Reality check on Gun Control..

[virginia mountainman]

Just a short post, exposing problems with the current crop of gun control proposals..

1. Universal background checks.... How do you do that without registration? Registration is a complete non-starter in the vast majority of the nation, and is completely unenforceable without registration . It completely depends on people complying with the new law, if they don't comply there really is no way of enforcing it against anyone with half a brain. Notice the 95+% non compliance with the SAFE act in New York, there's practically no way to enforce that law, so it is being IGNORED, and ignored openly.

2. Background checks in general, On this issue I have had a change of heart as of late... I used to support them wholeheartedly, now not so much. They seem damn ineffective at stopping mass shooters, here over the last several years, not a single "high profile" incident, has ANY of the perpetrators, had any difficulty whatsoever passing the background check, and getting their gun. I have come to conclude that they are pretty pointless, and "security theater" of the worst type, right up there with "gun free zone".

3. Assault Weapon Bans, magazine bans, other "assorted bans", Keep talking that one up, that "type" has been the most popular firearm in the US for almost a decade, selling MILLIONS and MILLIONS a year, FOR years, they only became popular back in the 1990's when some people TRIED to ban them, so good luck with telling americans that they can't have them anymore. They will just start making them at home, many are doing that right now as a hobby. I am not debating schematics that has been done for years about "semi auto's and function" No need too, the people have spoken, and many Democrats have lost their political careers over it, but like Rethugs and Abortion, they just can't help going back and getting pwned at the polls over it. So I give up trying to educate people on how silly it is. If losing election after election is not enough to teach them to leave that hot stove alone, than maybe they don't deserve to be in office anyway. We Democrats are at our weakest nationally for almost 100 years, so "now" is the time to bring this crap up again?!?!

4. We can erase the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution.... Ok, This overlooks the fact that gun control is very unpopular... So where is that 2/3's majority going to come from??? Odds are is that if any side can come up with 2/3's vote to change the constitution, it will be the pro-gun side, remember every state gets a vote, You have your California and New York, but so does South Carolina, and Texas get a vote, not to mention North Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Montana, Nevada etc..etc.....ok you get the picture, I hope you do anyway because if the 'convention" gets called, who's to say all those "anti gay" states get to put " man and woman only marriage " in the constitution? Who would stop that?... And nationally gun laws are getting a lot less strict.. So go ahead, call for the convention vote, and see what happens, it may end up being all of our worst nightmare, and end up having very little to do with guns.

5. What gun control proposals, that have any hope of passing, have any chance of stopping random killings? I can answer that, NONE....

Now can we please start talking about mental health, and getting some kind of help to the people that have absolutely no hope for whatever reason, that see no other way out than to start just randomly killing people? If we can start doing that, we WILL save lives.

Just some thoughts from someone who has worked in Democratic political circles for almost 40 years.

[stone space]

1. I'm fine with registration.

How do you do that without registration? Registration is a complete non-starter in the vast majority of the nation, and is completely unenforceable without registration .

[virginia mountainman]

4. What your fine with, is a complete non starter and will not be complied with..

You can register, YOUR guns, I won't, nor anyone I know here in my community would... I refer to the 95% NON Compliance with the New York SAFE act, this is in an ANTI gun state. That the vast majority of sheriffs in New York said that they would not even enforce the law.. So why comply?


....Next....

[stone space]

5. By criminals only.

and will not be complied with

[virginia mountainman]

10. You know that, Criminals are exempt from gun registration?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States

The court held: " To eliminate the defects revealed by Haynes, Congress amended the Act so that only a possessor who lawfully makes, manufactures, or imports firearms can and must register them", United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601 (1971).[3] The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes.

[Eleanors38]

25. War on Drugs: You start by creating criminals.

[Kelvin Mace]

7. So, just curious

Why won't you register a firearm?

[virginia mountainman]

8. I will give you a straight answer..

Because it is absolutely no ones business what firearms I own. There will not be a "rule change" down the road, accompanied by a letter telling me to turn in my "once" legal firearm, as did happen to SKS owners in California (see letters below). This could be a very long post, there are several valid reasons for NOT registering your firearms, that simply trump the government's reason for wanting them registered. Think about this, you register your guns now, while a "friendly" to your political views government is in power...In a few years the far right gets into power, and since you are active on a left wing message board, you can potentially lose your civil liberties. It has already happened, look at the innocent people Bush-co's Patriot Act...

