Idea to change the waiting period law

That would work for those that value intellectual consistancy... and I dont think it would work. But Im not opposed to trying

 

Since you state that this is an idea without saying whose idea it is, it is reasonable to assume it is your idea. And since you didn't criticize it.....

Regardless, as I indicated, the point of waiting periods originally was for compliance and that has been rendered moot by technology. My only complaint about background checks is that in places like my state a nut case has to be involuntarily committed before they get added to the No-No list, I would rather they be added earlier when they are first encountered whether that came from LEO, school officials, counselors, or wherever.

 

That's kind of irrelevant, isn't it? I think you are still totally missing the point.

I explained it pretty clearly, so if you still aren't able to get it, I'm done.

Just because you push a compromise proposal doesn't mean you support everything in it, or that that's what you'd want if you had total control and could get whatever you wanted.

Understand now? Yes or no?

 

You were done when you made an op that states something you clearly now are trying to back away from

 

No more "compromises". Ever.

 

Every time we have compromised we where screwed over by the anti's, they see compromise as a weakness.

 

The logic held by the other side is "I want your guns so that i can force you to do what I want you to."

This thread has be on the top of the forum for a while. Has a single gun-grabber even cared about this?

Not one from what I can see. Your idea is a failure.

Have you read their posts on this forum.

The only thing they understand is power, insults, and political maneuvering.

 

Waiting periods get good people killed.

 

I propose we write guns laws that go against their logic and fight to get them enacted and if the anti's don't like that they can go pound sand.

 

To be accurate, those werent compromises. In a compromise, both sides get something they want. What we've been doing is capitulating. To a lesser degree than what was demanded, but capitulation nonetheless. An example of a compromise would be:
'you want nationwide mandatory background checks? Then pass nationwide concealed carry.' That would be an actual compromise. I am willing to compromise. If they want restriction on access in one area, then access must be improved in another or no deal. No more capitulation.

 

My idea is, if they want something we get two or more in return just to catch up.

 

Absolutely. I don't mean to infer what the compromise should be, I'm just providing examples.

 

I say abolish all waiting periods as unconstitutional. Depriving someone of the right to bear arms even if it is for 3 days or 7 days or whatever arbitrary number of people pick should be strictly forbidden.

 

it's a constitutional stance rights shouldn't be compromised. Tolerating any infringement on it at all is a problem.

yes we will be realistic here there are places that want to suspend the constitutional rights. This should never be tolerated people in those municipalities and regions should be at the government's front door morning noon and night not letting them sleep until the rights are restored. Most people are unwilling to do this so the rights get trampled.

What's wrong with completely disposing of them? What value do they hold other than to provide lip service to people who don't care?

 

That I can fully agree with, law abiding people have been killed because of waiting periods.

 

What I'm hearing is you want feel-good legislation that accomplishes nothing good, positive or beneficial and actually harms people.

6.2% of the population (Black men) committed 54.9% of all murders in the US in 2019 (the latest data from the FBI UCR.)

Out of those 54.9% of murders, 98% were committed using firearms obtained illegally.

Get it? It's called a Black Market. They cannot legally obtain the firearms, because they would never pass a background check, so they buy weapons on the street --the Black Market -- that were smuggled across the Mexican border, smuggled into the US along US coast-lines, or stolen from persons who legally possessed them, or in a handful of cases, illegally purchased a weapon from someone who obtained it legally, knowing they could sell it on the Black Market for more than they paid for it and then reported it stolen or otherwise claimed it was stolen or lost.

Demanding that firearms be registered or undergo background checks will not reduce that 54.9% murder rate.

What will reduce that rate is incarcerating people who illegally possess firearms for lengthy periods of time.

 

No, you're hearing wrong.
Maybe you only read the opening post and didn't read all the additional posts that gave clarification?

Nothing I was proposing would take away rights from people.

I'm not proposing a restrictive law. I'm just proposing another version of a law that already exists, to modify it and make it slightly less restrictive.

Of course I know you'd prefer to get rid of that law altogether, but in many cases that just may not be realistically be possible. So another alternative would be to push to modify it a little bit. Better than nothing changing.

 

I never said it would.

Which is feel-good legislation.

No amount of gun control will stop the carnage in urban America, because those weapons are illegally on the streets with many being smuggled in from Mexico or along your coast-lines and they are being used by people who cannot legally register guns.

 

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I'm proposing replacing a restrictive law with a very slightly less restrictive one.

The reason I am arguing that you should support this is because it will likely be far easier and more likely to work than trying to totally get rid of that law.


Let me use an analogy to maybe help some of you understand.
Imagine a society where slavery exists. I try to argue that you should support a law that seeks to ensure that slaves do not receive unfair harsh treatment. You refuse, saying that you will not support this law because you do not support slavery.
That would be very stupid, wouldn't it?

 

And that is the only workable solution that doesn't infringe on the law abiding, it actually makes life better for everyone who is law abiding..

Sadly those who kowtow to the criminal element of our society and wish to suppress the rights of the law abiding, forcing them to become child like wards of the government and dependent on such, will never admit that locking up criminals will work, insted they will come back with numbers of how many people (rabid dogs) are already incarcerated, numbers which in reality means nothing.

Truth be told the, only measure that works when dealing criminals is incarceration, keep them off the streets and crimes related to firearms will be substantially be reduced, as will crime overall..

But then the anti-gun, pro-criminals will come back with more numbers demonstrating the cost of keeping those rabid dogs incarcerated, to which I say, don't let them out, that is actually more expensive in the long term, instead lower the costs of keeping them locked up!

We here a lot about a failing infrastructure in the U.S. and how tossing money at that problem will create "shovel ready jobs," so how about we take a lot of incarcerated hands and give them a shovel and let them pay for their incarceration by working?

Why should they get free room and board, when the law abiding have to pay for the same?

Make going to prison something no one wants to do, versus a way of taking a vacation off of the streets.

Free food, free housing, free gym, free cable TV, that's just wrong, I'm law abiding and would never want to be incarcerated, but I get to pay for all of that, not just for I, but for them as well.

That's wrong, very wrong.

 

I have a better idea.

Lets examine the 20,000+ existing firearm laws that are already on the books and find those that are not being utilized and sunset them, shave the number down to say 200 laws, now that's a compromise I can live with.

Pro-gunners have already been steamrolled by the anti's, compromise will never work, the anti's see such as a weakness, all they understand is being totally beat by having one of their favored laws ruled as a violation of our Constitution.

No compromise with them what so ever, beat them into the earth until they no longer exist.

 

Never work.
Plan wife beating on Sunday.
Fill out form on Monday.
Attack wife on Tuesday.
Form circumvented

 

And strictly enforce the 200.

 

Sounds like another person who didn't understand this post.
You should have read through the thread before you responded. You are totally misunderstanding.

I wasn't suggesting any restrictions. I was suggesting a way to reduce restrictions.

Seems everyone these days wants all or nothing, and won't try to take what little things they can get.
I think that's called block-headedness and stubbornness.

 

Which "waiting period law" were you referring to in the OP? We don't have one at the national level or in my state. My last background check took about 5 minutes, and Colorado checks out 7 different databases.