Biden to unveil gun control measures, appoint ATF chief

[We Never Know]

That depends, has he been arrested in the past for threats of violence, stalking, assault, drunkenness, drug possession, domestic abuse, or social disturbance? Would he be able to pass a test involving every aspect of gun ownership and usage, as well as a psyche evaluation? If not, he would be denied a license to purchase, own, carry, or use a firearm. He would have to steal one, which would then be reported, and investigated. Making his desire to commit mass murder much more difficult.
Of course you don't. You're trying very hard not to. You're telling yourself that if regulation can't stop EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of gun violence, it can't stop ANY INSTANCE of gun violence. Which is patently absurd, of course. But the gun fetish in this country is so powerful that it obscures all sense of reason and proportion. And causes the fetishists to reach for and accept even the most absurd justifications.

No crime can be prevented 100%. But they can all be prevented a great majority of the time with effective policing (regulation). Very few gun deaths are the result of people plotting and planning to kill someone else regardless of the law or the consequences. They are the result of a moment of mental and emotional instability, often brought on by drugs or alcohol, and by innate ant-social tendencies. So the people who tend to engage in this sort of behavior should not be allowed access to firearms. It's that simple. And the fact that you're trying to argue with this logic using the absurd idea that the only acceptable criteria for regulation is absolute perfection makes it clear to me that you aren't thinking clearly about this at all.
It doesn't matter. If everyone around him DOES care about following the regulations, they will not be enabling his violent insanity as they are currently doing, because they will care about the consequences, to themselves, if they're caught.

People used to think nothing of driving drunk. And as a result a lot of innocent citizens were killed and maimed every year on our roads. Eventually we realized that we had to seriously tighten up the regulations involved in driving motor vehicles, and because we did so. we significantly minimized the number of citizens being killed by drunk drivers each year. We didn't stop it from happening completely, but we did significantly minimize it's occurrence. It's just common sense. Some people can't be allowed to drive because they cannot do so safely or responsibly. And the same is true of people owning, carrying, and using firearms.

In my opinion anyone who has been arrested of a violent crime and found guilty, should not be permitted to own a firearm or should at least have restrictions on owning a firearm.
Being drunk or drug possession shouldn't be included in that. I think its already a law that if you are under the influence(drugs or alcohol) its illegal for one to be in possession of a firearm.

 

[esmith]

In my opinion anyone who has been arrested of a violent crime and found guilty, should not be permitted to own a firearm or should at least have restrictions on owning a firearm.
Being drunk or drug possession shouldn't be included in that. I think its already a law that if you are under the influence(drugs or alcohol) its illegal for one to be in possession of a firearm.

Not a federal law and I do not know of any State that has such law. However, if they became a felon because of being drunk or drug possession then they can not be in possession of a firearm

 

[Twilight Hue]

Actually the M15 is made by Classic Army.
The AR-15 and M16 are both made by Colt and the AR-15 is the civilian version of the M16.

That's correct. Little known fact. Fisher Price got into the military arms market as well. Let's just say it didn't last long. *,grin*

 

[PureX]

Criminals don't obey laws. Any new laws will be ignored by them.

EVERY law will be ignored by them, they are CRIMINALS, after all, by definition. So, are you suggesting that we eliminate all our laws because the criminals will ignore them?

 

[We Never Know]

Not a federal law and I do not know of any State that has such law. However, if they became a felon because of being drunk or drug possession then they can not be in possession of a firearm

It is almost always a crime to possess a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance. Many states also prohibit people from carrying a firearm into establishments that serve liquor (such as bars and nightclubs), even with a concealed carry permit, and even if you are not drinking.

Is it Illegal to Possess a Firearm While Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs?.

 

[We Never Know]

EVERY law will be ignored by them, they are CRIMINALS, after all, by definition. So, are you suggesting that we eliminate all our laws because the criminals will ignore them?

No its is you suggesting new laws will affect them. New laws only affect law abiding citizens.

