A Challenge To Anyone

So are you for banning 9mm handguns?

 

arm the groomers?

 

Yes I did. For starters, you are asking the wrong questions at first. It is why I went with the gun culture argument, especially the pro-gun culture crowd who perpetrate most of the myths out there. There are myths from the left on gun ownership and "assault guns" etc, but that's a different discussion for a different thread.

Universal background checks would not require universal registration unless you mean every gun has to have a unique identifying number on it. But that is not universal registration. If you purchase a firearm from a registered dealer in which a background check is required, that information is fed into the ATF Database system and/or state database system in which approval or no approval is provided. If approved, then the AFF does not have the registration of the gun while the paperwork for the background check is kept by the registered firearms dealer until it is required under court order for that firearms dealer to produce such paperwork. If something happens, AFT or local law enforcement has the ability to search the database based on the unique identifying number on the firearm if the firearm is recovered and if the firearm required a background check. From there, AFT or local law enforcement can determine who owned the gun, when it was purchased, etc. But there is no files where the registration of the firearm is kept unless it is state law. And state law generally requires the registration of firearms for handguns, depending on the state. Texas for instance does not have a state gun registration, yet certain firearms under the National Firearms Act must go through a background check while the state of New York does have such a system, I think.

When it comes to private sales, you are required to keep some sort of record of the sale, depending on the state if a firearm is involved. Sadly, most private sales do not do this at all and the only concern is "will the check bounce" thought. And that makes it difficult to find out who owned the gun if a private sale was involved. It is where most criminals obtain their firearms to begin with. And since private sales are in fact legal, even a criminal can legally obtain a firearm without going through a private sale because no background check is required. If we require universal background checks, including firearm sales by private persons to another private person, the argument is not about rights, but about burden. Generally speaking, it is a very little burden to the individual because you can quite literally do this online now with minimal cost. You will just pass that cost onto the person purchasing the firearm.

 

A random person should not be able to just walk into a school. The doors should be locked and access controlled. That will help.

 

So you are asking for pediphiles to protect the children they are grooming?

 

So you're for arming groomers??? Interesting

 

The primary cause is someone hell-bent on killing themself and as many other people as possible in the process, probably with the goal of becoming famous/notorious.

Guns are merely the most common method chosen up to this point. With this particular guy going as far as owning body armor, if guns were not his method, he could have just as easily used a vehicle through a playground or a parade route etc. There are an awful lot of ways to kill others, and in truth, you can kill just as many or perhaps even more with a car, and we have in fact seen a huge uptick in mass killing in that manner. A few decades back I do not ever recall hearing of that. I can think of several of those instances in the last 5 years or so.

Gun proliferation is not the problem. The problem is the person hell-bent on killing others.

 

I said same thing in a different thread. Someone actually tried to claim it would be a "fire hazard since it would be more difficult to get out of the school". The person didn't seem to understand locking the doors means only those on the outside are locked from coming in. No one is locked from getting out.

 

True. We need to ask for a tax on certain types of weapons to fund an effort to put up fences to hire armed guards at entrence points. The reason I ask for the tax is that in the past the same people who do not want to lose any "gun rights" have shown they do not want to pay for the expense of fortifying our schools. Step one you want to own a gun that has the express purpose of killing people you also need to help protect those people.

 

If you never committed a crime, you still wont be prevented from owning a firearm, you just have to go through the background check to verify you can own one.

This is the same logic when obtaining a ID. You have to prove who you are to get an ID from a government office. You conservatives say it is no big deal. It is also no big deal to do a background check to show you never committed a crime that will forbid you from owning a firearm, whether through an FFL or a private sale. But that is part of the solution. The other part is changing the national psyche on what guns should be used for, that the other part.

Note: You may want to look at the XM-5 civilian version. This will replace the civilian version of the AR-15, but it may also change the landscape of the gun culture as well.

 

It can be done safely and seems, to me, to be relatively low hanging fruit.

 

.

 

I never mentioned banning anything

 

Most guns are purchased for defense. It would be silly to ask the lawful gun owner to fully shoulder the cost of hardening the schools against the same type of person they are defending against.

 

100% agree. The school I coached at for 18 years locks its doors once school starts.

 

I sell a gun to someone without a background check. He uses that gun to kill a dozen people. I simply deny I ever sold the gun to him. Without universal registration, it is impossible to prove that I ever owned the gun.

 

Good you're against banning anything

 

I never said it didn't exist, I said it wasn't popularized until the 1990s when the pro-gun crowd began using that argument and flooding it on AM talk radio, among other things.

If you look at the statistics from the 1940s till now, including the upward trend in per capita firearm deaths from 1960 to 73, does not compare to the number of firearm deaths per capita today and the past few years.

 

Only 3 nations have a constitutional right to bear arms.
Mexico, Guatemala and the US.

https://www.businessinsider.com/2nd...stitutional-right-bear-arms-2017-10?r=US&IR=T

The 2nd amendment needs to go.

 

The bullet hadn't even been invented at the time the Founders decided to protect the right of militias to have muskets. Does any right thinking person really believe if they were able to foresee the grotesque ways the 2nd A has been distorted they wouldn't want it repealed?

 

This does not happen here. this only really happens in America

 

It won't be because of our judicial system. Furthermore, it is the type of parania of the pro-gun at anytime with anyone crowd that usually makes that argument despite the fact that in our entire history, it only happened one, under extreme circumstances.

 

But it was popularized prior to the 90's. I am not sure what makes you think that it was not. You can point to per capita death rates all you want, that is an entirely different subject.

That is the larger point, you are trying to correlate higher gun deaths ( and more specifically mass killings) to that mentality, but that mentality has most certainly existed since my cognizance, which goes back to the 70s. I am pretty sure it existed long before that as well. Such a phrase is definitely a response to increases in a push for gun control, so when you look at that attitude, it will definitely correlate to gun control efforts.

With that being the case, if you REALLY want to correlate that attitude with mass killings, then by extension you would have to blame gun control efforts because that is what has fueled that mentality. I am not saying I believe that, but if insisting upon your logic, that would be the natural extension of that logic.

 

I am not for gathering up Guns
I think that children under 21 have to have a parent to vouch for them or a mental, health eval.
a 7 day wait

 

We did in 1996 (all handguns) and we've not had a school shooting since.