morning. It was moving. He also said “good luck, NRA”.
You know what….. go ahead.
Nothing I say will do anything but make you upset. Nothing Joe said….while emotional…actually makes sense in light of the actual events, since the shooter also had pistols, and there was NO ONE able to stop him. He could have used a single shot rifle and continued to shoot like the Norway shooter.
I’m as horrified as the rest of you, but I don’t blame an inanimate object. The laws in CT are already restrictive.
How many more laws do you want:
A 20 year-old had a couple of handguns (illegal). And, depending on the press report, had an assault weapon (illegal), automatic rifle (illegal), or machine gun (illegal). Shot his mom in the face (illegal). Stole his mom’s vehicle (illegal). Transported the gun in the vehicle (illegal) within 1,000 feet of a school (illegal). Carried it onto school property (illegal). Broke and entered (illegal). Carried a gun in a school (illegal). Discharged a firearm (illegal). Shot at people (illegal). Killed some people (illegal). Killed himself (not sure if illegal).
But everything that is being said here leads to a total ban on firearms. No amount of statistics that counter Censored will satisfy her. Elena won’t change her mind, nor will Lyssa. You all wish to restrict the right to keep and bear arms because of a third party’s criminal actions.
So..go ahead. Start the proceedings.
We are not going to start any proceedings here. I think though Cargo, that this issue may result in many people taking a unyielding stand. And I think this issue is the single most appropriate issue for an unyielding stand than any other I can think of.
Three things that can be done: 1) renew the assault weapons band; 2) limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds; 3) close the gunshow background check loophole.
These aren’t going to prevent each and every crime or murder, of course, but they would make it harder for crooks and psychos to perpetuate their mayhem, without infringing on our constitutional rights as well.
Its a place to start, that’s for sure.
While we do that we have to open up more facilities for moderate to severely mentally ill people. We have to end this mentality of “we can’t do anything unless he does something.”
It seems as inevitable as it is barmy that when one of these massacres happens there will be a few people who suggest the solution is more guns in more places so that we can have general firefights between civilians (see Kelly @0848). The most charitable interpretation of this I can offer is that these people watch too much television.
Something like this happened in the aftermath of Virginia Tech when they had their moment of slaughter.
I remember some members of some group showing up on the first anniversary strutting their guns and big-assing. Had I been a violent woman, I would have wanted to snatch one of those guns and …..well….never mind.
@Moon-howler
Not all Republicans favored military action followed by “nation-building” in Iraq and Afghanistan, paid for with our credit card from the Bank of China. The original intent of the action in Afghanistan – destroy al Quaeda and the Taliban who hosted them – was sound. Staying there for the longest war in US history and piling up a trillion dollars in debt and American deaths and injuries was not mentioned in the orginal pitch on why we went.
I’m still for a foreign policy of military intervention only when or national security is directly threatened, and otherwise minding our own business, not piling up debt, and letting others build their own nations while we focus on ours.
If history teaches us anything, we shouldnt have gone to Afghanistan. There are other ways.
In hind sight, I have decided that was stupid also.
i also have to remind that the credit card of China wasn’t started by Obama.
@Starryflights
None of those are actually anything worthwhile.
a) the “assault weapons ban” didn’t. And it doesn’t stop a single crime. It’s a cosmetic ban.
b) limiting rounds to 10 does what, exactly? I can fire 30 rounds in about 25 seconds. I can fire 30 rounds with 3 magazines in about 29 seconds. And why only 10? Are you thinking that there is a moral quality involved in 10 rounds vs 9 or 11?
c) there is no “guns show loophole.” There are private sales and transfers. One can purchase or sell firearms anywhere in Virginia, but only to a Virginian resident.
We’ve tried the ban before.
Cargo, we have been playing it by your rules for over a decade. it isn’t working. Now we are going to start looking at the common send approach.
Too many nut burgers are getting hold of weapons that can do multiple kills in seconds.
I just defined the problem, again.
Then we need to tighten up that assault weapons band and make it really difficult for the averag eJoe and Jill to get hold of weapons that fire multiple rounds in a matter of seconds. I don’t ming making the law more restrictive. At this point, I dont care.
@Need to Know
+1
@Scout
Funny…these “general firefights” don’t seem to be happening anywhere that there are actually more firearms controlled by citizenry. For years, the narrative was “blood baths in the streets.” And they keep on NOT happening.
