arma virumque cano (et alia)
That would be David Brooks, as he and the titles at the start declared. As we've told you before, private sellers can't run a background check. We don't have access to NICS. Brooks does suggest that if we have a state document that shows us to be acceptable gun owners, there doesn't need to be a background check. That's already the case in Arkansas for carry license holders, as it is in some other states. It's a good idea.My only problem with what he says is that he's giving up something without getting anything in return. Why should we compromise when gun control advocates won't?
Because it's not a compromise for some people. It's a honest attempt to find the right thing and do it.
Well, you're right in one sense. It isn't compromise if the giving up is all on one side. You've never been willing to give up anything. Why should we make deals like that?
I told you I'm all right with you keeping your silencers and doing away with the 3-day waiting period except for your first gun purchase.you see how you are, I give an inch and you want a mile.
Those are crumbs while you're enjoying the feast. Doing away with the three-day waiting period? There is no three-day waiting period in most states. Didn't you know that? And since I haven't bothered to get a license for them, I have no surppressors. I might enjoy trying one, but I don't have a strong desire for them.What matters to many of us is as follows:1. An acceptance that gun ownership and carry is a right, not a privilege. A right can only be taken away by due process after a criminal offense.2. Elimination of most gun-free zones.3. Elimination of foolish rules and yammering about capacity and cosmetic features.There's more, I'm sure, but you get the idea. Compromise requires giving up something important on your side, not crumbs.
That guy is an uneducated tool.
C'mon, he represents far more than you do.
So, the hundreds and hundreds of people commenting on blogs are not a representative sample of gun owners at large, and in fact all of these people are extremists. But one person who posts a video that you agree with is not an outlier, and is indeed representative of gun owners at large. Got it. I've got to go back and have a talk with my statistics instructor.
That's exactly right. All the people who write and comment on pro-gun blogs add up to what percentage of the 80 million gun owners? Less than 1%. That's the extreme fringe. Most are apathetic and wouldn't waste their time on what is fascinating to us. Others actually agree with the gun control side.That's the breakdown.
Here's a revelation for you, Mikeb: Most people are apathetic about everything. Why can't we get more than fifty percent of eligible Americans to vote in real elections, not for American Idol? It's the people who speak up who get things done. Truth be told, I don't really give a damn for apathetic people. If they can't speak up for themselves and get involved, they deserve what they get. (Before you go there, I don't mean getting shot.)
Mr. Brooks is mistaken that this issue is about gun shows. His proposal won’t “satisfy crybaby anti-gun people”, because they are really after all private sales. This isn’t some slippery slope prediction because you guys are not hiding the fact that you want this for all private sales. I have never conversed with a gun control advocate who says “no, I am only after gun shows- I think you guys should be able to privately sell and trade guns at your home, or with your buddies at the gun club without government intrusion.” Right? I do like when this guy said “selling guns is part of the protected right”- because that is really what this issue is about. The NRA is not trying to protect felon’s right to buy guns- they are trying to protect all gun owners’ right to sell their guns. If gun controllers would respect that part of the right, they may be able to make some headway. Instead of looking at it like “how can we get background checks with the minimum infringement of someone’s right to sell a gun?” they look at it like, “How can we use this as an excuse to get the maximum restrictions for private gun sales?”
That last line needs a bit of rephrasing. This is better:“What is the maximum amount of restrictions we can get out of this issue?”
If I was mentally ill, I could buy a gun at a gun show through the gun show loophole. That is how the lunatic at VTU bought his guns, magazines, and he then killed 32 people.If I was a foreign terrorist, I could buy a lot of guns at gun shows, and ship them out to equip persons. That is what happened during the Bosnian war. The gun show loophole is where criminals buy guns. It is where criminals sell guns. It's criminals on both sides of the table.
You know this from personal experience, or are you just guessing?
POedLib:If I was mentally ill, I could buy a gun at a gun show through the gun show loophole. That is how the lunatic at VTU bought his guns, magazines, and he then killed 32 people.Bullshit. Cho bought his guns at a licensed gun dealer after passing two separate background checks. The Brady's and their spokesturd Goddard tried to make it a "gunshow" issue a couple of years later.If I was a foreign terrorist, I could buy a lot of guns at gun shows, and ship them out to equip persons.You could maybe, but why would you go to a gun show and pay full price when you could buy black market stuff better and maybe even get some good full auto stuff that you cannot buy at a U.S. gunshow legally.That is what happened during the Bosnian war.I call bullshit. What venues in Bosnia hold gun shows? Do you have any flyers?The gun show loophole is where criminals buy guns. It is where criminals sell guns. It's criminals on both sides of the table.The FBI states that less than 2% of crime guns are bought by criminals at gun shows. Your nonsense doesn't add up.
Yes, all those Bosnians Muslims being aided by Saudia Arabia, et al., and Serbs by Russia, et al., but they're going to pay shipping and handling plus retail prices to get guns from America.