Yes. And also for voting. For the same reason.
Edit: and let me ask, if proof of citizenship isn’t an infringement for firearms, how can it be an infringement for voting?
1 Like
That kind of thing takes time. What amount of time is reasonable to be separated from your firearms? Weeks? Months?
Yes, its called entering your SSN when filling out the background check form.
2 Likes
If there is no trust then there an be no agreement… so you are defining this as a matter where one side wins and the other loses.
How can the American Republic function in an atmosphere of automatic distrust?
And at least you can trust people like me won’t shoot your if you ring my doorbell by mistake. That’s something.
So, asked but not answered. What is your solution to get guns out of the hands of criminals and gangs?
Are they going to go through all of the hoops needed to own a gun?
2 Likes
Aren’t they already prohibited?
Our system makes it too easy to avoid going through the hoops and there is substantial evidence in the northeast that a large portion of criminal/gang guns are purchased at a small number of venues in states where the laws are more lax.
I have no thought that anything we do will end crime, but there are common sense and widely supported measures that will reduce the number of gun related fatalities while not stopping repsonsible gun owners from acquiring the weapons they need to provide for self-defense, hunting, or sports shooting.
So you are saying if there were less hoops and stricter laws criminals/gangs would have less guns?
2 Likes
I’m not pretending that any law or hoop will end all crime.
But laws do make a difference. Every state that has passed a stand-your-ground law has seen an increase in homicides, but no decrease in crime.
Do you think that is a good thing?
It would appear you’re targeting the law abiding, responsible gun owners with more rules and regulations when it is completely unnecessary.
If someone is standing their ground and shoots/kills a criminal, how could there not be a decrease in crime?
Stand your ground laws? Absolutely.
2 Likes
Not at all. My initial point in this discussion is that I don’t want to block responsible gun owners from their bliss, but I wasn’t those very people to recognize and work with the majority sentiment that far too many guns are in the hands of irresponsible people who then become criminals.
What concerns me is that the majorities that favor steps such as closing the gun show exception, but whose wishes are blocked by the widespread bribery of politicians by the gun lobby will end up imposing solutions that go too far when they are able to gain power.
Actually, I am on your side, but I am also on the side of the women dealing with men who have domestic violence restraining orders. Such women face great risk when those men have easy access to weaponry. It’s a right to life issue for those women. Do you agree? Or are you saying that access to guns among people whose proneness to violence is recognizable is more important than a woman’s right to life?
The women have just as easy access to weaponry. Any woman, in a stand your ground state, shouldn’t have to fear for her life.
I’d also be wary of restraining orders. Some women use that as a tool in a divorce. Before taking a gun away from the accused, they are entitled to due process.
2 Likes
I agree about due process.
However, the notion that both sides of a dispute being armed leads to anything but more crime is just absurd. Look at the national statistics on the growing number of shooting incidents in matters of road rage.
I don’t think a person who cuts another driver off on the road should be put to death, but that’s the system you are creating.
There’s a strong correlation between the number of guns in a location and murder. You are concerned about crime. Last time I checked murder was a crime.
This has already been struck down by the 5th circuit. There is no reason to think that The Supremes won’t eventually do the same.
Well, you’re optimistic, I’ll give you that.
Also: that is a filter bypass, and a no-no. Just type the full word and let the system do its thing.
But I’m guessing you don’t have to show any proof currently, right? Would the NRA try to kill a regulation like that?
I think John Roberts is concerned about his legacy but he has to contend with the Federalist Society caucus which is more concerned about delivering an far right vision of America that their funders cannot achieve through legislative processes.
You’d guess wrong. They take your SSN, and a photo of your ID every time you buy a gun.
Now…. About that “Why is an ID an infringement on voting rights, but not for firearms?” question?
2 Likes
Why was the Texas guy allowed to have it and shoot it in his yard even after the police had been notified several times?
There are no background checks required for private sales.
