The full list of recommendations is below:
- Support the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans
- Support citizens' rights to possess firearms for hunting, shooting sports, defense, and other lawful and legitimate purposes
- Reinstate and strengthen a prospective federal ban on assault weapons
- Reinstate a prospective federal ban on assault magazines
- Require a background check for every gun sale, while respecting reasonable exceptions for cases such as gifts between family members and temporary loans for sporting purposes
- Strengthen the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) database
- Prosecute those prohibited buyers who attempt to purchase firearms and others who violate federal firearm laws
- Pass legislation aimed specifically at cracking down on illegal gun trafficking and straw-purchasing
- Restore funding for public safety and law enforcement initiatives aimed at reducing gun violence
- Support initiatives that prevent problems before they start
- Close the holes in our mental-health system and make sure that care is available for those who need it
- Help our communities get unwanted and illegal guns out of the hands of those who don't want them or shouldn't have them
- Support responsible gun ownership
- Take steps to enhance school safety
- Address our culture's glorification of violence seen and heard though our movie screens, television shows, music and video games
Reinstate and strengthen a prospective federal ban on assault weapons.....
ReplyDeleteRight, reinstate a ban that did nothing to lower the fewer that ~400 long gun homicides (because that is what assault weapons are long guns) per year that occurred, before, during, and after the AWB, pass a law that does nothing and makes Democrats feel good..... That makes sense.....
The availability of firearms, and especially military small arms, presents the opportunity for anti-State groups to arm their members. The number of these weapons which are used in conventional or spree crime is irrelevant with regard to the fact that such weaponry endows the common subject with the ability to forcefully oppose their rulers.
DeleteThus, the Second Amendment Koba. Any illiterate can read the amendment and see that the 2nd amendment was written for just that purpose.
DeleteAyn idiot? Is that right? Everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot.
DeleteRe-read that Mike B. I don't see me calling anyone an idiot, but if the shoe fits...
DeleteOh, illiterate not idiot. That changes a lot.
DeleteProsecute those prohibited buyers who attempt to purchase firearms and others who violate federal firearm laws.....
ReplyDeleteWow you mean like the laws against straw purchase that exist now, so the Federal government is so stupid that they need to be told to prosecute people that break the law?
Few things would constitute more grave a dereliction of duty than a lawmaker encouraging common masses to arm themselves. Such is the issue with the first and second point. They are antithetic both to all of the other goals of the plan and to the duty of the State to ensure the preservation of a civilized society.
ReplyDeleteThe common American has absolutely no right to control or proliferate any form of weapon. However the State, bears the compelling duty to disarm it's subjects, and such persons who are subject to the rule of law do however implicitly possess a right to be disarmed. The fundamental Right to Civilian Disarmament can be derived fro the language in the preamble (of the U.S. Constitution) sanctioning as the duty of Government to "ensure domestic tranquility", "promote the general welfare", "provide for the common defense". As there exists such a Right to Disarmament of the mere citizen as expressed by the constitution, congress bears the responsibility to adopt prohibitive statutes concerning the proliferation and possession by mere civilians, who do not convey public authority, are not entrusted with the safety of the populace, and not endowed with coercive power (therefore requiring the use of arms) over other subjects.
It should be interesting to note that Justice Scalia's majority opinion on District of Columbia v. Heller vacated his usual originalist viewpoint, and instead interpreted "rights" guaranteed by the Second Amendment in (what he perceived as) the context of the modern day. This was a largely politically (as opposed to historically) motivated decision.
The most effective means of achieving such a prohibitive firearms policy (as required by the preamble of the Constitution) would be to require universal background checks completed through the Federal NCIS system, whereupon an Executive Order would prohibit funding for background checks to common civilians, and thus prohibit the transfer of arms by unauthorized parties. Such would be more effective if extended to the sale of munitions.
Since when are Americans "subjects"..I'm a free citizen of this country who has served in its military. The right to defend myself was not and will never be given to me by laws. The right of self defense is a human right. I am not a subject and I will not be disarmed.
DeleteI smell troll
DeleteI think E.N. has another account he's posting under.
DeleteWe need to be doing background checks on family members for gifts. We need it on record where those transactions take place.
ReplyDeleteIt is not as if those who are criminals, alcoholics, domestic abusers, drug users, illegal immigrants, or those who are dangerously mentally ill, etc. don't have family members who in some cases NOW provide these people firearms. Let's take away any plausible deniability that the family of friends did not know they were transferring a gun to a prohibited person.
Or has everyone forgotten the study that showed a significant number of felons got their firearms used in the crime for which they were behind bars came from family or friends?
