{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/20/2013 6:44:46 PM
39
Ultimately, stricter gun laws and background checks will lead to confiscation. Just look at some states who are already proposing to do so.
Why do we need a record of every law abiding citizens ownership of a gun. It would be much better and easier to put people into a system who have a criminal record.
English
-
[quote]Ultimately, stricter gun laws and background checks will lead to confiscation. Just look at some states who are already proposing to do so.[/quote] California has some of the strictest gun laws in the USA, and there's no guns being confiscated here. [quote]Why do we need a record of every law abiding citizens ownership of a gun. It would be much better and easier to put people into a system who have a criminal record.[/quote] Why do we need a record of our birth certificate? Same answer.
-
actually, legally possessed (and registered) "assault weapons" are confiscated at will by police officers every time LA or another crime center tells the CA AG it needs gun control to fix it's crime problem. same with pre-ban magazines. 100% legal to own and use. an officer can confiscate them in CA solely because" civilians shouldn't own guns" is his opinion, never mind the fact that a uniform, a badge, a gun and an ego doesn't make you a non-civilian. don't believe me? civil rights lawsuits happen over this shit there, and are often settled out of court.
-
Yeah, if only there was a record of people with criminal records.
-
If only states would actually submit those records to the background check system.
-
Edited by M37h3w3: 2/20/2013 7:25:29 PM[quote]Ultimately, stricter gun laws and background checks will lead to confiscation.[/quote] You say that like it's some kind of predetermined fact. Like pushing a car in neutral over a hilltop will lead to the car racing to the bottom. And in the meantime, the current broken and half-assed system isn't working.
-
it's historical precedent. you;re trying to marginalize and outright ignore what has happened in the past.
-
Its already happened in other countries and it is beginning to happen in some states, like Washington and Missouri.
-
Is it not? Please explain.
-
Take into consideration that the road is not really flat and depending on the position the car is in, the only way to get a car to come racing to the bottom is if it is perfectly aligned left and right. Otherwise, it will veer off on one side, or potentially crash before hitting the bottom instead of racing to the bottom intact.
-
Why would a law abiding citizen care if he was on a registry for owning a gun?
-
Why should any law abiding citizen be forced to register their gun in the first place? On another note, Canada experimented with a long gun registry and it failed for two reasons. Reason 1: It was far to to expensive to maintain. With millions of guns in the country they just could make it work financially. We have 88 guns per every 100 people in the US, think of the nightmare of red tape that would cause. Reason 2: People were not registering their guns in Canada. Sure it carried a fine, but they didn't care. How was the government going to track down guns not on the registry? Canada threw out their registry because it was ineffective, expensive, and a waste of time. Then there is the historical fact that Registration leads to confiscation. The UK is a prime example. People were forced to register their guns and a few years later one bad shooting happened and they went in a confiscated everything. All registration does is make the law abiding citizen feel like a criminal. Sort of what all gun control legislation does, goes after the people following the law and ignoring the people breaking it.
-
[quote]All registration does is make the law abiding citizen feel like a criminal.[/quote] I register my car. I don't feel like a criminal.
-
There isn't a large following against cars. There are many people that(wrongly) think guns can only do bad.
-
Not relevant.
-
Yet you are not forced to. I can own a vehicle and not drive it on the roads and not have to register it.
-
Because the US is exactly like Canada and the UK. People need to stop looking at the registry as a bad thing. All it does is make people more accountable for the guns they own. If you are an innocent person with nothing to hide, then registering your gun ownership should be no more of a hassle than registering for voting.
-
Actually Canada is very much like the US, just more liberal. They could not keep Long Gun registration going because it did not work. It was to expensive to maintain, and no one registered their firearms. There are 88 firearms per 100 people in the US. There are 360 million people in the US. Where do you intend to store all of the data on those firearms? Who do you intend to employ to register those firearms? Who do you intend to employ in keeping those records around? Do you plan to have a regressive registration? You know registering all firearms owned before the passage of the law? Besides, a Federal Firearms registry is blatantly unconstitutional. You want a firearm registry, push for it at State level.
-
Because when the constitution was written, they thought everyone would eventually own a gun, especially ones ten times more lethal than a musket.
-
Because when the constitution was written they though that everyone would own a means to convey bullshit, even at the speed of light.
-
Just because you can't refute my statement in a civil way doesn't mean you have to degrade to your last comment.
-
The point stands. The Founding fathers never envisioned a world where you could communicate instantly across the continents. A world where you could coordinate simultaneous crimes in different parts of the world. A world where you could ruin someone financially with the click of a button. Yet the Internet still exists and there is mass anger when governments attempt to censor it.
-
All you've done is further validate that the constitution is outdated.
-
Ok, what Amendment would you change, save for the 2nd? The 1st? 3rd? 4th? 10th? 13th? 14th? 15th? 19th? 22nd?
-
You don't need to change anything, just add an amendment making it more difficult to own a gun. Of course previous gun owners will be grandfathered in because that's just the way these things work, but adding a registry, background checks for every purchase, psych evals when available, etc. could easily be put into the amendment. And before anyone says that that is too far, think about the weapons we aren't allowed to own, like hand grenades and top military gear. That is for your own safety as well as everyone else. Handguns, shotguns, and semi-automatic rifles have proven to be extremely lethal and should be difficult to obtain. Not impossible and not too crazy of a process to get, but we shouldn't be letting anyone who wants one to buy one on a whim.
-
So an Amendment that takes the rights away from people. I am pretty sure you don't understand what the Constitution was written for.