[LonePirate]

13. People who refuse to register their guns are exactly the type of people who should not possess them

If you do not wish to obey the law, then you should not be granted privileges that exist with the law. People who refuse to register deserve the same fines - at a minimum - as those who refuse to register their automobiles. Nearly everyone speeds but we still have LEOs patrolling roads and writing tickets. Gun ownership should be no different.

[gejohnston]

14. gun ownership is a right, not a privilege

just like free speech. Driving a car is still a privilege.
Who about pot smokers, since they are violating federal law even in Colorado?
Are you against all civil disobedience?

[LonePirate]

15. Pot smokers do not pose a threat to my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness like gun owners do.

[oneshooter]

16. How do my firearmes, snug in their safes

"pose a threat to my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness"?

[Kelvin Mace]

20. So, when the criminal element

that that the NRA is always warning people are lurking about ready to kill us all (code for non-white people) breaks into your home, the guns snug in their safe are hardly going to be useful, are they?

[oneshooter]

21. Evading an answer, typical.

Will you answer the question now? Or surrender?

[Kelvin Mace]

22. I am informed by gun owners

that the whole point of owning weapons is shooting beer bottles and "self-defense". They even tell me it is the only thing keeping America from becoming a police state.

Trouble is, we are already a police state, and we became a police state while gun owners could have all the guns they could eat. I would gladly trade the "rights" granted me by the 2nd Amendment for the actual rights I have lost specifically the 1st, and 4th through 8th.

[oneshooter]

23. So you refuse to answer the question.

I win, now go away.

[gejohnston]

18. pot dealers are

I grew up around gun owners my entire life. Never had an issue. At my last base, my wife and I started neighborhood watch. It pissed off the local drug dealers in the neighborhood. In fact, the AFOSI sat me down and told me about the local PD busted a local drug dealer who split the beans on a bombing plot, my house being one of them. Every pot smoker I ever met was an asshole, all of which would line the pockets of these assholes who intended to murder myself, my wife and two children, and the lives of the neighbors. Who do think commits most of the gun violence in this country? The target shooter down the street? No, fucking drug gangs who spray bullets at each other, often killing children doing their homework, so don't even feed me that shit. Where did these gangs get the money for the guns and ammo? Working at Starbucks? Does the average pot smoker care that their beloved herb is soaked in blood? No. Does the average pot smoker that they line the pockets of the people who did this?
https://www.google.com/search?q=cartel+murders+mexico&espv=2&biw=1024&bih=659&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAmoVChMI9ZmqtZqxyAIVgV0eCh3esgRi

for money and market share? Sorry that I don't buy that bullshit.
As mentioned above, I have an hatred for drugs, the drug culture, drug dealers, drug users. They should be legal only because prohibition conflicts with basic principles I hold. If it were legal, I would treat pot smokers they same way you do gun owners. I'll take the most ignorant redneck AR toter over any brain dead pot head any day of the week. Because, quite frankly in my experience, they are simply better people.

[independentpiney]

77. "Every pot smoker I ever met was an asshole"

And you admit that if cannabis is legal you'll act like the biggest asshole gungrabber does now. You may want to look in the mirror and reevaluate who the asshole is.

[gejohnston]

86. you clearly misread what I wrote

about other than those other principles?
smoking, pot and tobacco, is a nasty disgusting habit but I don't have the right to tell you how to treat your lungs. In fact, if you do a search, you will find that I support legalization.
No, I would not be an asshole. Perhaps I miss spoke, since gun grabbers are often irrational with hatred, kind of like homophobes and other bigots. But I would ask that they not bring their shit in my house.

[Eleanors38]

26. Anti-pot laws Created criminals. De ja vu all over again.

[Duckhunter935]

28. But they are breaking the law

By your own words they are criminals and should be dealt with in the same fashio as those that would fail to register their weapons.

[bkkyosemite]

29. Oh you mean a well REGULATED militia

[gejohnston]

30. let me give you a website

that explains it better than I do.
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html
BTW, all of the BoR, with the possible exception of the tenth, are individual rights. As Obama correctly pointed out, they are a set of negative rights, which means it limits the government, not the individual.

[GGJohn]

32. Yeah, keep beating that dead horse.

Just in case you missed it, Heller v DC put that meme to bed, the 2A confers an individual right to own firearms not connected to militia service.

[stone space]

36. Were you this annoying when the Bowers v Hardwick decision came down, also?

Yeah, keep beating that dead horse.

Just in case you missed it, Heller v DC put that meme to bed

Your arguement is not a new one. It's just a repeat of that old Bowers arguement.