Or........hello? The shooter who just killed the American sniper, Kyle, who was using a borrowed firearm, after just getting out of a mental hospital the week before? You think hey - maybe there should have been some further barrier to that kind of stupidity by Kyle that got himself and another man killed? Kyle died by his own stupidity, in a very real sense.
The underlying problem we have with firearms is that people are making bad decisions about firearms and who should be accessing them. THAT needs to be made harder.
We have seen comments from gun guys here that show they are bad about responsibility and good judgment. THAT is why the many guns in this country are such a damn big problem.
Kyle died a hero. Kyle died tying to do good. Name one thing that you have done to make this world better, you snivelling coward.
DeleteDog Gone represents a personification of America's ailment. She consistently exhibits a distinct ignorance of the most fundamental of American legal principal, yet she feels compelled to endorse substantial and profound changes to the current framework of law. She is neither a criminologist nor an economist, yet she feels that she has the "solution" to the plague of violence. Dog Gone is most certainly (or at least hopefully) not involved in the creation, implementation or interpretation of law. Understandably for someone of limited mental vigor, Dog Gone feels that her plain and unadorned steadfastness, is somehow a replacement for both intelligence and expertise, as she is neither a Lawyer, an Intellectual, or a Lawmaker, but yet masquerades such an authoritative station behind the veil of the electronic age. Stop flinging petty insults at slain servicemen, and leave the discussion to the grown ups. You would do well to listen to ones betters.
DeleteI agree with Dog Gone. The exemption for family members is not necessary. If we can demand background checks for private sales, there's no need for any exemptions.
DeleteHere the gun control freaks reveal, once again, that they're either liars or delusional. The first two items on that list contradict most of the rest. The ones that don't would be a waste of time, possibly would violate the First Amendment, or are simply too stupid to be credible.
ReplyDeleteNot only are the following thirteen "proposals" contrary to the first two moderating declarations, but like the rest of the President's agenda, at odds with the current political reality in DC. Any real gun law reform in the next decade, will be spawned in the Statehouses across the nation (which are ignored by the NRA's PAC) as opposed to any marginal and ineffective legislation which will be laughed out of a Congressional committee. The once omnipotent Obama is now but a paper tiger. Any real legislation will bear the name Cuomo, O'Malley, Quinn, or Brown upon it's passage.
DeleteIf you seek change, then you must first come to terms with reality.
We have. We hope someday you'll join us. But far be it from me to imply that I support that Liverpudlian wacko.
DeleteThe NRA is but one organization. There are many others, some working on the state and local level, and others that are national. All of them are protecting our gun rights. The traitors and tyrants that you named are only poisoning their own kingdoms. New York and California are already bad. Illinois's governor is soon to face something he hates--legal concealed carry--thanks to the Seventh Circuit ruling.
Liverpudlian eh? Do you mean to imply that I am the infamous pooch?
DeleteBut as a form of Ideological Welfare given to support the pauper of the political realm that is Gun Rights, it would be wise to ignore the feeble and conflicted Federal strongman, and turn ones attention to the real threat. The Second Amendment (as with all other personal Freedoms) will not be eliminated in one fell swoop. Rather the Constitution will suffer a slow death by a thousand cuts over the next half century. You should find it interesting that the Gun Manufacturing States New York, Maryland, Connecticut, New Jersey, California, Illinois, and Massachusetts are the States which are already "lost" to the cause of gun rights. Therefore no funds will be spent to protect the few privileges that remain. When the hammer of the Statehouse finally comes to bear, will these manufactures (facing lawsuits, labor disputes, and punitive taxation) have the financial resources to relocate to a freer State? Will the laws of Vermont or Arkansas or Texas have any bearing on the price increase that will ensue? If one is free to arm oneself yet one cannot afford to arm oneself, is there any practical difference in the means of achieving a disarmed populace? You seem like you would understand the monster that we have created. Once it has been initiated, the disease is impossible to contain. My advice to you is to buy a map and book a flight, while you are still free to leave.
I was referring to John Lennon and deliberately misusing the lyrics of his song, "Imagine," since I can't stand him.
DeleteBut don't worry about gun prices in the future. Good firearm designs are available in the public domain, and starting a business to manufacture them isn't difficult in states that value freedom. See Kel-Tech in Florida, for example. Historic makers can move easily, since there are many states that would welcome them with open arms and many gifts. Besides, guns last a long time.
This plan, courtesy of the morons who can't come up with a budget in 4 years.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
Two of those years where they controlled both chambers of congress and the WH......
ReplyDeleteyup they sure are efficient....
Wow what a great list. Why didn't they just not create the following list:
ReplyDelete1. Make it illegal to illegally shoot someone.
That would solve all of our gun problems and save 14 bullet points of worthless drivel in the process.