In Lowell, MA there was a terrible shooting on New Year's Eve. Since criminals just won't obey the rules, I think we need to ask who was the last legal owner of the gun. That's the place where it goes wrong.
I suggest a three-pronged attack. 1. full licensing and registration and strict controls on new gun purchases. That would eliminate straw purchasing. And 2. background checks on every transfer. That would eliminate all those supposedly inadvertent private gun sales to criminals. And 3. enhanced and strictly enforced safe storage laws. This would cut down on theft.
MikeB: “3. enhanced and strictly enforced safe storage laws. This would cut down on theft.”
ReplyDeleteDo you agree with Capt. Michael Chowske of the Saratoga Springs Police Department’s statement from the above post? A $50 lockbox is not anti-theft, it is just to keep the kids out of it. I think you are more in the “bolt down safes for everybody” camp.
I suggest one simple step.
ReplyDeleteJustifiable Need.
TS illustrates the gunlooon approach to addressing problems: nitpick 'em and do nothing.
ReplyDelete"I suggest one simple step.
ReplyDeleteJustifiable Need."
Excellent idea. If we required that for gun laws, there'd be no irresponsible bans or registration requirements at all.
A sensible idea. Justifiable need for gun laws.
Looking at the original post, why would background checks still be needed at every purchase if registration is mandatory?
A single check performed at registration that applies for all weapons bought afterwards would be far more sensible, especially if the sale to a liscencee had to be logged as you'd no doubt require.
I am bringing up an interesting point, Jade. All the safe storage laws I can think of are aimed at child access, not theft (except maybe theft by the kids, the kid’s friends, or the housecleaner, etc.). Can you think of any gun control laws in this country that are anti-burglary? I mean, besides castle laws and such.
ReplyDeleteGood point TS. how about this. If you can afford $300 for a nice new pistol, you can afford $1200 for a nice new bolted-down safe.
ReplyDeleteAnd the $600,000 house to put it in.
ReplyDeleteGuy Ohki:
ReplyDelete*Justifiable Need to own and possess a firearm*, which of course, there is none.
"*Justifiable Need to own and possess a firearm*, which of course, there is none."
ReplyDeleteNo, Justifiable Need for irresponsible bans and restrictions, which you advocate.
There is, if you're honest, no need for bans that affect the average gun owner.
All right, lets pretend we have a wide spectrum. On one end we have BantheNRA suggesting there is never a need to own a gun. On the other end we have Guy Ohki saying there is never a need for gun laws, which are what he considers "bans."
ReplyDeleteWhich way will the Needle of Truth point?