A mere appeal to authority.

[GGJohn]

47. My argument is one you seemed to have missed,

and a fact.
A mere appeal to authority?
What the hell does that even mean?

[virginia mountainman]

17. I do obey the law..

But if you change the rules, I really don't give a *&^% from that point on...

BTW, who are you going to get to enforce the law, when the police disagree, and refuse to?

[GGJohn]

31. Privilege?

Since when is an enumerated right a privilege?
So the rest of the BoR is a privilege?
Or is it just the 2A because of firearms?

I am vehemently against registration, not because I fear the govt, I don't, but because the govt has no right, nor business knowing what firearms I own, and, BTW, the ACLU opposes registration on privacy grounds.

[stone space]

37. Guns are a privilege. (nt)

[branford]

38. Would you care to provide links to the news stories

describing when and how the Second Amendment and 44 state equivalents were repealed?

Citations to the Supreme Court decisions overruling Heller and McDonald will also be necessary.

[stone space]

39. Irrelevant to my point.

Guns are a privilege.

[branford]

40. You are certainly entitled to any opinion you wish about how you want guns to be treated,

but it is a fact that firearms are indeed an enumerated and protected right in this country.

If you want your opinion to become fact and eliminate all guns, follow the below advice:

[stone space]

41. Guns are a privilege. (nt)

[branford]

42. You are also free to bury your head in the sand... nt

[stone space]

43. You are missing the point here.

Guns are a privilege.

[GGJohn]

50. Got a link to that claim? eom.

[stone space]

51. You just read it. Why should I have to link to it?

Got a link to that claim? eom.

Are you having trouble finding it?

[GGJohn]

54. So IOW, as usual, you've got nothing.

Thanks for confirming it.

[Oneka]

73. Guns are mostly metal and plastic.

Keeping and bearing them is a right.

[NutmegYankee]

78. I think all rational people got the point long ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy

[GGJohn]

84. You still haven't provided a lind to this wild claim. eom.

[GGJohn]

49. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, however ridiculouus it may be,

but you're certainly not entitled to your own facts.

[stone space]

53. Guns are a privilege. That's a fact. (nt)

[GGJohn]

55. Prove it Mr. Calculus Teacher. eom.

[stone space]

57. Why does calculus disturb you so much? (nt)

[GGJohn]

58. Why can't you answer the question? eom.

[stone space]

61. Why are you so obsessed with calculus?

I really don't understand your obsession.

Is it just some sort of anti-intellectual knownothingism?

[GGJohn]

62. So, instead of providing a link to your bullshit claim,

you divert, distract and ignore the question?
Got it, although, after you posted several lies about me, I've come to expect this behavior from you.
You certainly didn't disappoint.

[stone space]

65. Again, what is your obsession with calculus all about?

Do you fear knowledge?

[GGJohn]

68. LOL.

Pure comedy gold.

[stone space]

70. Why the obsession? And why are you afraid to answer? (nt)

[GGJohn]

71. LOL.

Like a babe in the woods.
Just too funny.

[GGJohn]

48. For a calculus teacher,

you sure aren't well informed about current events.

[stone space]

56. Calculus seems to disturb you for some reason.

What is that all about, anyway?

[GGJohn]

60. LOL, you're a good one to talk about things disturbing one. eom.

[stone space]

63. What is your obsession with calculus all about?

I really don't understand your obsession.

I suppose that it is just some sort of right wing anti-intellectual knownothingism.

[GGJohn]

64. LOL.

Pure comedy gold

[stone space]

66. What is it then? Why the obsession? (nt)

[GGJohn]

67. You're hilarious.

[stone space]

69. Why are you afraid to answer?

You brought the subject up.

Twice.

Why don't you explain your obsession with calculus?

[GGJohn]

72. ...

[Kelvin Mace]

19. So, if you lost that weapon,

how many firearms would you have left?

[virginia mountainman]

24. That is immaterial

I will have them all, if I don't register! Don't forget, my mind's already made up, I care NOT about penalties, because the law will be unenforceable...

It's nice living in the country where You, your neighbors, elected officials, and law enforcement all agree..

You "might" be able to register, but if it is like it is in many New York jurisdictions, the sheriff's, up their don't have "the manpower", or the "resources" to process the forms "wink wink"..

The governed, must consent...and they DON'T consent, tuff luck!

[Kelvin Mace]

35. So, as long as they let you keep your guns

you will consent to the loss of all your other rights?

Cool.

