Personally, I think the list is a horrible, pointless, wasteful distraction. It seems like a way of doing “something” without actually doing anything. And the best features of the list are that 1) profits from it go to The Right Kind Of People, and 2) costs fall on Those Other People.
However, having said that …
Yep.
If the list is worthful; use it.
If it’s worthless; fix it or get rid of it.
Any of those choices are within the gift of the Senators. But supporting the existence of the list and then not using it … WTF is that?
As far as I can tell, the purpose of a government is to protect the ultra-rich from any harshness of reality, to keep the wealth and resources limited to a very select few, and to maintain the status quo for everyone else.
What do you mean “do nothing”? They helped pass the Patriot Act (with the helps of the Dems). And the War on Terror. Which gave us lots of lists of names, which gave us a lot of people stuck in Gitmo. Who, despite Obama pledging to do something about it, is till alive and kicking full of people who are in there for unknown reasons for an unknown amount of time.
Hell, Trump even has a shot at being President. You want him in charge of adding names to a list with no oversight and no path of correction? Knowing his type, I bet he makes lists of people all the time.
Do not further empower a corrupt system. Rights watch groups have been highlighting the bullshit of the no-fly list and other lists for years.
What do you mean? No one is out right saying it because if they said it out loud they would be like, “Oh wait, those bad things are what we would use to black list people from buying guns?”
But Xeni and several people on my face book seem to think that the proposed bill was a good thing. Or if their lambasting of congress means something else, they will have to fill me.
Also, not directed at you but FYI - current laws already prevent foreigners from buying guns. So anyone worried about refugees or illegal aliens need not worry, because you have to be at least a permanent resident to be able to buy a gun. You can’t be here just on a work visa or something. Of course that does no good for domestic terrorism, but given the paranoia of late, I thought I would point that out.
I’ve gotten quite accustomed to being thrown under the bus by the left while the right tries to run me over. At this point I just know better than to trust power.
Nothing stops people from getting guns if they want guns because there’s always someone willing to sell a legally purchased or illegally stolen gun in an illegal purchase. We need to limit the purchase of either guns or ammunition if we want to keep guns out of the hands of killers. But the ability of “responsible gun owners” to go sport shooting (and the ability of gun manufacturers to make money) is more important than human life.
Nearly every gun at a gun show is sold by an FFL, so yes they go through the SAME background check as the would in a store.
There are PRIVATE sellers. They account for only a fraction of the overall available items. Less than 1% of criminals get their guns from gun shows according to a Bureau of Justice survey (albeit an older one). This is a blown out of proportion issue made by people ignorant to the laws we already have and the reality of what goes on at a gun show. 80% of them got them through the black market or from a friend/family member. They do not partake in any system of checks.
But anyway, it is only legal to sell face to face to someone in your state. So they would need at least state ID. Even if they did have state, gun owners are all racists, (amiright?), so they won’t be selling to dirty foreigners anyway.
Elections are a public utility, and need to be publicly funded so as to serve all Americans.
No more pay-to-play!
time to play “I’m totally not a heartless monster, but…”
I also sincerely wish that each and every one of these bought-and-paid-for obstructionist assholes meets an angry gunman holding a legally-acquired weapon, that the senator might experience firsthand just how useful thoughts and prayers are in reducing gun violence.
The senator would be free to use as much thought and/or prayer as they see fit in order to manage the situation.
You just said nothing stops people because someone is always willing to circumvent the law. Then you say you need to limit purchases 0_o.
Check your TARDIS, I think its paradox machine is wonky.
But yes, many of us are worn out from defending 80 million of us because of handful of nut job mass shooters, and ~10,000 criminal murders per year (most of whom are killing other criminals).
They demonize the AR style rifle like is just a baby killing machine. You want to know who are actual baby killing machines?
Parents.
IIRC 2014 FBI lists ~325 homicides by rifle (ALL rifles, even just bolt action hunting rifles). According to USA Today, the FBI stats show on average ~450 children are killed each year by their parents.
How is that for a crazy stat that puts things in perspective.
But I’m equally unimpressed that the Republicans have proposed that we do nothing and accept mass shootings as normal and proper, and that thoughts and prayers are equivalent to doing their job as legislators.
It isn’t a paradox. If you limit purchases of guns and ammunition, the prices go up and [insert your red herring argument about class or racial bias here] fewer people can afford to purchase black market firearms. Yes, this would take decades to reduce the circulation of firearms, but it’s the only practical thing to do when it’s otherwise impossible to stem the flow of guns into the wrong hands. Reduce the availability of ammunition so the guns are worthless.
Again, parents aren’t designed to injure or kill people. Guns are. You continually ignore this point. When you have weaponized parents (or swimming pools or automobiles or staircases) that are designed and marketed for their ability to injure or kill people, then we can talk about regulating those things as much as we need to regulate guns.
I’m all for preventing parents from killing children, but it’s a false dilemma and a red herring to pretend like we have to choose between preventing deaths by guns and deaths by parents. Let’s do both!
I’ve asked before and you’ve never answered, but I’ll ask again: how many deaths is too many for you? What’s the killscore that would cause you to voluntarily give up your supposed right to casually own a firearm (instead of owning it for the express purpose of being a member of a well-regulated militia)? I won’t hold my breath for an answer.
I demonize the AR style rifle because they are actually designed as military-grade assault weapons, not tools for hunting or home defense. The “AR” doesn’t stand for “Awesome Recreation.” And as “tools designed to kill a large number of people” they are very good at what they were built to do.