In fact, the Washington state Clackamas mall shooter was confronted and may have been stopped by a concealed weapons carrier.
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
Not shot by the good guy… but indirectly stopped. The shooter killed himself.
We can’t implement solutions without really identifying the core problem. I”m not understanding what is accomplished by limiting magazine capacity. So 10 children are killed instead of 15? Somewhere there has to be a sensible solution that does not involve a killer driving by a “Gun-Free Zone” sign and thinking “Playground!”
It your child is one of the surviving 5, you might rethink that comments importance.
This guy used his Mom’s guns, right? No criminal history for either I believe.
The Columbine killers got an older friend to buy the guns they used.
I’m open to idea about keeping guns away from crazy people, but to pretend we could really do that is silly.
I am and have been a supporter of gun control – of automatic weapons band and background checks. But I’ve come to realize that concealed weapons and guns in the hands of security people are the only thing standing between large groups (say, schoolkids in a school) and a psychopath implementing a massacre. “Less guns” is not a solution.
For that matter there are other ways to kill people beyond guns. Bombs apparently aren’t hard to make. Did you know the Columbine killers planted bombs, which didn’t go off as planned? Their goal was to kill 500 people and to go down in history. What they actually ended up doing was a small token of their psychosis compared to what they wanted to do.
If we want to prevent these things from happening, all we can do is to arm security people in any area ripe for a massacre, and to be vigilant about strange behavior. Our weapons against domestic terrorism are similar to our weapons against international terrorism. To pretend there’s some gun control solution to domestic terrorism is beyond silly.
I have no problem with trained law enforcement at every school. It will cost money.
If I were king, no one would be walking around with an automatic weapon slung over their shoulder. in the old days, the cops here would haul you off. Nowadays I would have to listen about someone’s rights. I actually don’t think anyone has the right to carry whatever they want.
The only difference I can see between homicides in Australia, Canada and Europe is the access to weapons.. Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m sure they all have the same percentage of mentally ill (unless they receive better treatment due to national health care), have the same access to violent movies and video games. So if its not the access to weapons that’s the difference, then what is it?
Just look at how much it costs out of pocket for treatment for mental illness. It costs a fortune in this country and you have to fight insurance companies every step of the way.
Then we have the situation of Fairfax county not being allowed by law to tell VA TECH that Cho was some sort of crazed being.
Then it took a rock star like Nikki Giovanni to get him removed from class. Then some other poor chump inherited him. A lesser professor…not a rock star like Nikki. I don’t care to hear about his rights.
Actually, one other thing… our culture is more violent and always has been.
However, if you factor out drug crime/gang crime, our gun violence drops lower than some places in Europe.
So…reform the drug war?
Also, our mental health care, as I’ve said before, needs to be improved/reformed.
@Rick Bentley
Well said.
@Cargosquid
So is that what separates the US from Australia, Canada and Europe with regard to homicides? Not mental illness, not violent TV and not violent video games, just the perspective that the US is more violent? Nothing contributes to that?
@Cargosquid
1) the assault weapons ban was effective during he years it was law;
2) the constitution says nothing about magazines. BTW: do you need 30 rounds to take down a deer? If so, you probably shouldn’t be hunting.
3) every individual needs to be subjected to a background check, regardless of whether a sale is “private”. Heck, a sale of anything to anybody is “private”, why should that be a factor in whether to perform a background check?
@Starryflights
1) the FBI would disagree with you. California still has one. You can buy the exact .223 caliber weapon in California. It just needs to look different than standard.
2) The 2nd Amendment states “arms.” Look it up.
3) You do realize that you just answered your own question, right….why should that be a factor in a sale. Your opinion is that that every individual needs a background check. If that is the case, then why do the gun control organizations fight against the idea of every citizen being able to access the NICS, calling a number, putting in the buyer’s info, and getting a “yes” or “no” answer for purchase? Or, when you reach the age of legal ownership, you get a “Yes” for ownership on your id. If you are a “prohibited person” and therefore been through a court, your ID would be changed to NO. And then, every purchaser would have to show that specific card.
How about those plans? That means not having to go through a FFL to buy a weapon. DC has ONE FFL available. And their bureaucratic hoops are terrible. It takes months to buy a handgun. All without impacting one.single. crime.