[virginia mountainman]

45. Where did I, say that??? Why are YOU, making things up???

I do NOT consent to the loss of any rights... And I have absolutely no fear of losing them by ignoring gun registration.

[Kelvin Mace]

74. The rights have been lost, that is a fact

You surrendered them when you failed to prevent the government's infringing them, then simply ignoring them, or bending the law so as to permit their invalidation.

I have listened all my life to 2nd Amendment advocates that they needed guns, lots of guns, as a check on government tyranny. Well, since 9/11/01 the government has invalidated the 1st and 4th-8th Amendments, so government tyranny is in place with nary a peep from the gun crowd about it.

So, since they have failed to prevent this, I see no reason that the 2nd Amendment should be sacrosanct. The government, specifically, the rich people who own them, see no reason to take guns away since they are only used against the people and they make a really good profit on the death and destruction the proliferation causes. Now, if anyone ever takes it into their little heads to attack the 0.01%, then guns will be taken away immediately, and anyone who disagrees will have their home leveled by Predator drones.

Personally, I think people should be allowed to keep a reasonable number of rifles or shotguns, say one of each, since that meets the technical definition of "arms" (plural). I see no rational reason for any person possessing more than two, since no one needs more than that for reasonable self-defense against criminals. The argument that they are needed to protect against the government is demonstrably ludicrous.

[GGJohn]

33. That number would be................................................

none of your business.

[Eleanors38]

27. ^^^ This.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. All gun grabbers should be required to register their names, addresses and political activities.

[stone space]

46. "Gun grabbers", huh? And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously. (nt)

[GGJohn]

52. LOL.

I just spit out my soda reading this from you.
Funniest thing all day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

75. Go ahead. Tell us you reject any policy that would infringe on the RKBA and don't want confiscation.

[GGJohn]

79. Apparently firearm owners are taken seriously,

just look at the advances in firearm rights in the last 30 years.
What's not taken seriously are those that want to curb our civil rights.

[stone space]

80. We have to take ammosexuals seriously. They invade our public spaces and threaten us.

[GGJohn]

81. Ammosexuals?

Why do people such as yourself have to inject sexual references into the firearm debate?

So, tell us, what are those people doing that's illegal?
Why do you get the vapors around firearm owners?

[stone space]

82. Besides murdering two people in cold blood?

So, tell us, what are those people doing that's illegal?

Or does that not count?

[GGJohn]

83. Who murdered 2 people in cold blood?

Link?

[stone space]

85. The double murder who appears in all three photos.

Link?

I'm tired of doing your homework for you.

[jehop61]

2. So, the United States

the country that invented electricity, manned flight, space exploration, mass communications, eradicated much disease and who won Two world wars, is incapable of doing ANYTHING about the murder of thousands of it's citizens. I feel sorry for you.

[virginia mountainman]

3. Yes it can,

Mental health, helping find worthwhile employment to desperate people..

But others are so focused on banning inanimate objects that what really would help, is ignored.

[branford]

11. Ironically, the same American spirit of "rugged individualism," intense competition

and exceptionalism that gave us all the advances and successes that you list, might also be the same historical and cultural attributes that make firearms so central and important to so many Americans that they oppose most restrictions.

[beevul]

12. You aren't one of those 'gun control or nothing' folks are you?

Because you sure sound like you are.

[Snobblevitch]

59. Invented electricity?

[yeoman6987]

87. A start would be to ban anyone one on anti depressants

That would at least be a start.

[upaloopa]

6. You only see this from a gun owners perspective

The majority of the country supports gun control. It is only the gun lobby that prevents Congress from following the will of the people.
You can't stop all gun violence but that is no reason to try and prevent as much as you can.
I favor a federal gun registration. I thing we should know who owns a gun from the manufacture until it is destroyed.
I am for the assault weapons ban and large magazines because they kill more people in a short period of time. No it won't be a perfect law but that isn't the motive. It will stop some killings.
People's right to life trumps the right to own guns.
The 2nd Amendment has been interpreted in such a way to favor the gun lobby. If we get 4 new Justices with a Dem administration we can get a ruling that includes the whole amendment not part of a sentence.
I have completely changed my stand on gun control after the latest shooting because of the "shit happens" attitude.
One gun owner DUer even mocked people on this board who were morning the shooting in Oregon at the same time they were felling the pain of those killings.

