I doubt any sane individual would want to live in a country whereby the government didn't infringe on their "rights". Nothing feel good about reasonable measures to address the risk of gun violence. Common sense stuff, really. A long overdue correction of a policy mistake previous generations should've addressed.
Vehicle: 91 300E, 92 400E, 96 S420, 97 V10 Ford E350 to tow them home from time to time.
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 3,560
I think therein lies the rub. Previous generations had a different way of life. Information wasn't as readily available. People weren't glued to various electronic boxes selling them everything from underwear to Rolls Royces, excitement came from getting into molly's shorts, not dreaming images of godlike abomination from a hand held mechanical penis extender. Culture has changed radically from even 50 years ago. I would hold more against the internet for fostering a 'sell anything you can' mentality than the availability of hardware. Police the dreams and their incubators. You cannot control madness with madness. Abominations will always be with us, banning the tools doesn't solve the problem or really counter the incidences.
Should we throw the bill of rights away? What's the point of that question?
This is only a constitutional question insofar as people don't have problems shitting on it to make themselves feel better about a weird, incredibly ugly and violent but incredibly scarce boogeyman in their closet.
If that's what it would take to make you better able to sleep at night, I'd suggest a trip to the doctor or psychiatrist before we start feeding the COTUS into the paper shredder.
Doing anything to address the issue is projected as "throwing the bill of rights away." That is an extreme position and one that is constantly foisted on the public by the NRA and NRA supporters.
I happen to believe the equipment developed by the military for military purposes should be controlled and kept out of the public's, including criminals' hands. I don't think it is unreasonable or unachievable. I don't really know enough of the technical details of the equipment presently being made available to the public, and criminals through legal and other channels, but, I don't think demanding traceability from the manufacturer and sales organizations is unreasonable or unachievable either.
Keeping records on who owns guns and who is buying ammo is an affront to the NRA and its supporters, and portrayed as a violation of the Second Amendment. I fail to see how that is the case as there is no mention of record keeping in those words. I also think guns should be sold only through a State sanctioned transaction, like an automobile. All guns or ammo sold by a state sanctioned outlet must be resold only by a recorded transfer of ownership that is kept by the state.
I don't think it is unreasonable to have actions like the sudden acquisition of a number of guns and clips and lots of ammo trigger some kind of data base cross checking. All this peels some level of autonomy off the cowards who suddenly buy a load of weapons with the intent to kill random people, and it does nothing to regular owners and users. It would also identify those reselling weapons purchased legally to those who want them and legally cannot purchase them for whatever reasons (known felons, criminal records, mental records, etc.). Holding the original seller liable would provide a deterrent for the original State sanctioned seller who was dumping stock to a citizen who is then reselling them illegally and not required to keep records.
The country long ago gave up any semblance of civility, interest in civic duty and replaced it with accumulating money. The wealthy are admired and idolized regardless of how they are accumulating wealth. Putting the means for making money at risk is the only reasonable way to regulate behavior now.
Anyway, my point is there are acres of area for compromise. And the words in Second Amendment need to be "clarified and made concise." We can still ensure citizens have whatever rights we think they need while not allowing bizarre interpretations that lead to Constitutional grounds being cited for why maintaining traceability of weapons and ammunition and other weapons paraphernalia cannot possibly be allowed.
Vehicle: 91 300E, 92 400E, 96 S420, 97 V10 Ford E350 to tow them home from time to time.
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 3,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimSmith
Doing anything to address the issue is projected as "throwing the bill of rights away." That is an extreme position and one that is constantly foisted on the public by the NRA and NRA supporters.
I happen to believe the equipment developed by the military for military purposes should be controlled and kept out of the public's, including criminals' hands. I don't think it is unreasonable or unachievable. I don't really know enough of the technical details of the equipment presently being made available to the public, and criminals through legal and other channels, but, I don't think demanding traceability from the manufacturer and sales organizations is unreasonable or unachievable either.
Keeping records on who owns guns and who is buying ammo is an affront to the NRA and its supporters, and portrayed as a violation of the Second Amendment. I fail to see how that is the case as there is no mention of record keeping in those words. I also think guns should be sold only through a State sanctioned transaction, like an automobile. All guns or ammo sold by a state sanctioned outlet must be resold only by a recorded transfer of ownership that is kept by the state.
I don't think it is unreasonable to have actions like the sudden acquisition of a number of guns and clips and lots of ammo trigger some kind of data base cross checking. All this peels some level of autonomy off the cowards who suddenly buy a load of weapons with the intent to kill random people, and it does nothing to regular owners and users. It would also identify those reselling weapons purchased legally to those who want them and legally cannot purchase them for whatever reasons (known felons, criminal records, mental records, etc.). Holding the original seller liable would provide a deterrent for the original State sanctioned seller who was dumping stock to a citizen who is then reselling them illegally and not required to keep records.
