Democrat's latest clever strategy at gun control

The law mostly focuses on the 80% lowers it doesn't matter if you build a gun you have to have an 80% lower you can't have a gun without. They want to make it to where you can't buy that component as though it's a component you have to buy it as though you're purchasing a firearm I'm a licensed firearm dealer so that they know you have it so that they can then take them away at some point so the only point to any of this.

 

There are civil liberties issues. Which you would probably have difficulty understanding.

A legal gun owner might wish to do something that is illegal in the future, if certain political conditions change.

It should not be assumed that it would be wrong for that gun owner to do that illegal thing, in all situations. So this is a civil liberties issue.

This is yet one more thing that would just give more power to government. With little benefit at stopping crime.

I know that may be a difficult concept for you to understand.

Think about it. It would actually be a very scary world if your government were able to prevent EVERYTHING that they deemed illegal from being able to happen, as if they had complete god-like omnipotent and omniscient power, beyond just legal power.

Beyond that, it would make assembling a gun from parts, like many gun hobbyists do, excessively overcomplicated and difficult, to be able to comply with the law.

 

First and foremost it's based on a lie. When the government is lying to you it's doing that to deprive you of liberties.

So my question is why would any American not care?

 

From post #22:

Also see my post #17, above. Sorry to just put you on piggyback, but you and Kaz are making the same argument: criminals are too smart and hard- working to let any attempts like this either: A) discourage them from committing a crime, or from using a gun, in that crime, in the first place; or B) to let any of these measures lead to their being caught.

You should consider not just your own imaginings of criminal activity, but look at actual cases; criminals often do quite stupid things. If they were truly smart, meticulous, and hard- working, most of them wouldn't need to be criminals.

 

this is a fantastic point the whole purpose of the second amendment is so we can do precisely that.

You give too much credit it has zero to do with stopping crime there will be no benefit at all. If a criminal wants a gun that can't be traced or whatever people think happens with serial numbers they'll just chisel it off you can do that people have been doing it since probably they've been putting serial numbers on guns

 

all guns should have serial numbers, simple, no one but Criminals should care

 

this has absolutely nothing to do with crime.

Criminals don't spend thousands of dollars on gun components for a gun without a serial number it just buy some $70 piece of crap at a pawn shop and scrape the serial number off of it.

That's if they don't steal it.

This isn't really a good excuse for why your argument is so bad. Criminals don't have to be smart to spend $5,000 building a gun without a serial number they have to be wealthy. The kind that used guns to do crime aren't wealthy.

If they are they would use some $70 piece of crap from a pawn shop that they just scraped a serial number off of like they've been doing for decades.

 

Why?

Right now all guns that are sold have to have serial numbers.
Why is that not enough?

 

We aren't talking about guns we're talking about parts.

 

parts that make a gun

 

Then you realize this proposed change in law would not be much of an improvement? Not to what you just described.

Tell us how I am wrong if you disagree. Tell us how you think this change in law would make this specific situation you were referring to better.

 

make it a felony with a mandatory 5 years to be caught with an assembled gun without a serial number - loss of gun rights for life

 

Like I said, your arguments are just unoriginal copies of Kaz's arguments, and so obviously fallacious, that I don't even need to write a new reply, to answer them:

 

Why do parts need to have numbers on them? There is no gun without the receiver part, and anyone who legally sells that needs to have a number on it.

Also, the receiver part probably would be the most difficult of all the parts for anyone to try to make. It practically is the main body part of a gun.
One main part, one number, makes sense.

The Left has tried this before. They did not win the argument in the past, and that is why it was not previously passed into law.

 

Why? What would be the point of that?

Persons who are not legally allowed to have a gun are already imprisoned if they have a gun - any gun.

Why are you so desperate to be able to trace guns from legal gun owners?

 

Which parts on a gun should have serial numbers?

 

So a part that makes a gun isn't a gun A gun.

I'm glad you understand the part is different than a gun so now you would understand why we shouldn't have to consult the ATF if I want to buy a spring or a block of aluminum.

 

I believe that it was Ben Franklin who said:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

About 50 years ago when I was living in what was then W. Germany I was having a friendly chat with my landlady who told me: "You Americans don't appreciate the many freedoms you have and someday you will lose them like we did."

Every time I read naive arguments from gullible dupes of the gun ban movement I am reminded that, yes, it can happen here.

 

So this is your pathetic little excuse for why you can't come up with any valid reason for any of this nonsense.

It's just something burning dead moron with a d next to his name saying something and you just shake your head right along with it.

Yessa massa I do whatever you say.

 

Can you imagine if the federal government spent this much time and effort on Illegal Immigration?

 

Biden can't even tell you what he did with the illegal alien kids he flew off to who knows where. He can't even control the weapons or drugs flooding over the border. But this is the hill he wants to die on? I think the only folks who will notice are those who would have followed the law anyway. I don't see a single indication that this will have any effect other than on otherwise law abiding folks who might not then build artisan weapons anymore. Biden actively supports defunding police, he seems entirely willing to give over blue cities to the crime lords of them, so how is any of this going to address those problems? The whole fear of others being able to defend themselves from you or folks like you really pisses you off doesn't it.

 

That's why I used the phrase "Biden Administration". He may not really be the actual individual running things and coming up with the policy decisions.
His White House Secretary probably tells him what to say, and she consults with and gets her directives from the Democrat Speaker of the House and a few other select leading Democrat Party leaders.

 

They did that who would vote Democrat?

 

The only apparent "burning dead moron," here, is you. And I will prove that, by challenging you to explain what the hell you even mean, by your "yessa massa," comment, or any of this post's stupidity, masquerading as a thought.

Just to over- explain, to someone that missed my very clear explanation, the 1st time I gave it to him:
1) The argument you were making, had already been made, by Kazenatsu (which you presumably should have already seen, but we'll skip over that);
2) I answered Kaz's argument;
3) Since your argument was the same as his, I could use my own, same reply, as I had given to Kaz.

So that was who I had quoted, after just my explanation (which was all that you included, in your reply). You did not, for example, cut and paste the quote box, with my actual reply to your argument. Or, since I gave the post #, it would have been a simple thing to quote that post along with your brain-dead reply.

Now explain, what you are claiming that I was only, mindlessly, mouthing the words to, and "shak(ing my) head right along with it." What was the it, you were referring to-- you meant my own words!



(BTW, boy- genius, one does not "shake," one's head, in agreement with something: head- shaking expresses disapproval; "nodding," shows agreement.)

 

Priorities, priorities.

I bet a clampdown on immigration enforcement would cut down on straw purchases by 50%.

But no, we can't be looking at that as a potential solution.

The Left is so crazy they won't even support gun laws that specifically target illegal aliens. Apparently the revulsion to "discrimination" comes out even ahead of the impetus for ever higher amounts of gun control.

This may be extremely cynical and unjustifiable but it's almost like they want illegal aliens and the increased crime to have an excuse to pass more laws on the rest of Americans.