we're dealing with someone who hates the NRA and gun owners for political reasons. No amount of logic or facts will change him since crime statistics has nothing to do with what really motivates him
There are 8-9 states with universal background checks and 8 with de facto purchase permits plus carry permits. They enforce it. http://aliengearholsters.com/blog/universal-background-checks/ It works. What doesn’t is people bringing guns from uncheck sales in from out of state that don’t. . Included are California and New York. It’s assinine with the millions in these states that the less populated somehow couldn’t. Countries that do it and it work. It’s rediculous to claim they can’t do it. It’s done. Again, you guys never differentiate federal from state laws. The only strict federal law is the one that regulates full auto weapons. That works too.
You’re half right. I hate the criminal NRA. Your such a troll about the second idea.. I own guns myself and have for decades. They are a valuable tool. The difference is, I don’t think they are an extension of my manhood like you NRA troglodytes. I was a member of the NRA when they were ligit and interested in training and worked with their reps to get people certified then permitted. They actually talked about keeping guns out of the hands of felons. Now they support it while gun makers and Russia took over their agenda. They are now illigitimate fear mongering advocates of profits at all costs.
I live in such a state. I know that the law simply isn't enforceable. 55 of our 62 sheriffs believe the same thing. The DOJ believes the same thing. Over 2/3 of the guns traced in California originate in California. I thought UBCs and other laws worked. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/undefined/2016tracestatscaliforniapdf/download Countries that do it have 100% registration. We don't. You never did address how the 10,000 firearms found in Spain were never going to be sold without a background check as required by Spanish law. Were each of the customers of that gunrunner going to pass a background check? Did the shooters in Paris pass a background check?
I hope not. Catholics have done a poor job taking responsibility for child sex crimes....just a s bad as Trump who parades around with a man convicted of trafficking in child porno. Let’s not make that connection. http://www.newsweek.com/trump-nader-child-porn-charges-prison-mueller-849498 That’s not a crowd you want to hang with.
Canada doesn’t register all guns anymore. Yet they still have universal background checks. They have a plethora of weapons percapita. Everything else is subjective. As long as you continue not to acknowledge the difference between federal and state laws, your subjective comments are irrelevant. why should I address Spain’s problems. That’s just a diversion tactic proposed by NRA bots.
Here is the crappola the NRA continually fear mongers. Suggested gun regulations are not part of a gun registry. Just another fraudulent attempt at diversion by the criminal element of the nra. https://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/nra-misfires-on-federal-gun-registry/
Without registration, UBCs are unenforceable and therefore ineffective. See the 2010 DOJ report "Summary of Select Firearms Violence Prevention Strategies". It's not an NRA claim - it's a claim by the top criminal justice enforcement arm in the US.
It’s real simple. Canada doesn’t register hunting firearms anymore, because it’s unnecessary. They do register the more dangerous weapons. The high capacity man killers whose practical use is questionable should be registered. We register machine guns you know. We don’t nor will we ever register ligit guns for hunting and reasonable self defense. I guarantee my Smith 642 or Glock 42 will ever need to be registered.
Who gets to decide what are legitimate self defense weapons? Without registration, UBCs don't work. Registering "assault weapons" won't stop the owners from using one in a mass shooting, and we never need to trace one of those firearms to find the shooter, so there's only one reason left to want to register "assault weapons". Every other country with UBCs registers all gun, including those for hunting.
I’m not for gun registration beyound what we do now, because it’s a federal Law not to. But, you guys are lunatics if you think registering a gun is worse then registering your cell phone, which it is. Anyone with the means can find out every site and message you ever posted on it. Talk about invasion of privacy. The ONLY one who has the biggest reason for gun control is Putin....and Trump gets his ideas straight from him. I don’t speak to anyone here at all; I type. I’m the sane one in this conversation. You guys who measure the size of your man hood by the the length of your gun barrels, are lunatics. You have nothing to fear but fear itself. If you’re a criminal, you have a need to follow the NRA story line so you can continue to have easy access to guns. If you’re a law abiding citizen, nothing will change for the worse.