[jimmy the one]

9. you post bogus misinformation

vaMM: the fact that gun control is very unpopular

Better sit down, mountain man, here are the poll facts, not your bar room opinions.

cbs: Aug 2015. N=1,252 "In general, do you think laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?"
........... More strict.. Less strict.. Kept as they are... Unsure/ No ans
7/29 - 8/2/15 .... 52... 13............... 32 ..................2
Republicans ....... 31 ...21 ...............47 ..................2
Democrats .... 77 ....4 ................18 ..................1
Independents ... 48 ...16 ................33 .................3

pew: July 2015. N=2,002 ..more important - protect the right of Americans to own guns, or to control gun ownership?"
Protect right to own guns Control ownership Unsure/Refused
7/14-20/15 ...47 ................... 50 ...........................3 <<<< parity
12/3-7/14 ... 52 ................... 46

cbs, jan 2013: ..favor or oppose creating a national database that would track all gun sales in the United States?"
Favor Oppose Unsure/ No answer 1/13 ... 78 favor ..20 oppose.. 2

Va MM: so good luck with telling americans that they can't have them {asslt wpns, mags} anymore.

Lie down & elevate your legs, MM:
Quinnipiac, jan 2013 If a member of Congress who represents your district were to vote for a ban on the sale of assault weapons, would you be more likely to vote for that person, less likely to vote for that person, or wouldn't it make a difference?"
More likely .. Less likely .. No difference.. Unsure
ALL ..........37 ......31 ...................30 .. 3
Republicans 19 .........48................... 29 ..4
Democrats 61% more likely to vote for .. 11 26 2
Independents 30 .......33 .................34 2

cbs 4/2013: "Do you favor or oppose a nationwide ban on semi-automatic weapons -- including some rifles, pistols, and shotguns -- that have detachable magazines, allowing them to rapidly fire a high number of rounds?"
Favor Oppose Unsure/ No answer
4/24-28/13 50 47 3
Republicans 41 56 2
Democrats 65 32 3
Independents 44 52 http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

va mm: We Democrats are at our weakest nationally for almost 100 years, so "now" is the time to bring this crap up again?!?!

Support for gun control is slightly above support for pro gun alleged rights. Democrats are weak now more due to rightwing republican redistricting schemes & disenfranchisement schemes, rather than gun control, which will garner as much as it loses over time.
Your 2nd Amendment Mythology doesn't really hold up under scrutiny.

[Kang Colby]

34. K&R...

Excellent post. As usual, your posts are true pro-2A gems. Please keep up the good work!

[rustynewyork]

76. I can tell you right now

The New York rifle ranges are still the wild wild west. Even when the ATF show up to look around and they see something they're "not supposed to see" they just tell you to make it disappear. Meaning go put it back in your car. The majority of SAFE Act arrests are just added charges to African Americans who are already getting arrested for a gun charge. The SAFE Act is just jailing African Americans longer. It has no affect on the so called gun nuts.

We were supposed to have an ammo background check system here according to the SAFE Act. But Cuomo made a deal with Republicans to kill it. Saying we don't have the technology. But Massachusetts does. He then dumps this news on Friday at 5 pm to get as little attention as possible. This law is a joke and not only isn't it being enforced the way he told us it will he himself is helping take it apart.

And I cannot say this enough...these gun laws are ruining the lives of poor African Americans NOT the so called white gun nuts.

And the law itself? Laughable. If you have an assault weapon it needs to be registered. Ok. Unless you take the 4 inch pistol grip off and install a two inch pistol grip called a "Spur"! Then it's ok. No longer an assault weapon and it doesn't need to be registered.

[virginia mountainman]

88. You are absolutely correct..

The ONLY areas that the NY SAFE act is being enforced is urban areas, why, because that is largely the area where the support for the law is, they don't dare even speak of enforcing it outside the large urban areas.

Outside the large urban areas, practically all local sheriffs, no deputies, no "smart" state troopers, no local authorities of any type will touch it with a ten foot pole. They hate it just as bad as gun owners. Leaving the ONLY population that has to face real ramifications of the SAFE act being the minorities in urban centers. I have friends that live in upstate NY, they OPENLY IGNORE this law, the sheriff in the county they live in is on the record as saying it's enforcement is a VERY low priority (wink wink)", or the "we don't have the funding or manpower to enforce it" The comments outside of the media spotlight run this way "Cuomo wants it so bad HE will have to come and enforce it" Another effect of this law is that my friends, where Obama voters, and registered Democrats, they are not anymore. There is an estimated 95% Non-Compliance with this law. The folks in Upstate NY, have voided this law on their own.

The police in New York City take a very different view.

So like the NYC's Sullivan Act, its a law largely aimed at minorities.