This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to Newtster's comment:

Which is precisely why people suggest not only background checks, but serial numbers on all guns and ammo, all sales registered - whether from a vendor, private, or gun show, and make it a serious criminal offense to sell a gun or ammo without meeting all the requirements.

That would make it way harder for criminals to get guns.

As is, it's ridiculously easy to send someone to a gun show to get a gun for you, etc.

In response to Newtster's comment:

Which is precisely why people suggest not only background checks, but serial numbers on all guns and ammo, all sales registered - whether from a vendor, private, or gun show, and make it a serious criminal offense to sell a gun or ammo without meeting all the requirements.

That would make it way harder for criminals to get guns.

As is, it's ridiculously easy to send someone to a gun show to get a gun for you, etc.

In response to Newtster's comment:

More cowbell

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

The ability for people to buy and sell guns individually is something worth re-examining.  I'm not completely sold, but we do need to take a closer look.

However, thinking that background checks impede criminals is like saying throwing a pebble in front of a tank will impede it.

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

Which, as I told Newtster, is why we would also need all the other things I mentioned for it to work.

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

I think you underestimate criminals is you think criminals will gladly go through background checks that will limit their ability to buy a gun.  Regardless of what other steps are involved.

 

Look, i think everyone would like a safer world.  Less guns does not leade to a safer world.  It just shifts the weaponry for the bad guys.  i spent a lot of time in England over the years, and it is correct to say that guns are not a big part of the crime scene.  knives and swords are.

The problen is not the gun.  It is the criminal, it is the crazy person.  

But, looking at things like gun show sales makes sense to me.  That is a potential open door for criminals and crazy people.

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

I think you underestimate criminals is you think criminals will gladly go through background checks that will limit their ability to buy a gun.  Regardless of what other steps are involved.

 

Look, i think everyone would like a safer world.  Less guns does not leade to a safer world.  It just shifts the weaponry for the bad guys.  i spent a lot of time in England over the years, and it is correct to say that guns are not a big part of the crime scene.  knives and swords are.

The problen is not the gun.  It is the criminal, it is the crazy person.  

But, looking at things like gun show sales makes sense to me.  That is a potential open door for criminals and crazy people.

The 2nd Amendment talks about the right to own guns.

 

It doesn't say anything about how they are accessed, bought and sold.  That is the penultimate question.

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

Holy christ. Listen:

Criminals will not go through the background checks so they will not get the gun through legitimate channels. Duh. I didn't say that.

The other things I mentioned to Newtster would make it far more difficult for criminals to then turn to black market channels to get them, because it would be much riskier for people to buy guns legitimately then leak them into the black market.

That's why you need it all together. One and not the other doesn't work.

 

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

Holy christ. Listen:

Criminals will not go through the background checks so they will not get the gun through legitimate channels. Duh. I didn't say that.

The other things I mentioned to Newtster would make it far more difficult for criminals to then turn to black market channels to get them, because it would be much riskier for people to buy guns legitimately then leak them into the black market.

That's why you need it all together. One and not the other doesn't work.

 

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

infringed.  That's the key.

in·fringe (n-frnj)

v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es

 

v. tr. 1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent. 2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.

 

Somewhere there is a line government crosses that equals infringement.  Restricting sales, forcing registration, other gun-control ideas need to be viewed through this lens.

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

infringed.  That's the key.

in·fringe (n-frnj)

v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es

 

v. tr. 1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent. 2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.

 

Somewhere there is a line government crosses that equals infringement.  Restricting sales, forcing registration, other gun-control ideas need to be viewed through this lens.

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

It is admittedly broad language.  Not too different from language pertaining to other rights too.  And yet all rights have their limitations.  Congress is prohibitting the free exercise of religion yet laws that govern harmful religious practices have been upheld.  It cannt abridge the freedom of speech or press and yet you cannot engage in certain harmful practices there either.  Thus regulation of harmful aspects of the right to bear arms are fair game.  But where the legal line is is anybody's guess...