Re: New school shooting in Houston..
question: do any of the 2nd amendment advocates here actually oppose any of the following proposals?
a) requisite background checks/competence tests
b) closing the gun show loophole
c) teeth for appropriate departments (atf?) to crack down on illegal dealers
d) national registry (private of course)
so it should be clear why manufacturers and especially retailers would oppose most of those measures. the expense of compliance would eat into their margins. well so be it, but from what i've heard and read, economics hasn't really entered into the debate so we can ignore that
i also left out a few pills that might be too tough to swallow, or that maybe just don't make sense; outright bans on assault rifles (classification is tricky, with modifiers and all that), annual psych tests or something (overreach, maybe too arbitrary). the registry might belong in this category as well.
so, as law abiding citizens... anybody fundamentally disagree with the principle that informs the above list? seems to me by the most cited argument i see, you're essentially inclined to support them. i'm talking about the whole "good guy with a gun > bad guy with a gun" argument, and its cousin, to deter potential tyranny; both of those seem to share the same principle. it's not like you want suicidal nutjobs or whatever on your side in a showdown against the american military lol
so the question is then, how do you get more guns into the hands of good guys and out of the hands of bad guys? and the answer is plainly through a screening process of some sort. any any serious shooter or hunter will clearly take the time and spend the money on whatever licensing gets agreed upon. maybe you launch a gun buyback program that offers license vouchers at a higher value than straight dough? something along those lines anyway, dozens of ideas floating around im sure
and i have serious reservations about even entering into that sort of black and white line of thought. its horrifically oversimplified to the point of absurdity. the answer you get to "whats with these crazy people?" is one of two things; "its gun culture" says one side, "they are just crazy" says the other. i dunno, the whole thing just strikes me as a systemic issue far too complicated to attempt to address through any moderate public policy reform
but i'm rambling. the point i want to make is this; having sorta casually followed this whole raging debate for the past few months, everybody just seems talking past one another. the media isn't helping. i just watched a few of those piers morgan debates and they're barely coherent.
i know regular people aren't as bad as talking heads, so i ask again about the policy proposals listed above.
are they fair? are they constitutionally legal? do you think they make sense in light of the recent tragedies?