 

[PureX]

Not a federal law and I do not know of any State that has such law. However, if they became a felon because of being drunk or drug possession then they can not be in possession of a firearm

That's what needs to change. Most of the advance indicators for gun violence are misdemeanors, and so do not preclude the very people who are most likely to commit gun violence from getting guns. Road rage, bar fights, drunk driving, domestic violence, public nuisance, stalking, and so on all end up being misdemeanors that do not show up when these people go to buy a gun. Yet these are the exact people we most need to keep from getting one.

 

[esmith]

EVERY law will be ignored by them, they are CRIMINALS, after all, by definition. So, are you suggesting that we eliminate all our laws because the criminals will ignore them?

I think what is being said is that new laws will not affect criminals, therefore why introduce new laws that only non-criminals will obey.
Your argument holds no water in that laws keep law abiding citizens law abiding.

 

[We Never Know]

Not a federal law and I do not know of any State that has such law. However, if they became a felon because of being drunk or drug possession then they can not be in possession of a firearm

That's true for any felony, violent or not.

 

[esmith]

That's what needs to change. Most of the advance indicators for gun violence are misdemeanors, and so do not preclude the very people who are most likely to commit gun violence from getting guns. Road rage, bar fights, drunk driving, domestic violence, public nuisance, and so on all end up being misdemeanors that do not show up when these people go to buy a gun. Yet these are the exact people we most need to keep from getting one.

guess you want laws that would stop a person from obtaing a drivers license since those indicators would also apply to driving a vehicle.

 

[PureX]

No its is you suggesting new laws will affect them. New laws only affect law abiding citizens.

We're ALL "law abiding" until we aren't. The question is who among us is most likely to become non-law-abiding, and how do we keep them from having a gun in their hand when they cross that line? That's what the regulation should be about, and for.

 

[esmith]

It is almost always a crime to possess a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance. Many states also prohibit people from carrying a firearm into establishments that serve liquor (such as bars and nightclubs), even with a concealed carry permit, and even if you are not drinking.

Is it Illegal to Possess a Firearm While Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs?.

Depends on State laws. No federal law.

 

[We Never Know]

That's what needs to change. Most of the advance indicators for gun violence are misdemeanors, and so do not preclude the very people who are most likely to commit gun violence from getting guns. Road rage, bar fights, drunk driving, domestic violence, public nuisance, and so on all end up being misdemeanors that do not show up when these people go to buy a gun. Yet these are the exact people we most need to keep from getting one.

I disagree with misdemeanor for drunk driving or possession of pot being an advance indicator for gun violence.
It shows bad judgement in meet cases at best.

 

[PureX]

guess you want laws that would stop a person from obtaing a drivers license since those indicators would also apply to driving a vehicle.

Motor vehicles are not designed specifically to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible. They have another intended use.

 

[esmith]

We ALL "law abiding" until we aren't. The question is who among us is most likely to become non-law-abiding, and how do we keep them from having a gun in their hand when they cross that line? That's what the regulation should be about, and for.

It is called "due process". One must be adjudgicated of a felony or mental illness. Opinions do not count.

 

[PureX]

I disagree with misdemeanor for drunk driving or possession of pot being an advance indicator for gun violence.
It shows bad judgement in meet cases at best.

And it's exactly that "bad judgment" that should be a major concern to us regrinding gun possession. Especially when that "bad judgment" is in relation to the safety and well-being of others.

 

[esmith]

Motor vehicles are not designed specifically to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible. They have another intended use.

Doesn't make any difference you can kill with a vehicle just as with a firearm.

 

[We Never Know]

We ALL "law abiding" until we aren't. The question is who among us is most likely to become non-law-abiding, and how do we keep them from having a gun in their hand when they cross that line? That's what the regulation should be about, and for.

I personally think all criminal records(including SIS probation where the charge is pretty much dropped after probation) and all medical records for(treatment for depression, schizophrenia, etc) should be made available to the government when doing background checks on the purchase of a firearm. But then you get into violating people rights and so in.

 

[PureX]

It is called "due process". One must be adjudgicated of a felony or mental illness. Opinions do not count.

It's not about declaring anyone, anything. It's about using past behavior to predict future behavior.

 

[PureX]

Doesn't make any difference you can kill with a vehicle just as with a firearm.

This is an idiotic correlation.