Easy access to guns matters not if that prohibited person is arrested for possesion of firearms. So your arguments fall flat. And you communicate with others here, and you come off as a nutter. Gun barrel length is a matter of Federal Law, Gun function as longer barrels yeild faster muzzle velocities.
There is no reason to support UBCs without supporting registration, unless your only motivation is to cost law-abiding citizens their time and money. Anyone with the means can find out every site and message you ever posted on it. Talk about invasion of privacy. The ONLY one who has the biggest reason for gun control is Putin....and Trump gets his ideas straight from him. When you bring up penis size, you establish that your position doesn't have legs to stand on. It's called invoking Markley's Law, and it is every bit the argument loser that Godwin's Law describes. We actually want shorter gun barrels to be legal, at least with respect to SBRs, so your argument really doesn't hold water. It's never been harder for a criminal to get a gun than it is now. There is simply no enforcement of the laws when we catch criminals, so they don't fear the consequences. Prior to 2013, I could sell a rifle or shotgun to a friend or acquaintance, or any Colorado resident with a CCW, without having to go to an FFL for a NICS background check. Now it costs me time and up to $50 in background/transfer fees per transaction. That's worse for me than before, and still doesn't stop criminals from selling guns to each other. Or using a straw purchaser, or smashing a stolen truck through a storefront to steal weapons from a gun shop.
Oh, so it’s about the money. If we went to a buyers permit or carry permit that would cover all transactions, they’d be no additional charge per sale. The permit for me is $20 every four years for renewal. Pretty cheap price to sell guns to only qualified people. So, if they already have a permit, smart lawmakers should get that and allow permits to cover background checks. 8 states do it that way already....if you read my reference. I spoke to an Illinois resident and he really likes the convenience. He can buy and sell guns with his permit much more easily then your complaining about....and with no additional fee. You should partition to have that archaic method changed.
What prevents me from just ignoring it entirely? Why should I need permission from the government to sell a gun to someone I know isn't a prohibited person?
Even if background checks on private firearm transactions are mandated, even under penalty of death for noncompliance, it will still remain unenforceable for the simple fact that the firearms are not registered to individual owners. The mandate will continue to go ignored, just as it is currently in states that have the mandate but no registration. Explain, why is that fact so difficult for yourself to understand? What is the mental block that keeps such from actually registering and being comprehended?
No where has any of you explained the difference between local and federal laws. Without an understanding of the difference of each, your attacks on better gun regulations make NO SENSE. Federal laws have much greater voluntary compliance then state or or local laws. The resources behind their enforcement does not go unnoticed by criminals. Your silly idea that a penalty of death provision is a false assumption to any supposition you make and it’s a conservative notion that upping penalties will diminish crime. It has minimal effect. The single greatest motivation for obeying laws, is the ASSURANCE that the perp will get caught. Because ANY local law enforcement officer anywhere can enforce a federal law, there is no place to “hide”. Compliance to federal laws is much greater. A person who has no criminal record would be highly unlikely to commit a federal offense. Forget the stiff fines and more severe jail time.......They can never hold a permit again nor can they get a job anywhere in the US where a back ground check is needed. If they are a college grad, it becomes useless for many of the direct employment opportunities. ANYONE else who believes in scientific research, education and the law knows better FEDERAL GUN REGS are needed and they work like they work in every country and state that has them.. That you guys never mention this difference, is telling. It’s telling us you are poorly informed.
There are few effective federal laws. The ones we have are weak and easy to get around. What’s your point ? The one well constructed, efficient and well enforced has to do with some specific types of weapons including full automatic weapons. They are fairly strong. Guess what ? Criminals don’t traffic in them to any degree that it results in them being used enough to be of concern. Federal laws WORK, when they are complete and well designed. Funny how your “ they can’t be enforced” argument fails when we mention full autos.
They didn't use them much before NFA 1934 or before 1986, and nothing stops them from bringing in automatic weapons from Mexico with the drugs that come in.