The country long ago gave up any semblance of civility, interest in civic duty and replaced it with accumulating money. The wealthy are admired and idolized regardless of how they are accumulating wealth. Putting the means for making money at risk is the only reasonable way to regulate behavior now.
Anyway, my point is there are acres of area for compromise. And the words in Second Amendment need to be "clarified and made concise." We can still ensure citizens have whatever rights we think they need while not allowing bizarre interpretations that lead to Constitutional grounds being cited for why maintaining traceability of weapons and ammunition and other weapons paraphernalia cannot possibly be allowed.
Jim
I think there are three bits missing there.
Technical specs get murdered in legislative efforts and definitions. That's what made the previous ban so laughable, the focused on appearance.
Most gun sales are indeed recorded but not filed for long. This goes back to states rights and the many complexities of multiple governance or area of influence. You've got to start with a federal data base.
And of course what you think I need may not be what I think I need or what I think she needs or they need she thinks he needs who wonders why you need it anyway.
Technical specs get murdered in legislative efforts and definitions. That's what made the previous ban so laughable, the focused on appearance.
Most gun sales are indeed recorded but not filed for long. This goes back to states rights and the many complexities of multiple governance or area of influence. You've got to start with a federal data base.
And of course what you think I need may not be what I think I need or what I think she needs or they need she thinks he needs who wonders why you need it anyway.
I am not the fucking oracle. I am not proposing the only answer. My point is this is an issue that we can find a solution to if we want to find a solution. If we don't, we won't. If those three issues were the critical ones to debate, the problem would be readily solved.
For example, military hardware should be kept as military hardware. Period. That is relatively easy. No technical specifications for lawmakers to become confused over. If the military pays to develop a weapon, it cannot be released to the public. Not hard to write up.
A federal data base. Works for me. The issue here will be the NRA the NRA supporters who view this a some conspiracy to identify those who have weapons so the government can collect them before they put a black dude in the White House and the Union is ended.
And there is little doubt that the "needs" of most all Americans can be met without any of these controversial bits of hardware. It is the financial institutions like the NRA and the gun manufacturers who will expend every effort to whip up resistance to any attempt to restrict their "rights" to sell any weapons they can dream up or bring in the country from overseas military sources. But a reasonable compromise to "no restrictions" or "no guns at all" can be reached if we want to reach such a compromise.
Vehicle: 91 300E, 92 400E, 96 S420, 97 V10 Ford E350 to tow them home from time to time.
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 3,560
I'd like to see a federal license for purchases and concealed carry, would make things simpler. I do think it's a good idea for local authorities to be involved in the process as they tend to know the baddies. And yeah, that whole dark guy in the White House is cummin' fer yer guns thing might prove though to beat. Such rumors are very insidious.
Doing anything to address the issue is projected as "throwing the bill of rights away." That is an extreme position and one that is constantly foisted on the public by the NRA and NRA supporters.
That's not true. I will stand in opposition to proposals that either require us to throw the bill of rights away, and/or are going to be an utter waste of time and money (specifically, they will do nothing to prevent a deranged lunatic from coming into physical possession of a gun). If that's what people are concerned with, fine, but realize that you can get to prevention one of two ways. You can proclaim all gun owners as dangerous perpetrators of manslaughter cases in waiting, or you can start figuring out how to identify at-risk individuals early and have an effective system in place to neutralize whatever is eating at them.
Feel free to enumerate any plans you may have, and evaluate them on the following criteria:
* How does the plan prevent someone with physical possession of a gun from committing murder with it?
* How does the plan impact the 80,000,000 lawful owners of 300,000,000 guns?
* How does the plan prevent someone from committing murder / mass murder using implements other than guns (ref: Oklahoma City Bombing)?
The common denominator in all of these cases is not "assault weapons" or "military-grade guns" or even guns at all; it is a sick human being. Blame deinstitutionalization if you want, or Jack Nicholson's performance in One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest - the bottom-line is that there isn't a readily accessible service people can use to get help dealing with those who exhibit the sorts of obvious warning signs that always precede something like Sandy Hook.
Any arguments about that being "too hard"? I'd love to hear them.
I doubt any sane individual would want to live in a country whereby the government didn't infringe on their "rights". Nothing feel good about reasonable measures to address the risk of gun violence. Common sense stuff, really. A long overdue correction of a policy mistake previous generations should've addressed.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
