BRC's propsed gun control legislation

[BigRedChief]

I'm a known Obama supporter on here. I also have a long standing belief that gun control legislation usually doesn't work and besides...and this is not a small thing in the discussion..........the constitution is clear, the right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed. Thats why even though I don't own guns or hunt that I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment. The constitution is clear.

I understand that the constitution is also very clear on free speech but we restrict free speech in some circumstances (libel, yelling fire etc.). Thats the test that I've always used in evaluating any gun control legislation. If we allow and support the real ugly and reprehensible parts of free speech such as the Nazi's marching in a Jewish neighborhood then the Democrats must do the same with allowing gun owners that freedom guaranteed under the Constitution.

The Republicans have to be open to some limitations on gun control along the same lines as the limits we put on free speech.

The compromise:

1. Forbid the mentally ill to own guns of any kind.
2. Forbid those who have been found guilty of violence against fellow citizens from owning guns.
3. Make illegal the purchase and ownership of armor piercing bullets.
4. Make illegal any ammunition clips greater than 10 rounds. (Exception could be in place for gun ranges)
5. Make laws that punish gun owners if their own registered guns are used to commit crimes.
6. Closing the gun show loophole.

#1 and #2 are easy. No one should be against those proposals.
#3 There is no need reason for an individual citizen to own armor piercing bullets.
#4 This is the key. The Ft. Hood, Va. tech, Gabby Giffords shooter were all stopped when their ammo clips ran out and they stop to reload. We can limit the body count if they have to stop to reload a clip even if it takes only 3-5 seconds.
#5 Gun owners should already be securing their firearms so that kids, mentally ill, suicidal people don't have access to their guns. This would have prevented Shady Hook.
#6 You buy a gun at your local shop they perform a background check but buy at a gun show they don't? Thats idiotic. If there is a background check, it applies to gun shows.



What got left off the table:

• Assault weapons ban. It was already in effect for 10 years. It didn't lower crime. It doesn't meet the first amendment Nazi's marching test. The constitution is about the rights to own guns, not how many bullets that gun can fire.
• Mental illness legislation. A different discussion.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Correct, the military did kill protesters at Kent State but that wasn't really a systemic reaction.

The communist's in russia finally fell when the military wouldn't fire on its fellow countrymen. I don't foresee any scenario in which the U.S. military would kill its own citizens to support tyranny.

I don't see it happening, either.

Unlike a lot of people out here, I don't think that Washington is out to control every facet of our lives.


I smile when I think of the TV series "Jericho". The people are fighting with small arms, and a single Abrams tank rolls up (without ammo) and the opposing force said,"The hell with this!".

[banyon]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Every gun sold by a FFL dealer at a gun show goes through the exact process as if you went to his store and bought it

There are individuals selling guns to individuals and no those are not run through a check no different than if you bought a gun from me.

Everything you have said in this thread with respect to gun shows matches my experience as well. I would add a couple of things. First the vast majority of tables I see are FFL tables. The private tables are usually labelled with a handmade piece of posterboard and typically have a smaller, more used selection.

While I agree that the private sale aspect is just a semantic argument since they can indeed step out in the parking lot and effectuate the same transaction.

But BrC has a point in this thread. If people don't want to recognize the political tide on this thing, then they may wind up with a lot worse solutions. Gun owners need to be a part of this, because people like Radar and us can help point out what will be effective and what won't.

Like this private transfer issue. Why not require registration of those? We do it to title cars. I know I've had to wait 20 mins sometimes at an FFL, but in the grand scheme of things. its really not that big of a deal.

Like microstamping also from a crime control standard.

The NRA has had a tin ear on this thing so far. It's ridiculous to try to deflect the issue to a mental health issue while simultaneously not retracting your decades-long opposition to background checks which would stop some of those same mentally ill from making purchases.

[Fish]

Washington has it waaaaay too good right now to want to piss off their populace. They're all living like fat cats and will for the rest of their days. Why would they **** with that?

[banyon]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Investigate the Big Pharma and FDA on allowing psychotropic drugs and prosecute them if needed. Then ban them.

That's my gun control.

How does this comport with your usual 10th amendment objections? Oh nevermind, it doesn't.

[banyon]

Originally Posted by notorious

I don't see it happening, either.

Unlike a lot of people out here, I don't think that Washington is out to control every facet of our lives.


I smile when I think of the TV series "Jericho". The people are fighting with small arms, and a single Abrams tank rolls up (without ammo) and the opposing force said,"The hell with this!".

I thought the first time they used the tank, they fired off a round?

Small aside, i know.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

This is just pure BS.

you think the government is holding back from becoming a dictatorship because some citizens have pea shooters?

We have the biggest and best military the world has ever known. You think they are so scared of a citizen with a glock that they haven't turned our country into a dictatorship?

Well if all we have is pea shooters what are you lefties bitching about?

[stonedstooge]

Question--If initial reports showed the Bushmaster to be a weapon left in the car, how did it become the primary gun used in the shootings?

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Well if all we have is pea shooters what are you lefties bitching about?

I'm not bitching. Take your displacement elsewhere.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by stonedstooge

Question--If initial reports showed the Bushmaster to be a weapon left in the car, how did it become the primary gun used in the shootings?

how did the shooter have his brothers ID on him but in reality, he didn't.

[stonedstooge]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

how did the shooter have his brothers ID on him but in reality, he didn't.

So you don't know?

[notorious]

Originally Posted by banyon

I thought the first time they used the tank, they fired off a round?

Small aside, i know.

It was an improvised mortar. It scared the hell out of them.


If they wanted to they could have just driven it over the opposition.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I'm not bitching. Take your displacement elsewhere.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Fish

Washington has it waaaaay too good right now to want to piss off their populace. They're all living like fat cats and will for the rest of their days. Why would they **** with that?

Because the public wants action. look at the polls. Thats my point either you get on board and try to shape it the best you can or get run over. Not my opinion just my opinion on reading the Washington political tea leaves.

It's like the fiscal cliff debacle. This summer all the Republican candidates for President said they would reject a 10 to 1 ratio of spending cuts to tax cuts. Now there extremism is going to cost them. They will be lucky to get 1-1 now.

If you go nuclear right from the start, don't expect good results when you don't kill your target.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by stonedstooge

So you don't know?

Just how would I know why the media reported the shooter had his ID on him at the time of the shooting.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Because the public wants action. look at the polls.

Polling "useful idiots" and/or the ignorant masses who are easily manipulated and prone to knee jerk reactions in the heat of an emotional upset. Yeah, that's the best way to make law. Sounds like the aftermath of 9/11 which gave us Iraq.

Last I looked we still had rights despite stirring up the rabble. This is why the public at large don't get to make law....particularly the kind that infringes natural rights.