POTUS plea to respectable gun owners to support "common sense" gun laws

[MadBomber]

Mostly good, but I definitely have to disagree with #8. There is no moral justification for it. Murder is equally bad if done with a knife, gun, poison, etc. Armed robbery is equally bad if done with a knife, gun, crowbar, etc. Punish the act, not the tool.

#10 is subject to local (as in home-level) jurisdiction.

As always Pudly, you're right. I went a little off the rails on that one. I think I was just trying to throw a (very small) bone to reasonableness with that one.

 

[El-Cigarro]

Why yes, let's make deals to further **** away our rights with a known enemy of gun ownership and the Constitution!

What could go wrong here?

Kinda like Barry's deal with the Iranians......

 

[eric001]

Kind of sort of along the same lines as Rhino...

I will support any and every gun law that abides by the "...shall not be infringed" language in the 2nd Amendment. If it in any way violates that language, regardless of what some or many provide as "reasonable" justifications for it, the law is clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL and needs to be stricken from the books, period. Yes, i actually do realize that pretty much makes a null set. So be it.

Sad that such a situation will probably never happen in reality, but it sure would clean up a lot of the crap that politicians and activist judges have managed to saddle us with over the years.

 

[Sigsauerosarus Rex]

The only thing my war time service in the infantry validates is I was willing to defend our constitution in its entirety with my life, for others either unwilling or incapable of doing so. Not just languish in our freedom.

Let me make myself clear: mass confiscation is against the 2nd and 4th amendments. If reregistration escalates to mass confiscation the government would no longer be valid. I swore an oath to the current constitution, and as an American it is my duty to uphold it.

 

[flatlander]

If they have us register all our weapons I promise you that confiscation would be next. At that point, it's too late to yell about it being unconstitutional and you would be recieving a no-go at this station. We've given up enough already. Do you feel the bubbles yet?
Congrats on being one of many who state they will support and defend based on their .mil experience and continue to allow those very same rights to be worn away a little at a time. Murtha, Gifford and others say the same stuff.
Take that however you want.
Done.

Bob

 

[actaeon277]

Registration

Indiana had it for 20 years. Dropped it because it wasted $$ and had no effect.
Kirk is still trying to find a single instance where it had an effect on crime.
That was $$ that could have been used somewhere else.

Canada is talking about how their registration is losing $$ and having no effect.


So, registration has already been tried, and not worked. And the answer is to try registration?

 

[Twangbanger]

...Let me make myself clear: mass confiscation is against the 2nd and 4th amendments. If reregistration escalates to mass confiscation the government would no longer be valid. I swore an oath to the current constitution, and as an American it is my duty to uphold it.

Registration is the sine qua non of confiscation. It's the pinnacle of what the extremist Everytown against guns movement could possibly want.

Honestly, all the other things you say you advocate to expand gun rights in your 2nd and 3rd posts wouldn't amount to much, and would be pretty much irrelevant, if gun registration ever passes.

But either way - you've had a heck of a first month, new guy! Welcome aboard. At this point, I have to think you either believe registration is a good thing...or you're an Everytown plant. I sure hope it's the first, and we can somehow dispossess you of that erroneous viewpoint.

 

[spec4]

All we need is for SCOTUS to go majority liberal, then they would rule that only police and military can have guns. They would notify everyone on the gun registration list that they have 30 days to turn in their guns or be arrested. And we all know how SCOTUS goes majority liberal; we elect a Dem POTUS. Yeah, I know about Roberts.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

My point is, if we made no exceptions for background checks, the last know owner would have some questions to answer if firearms registered to him started showing up in criminals hands, or if he had guns "stolen and lost" very often.

You know Oregon had a universal background scheme in place. How did it impact Christopher Harper-Mercer?

You know Indiana had a universal background check scheme in place from 1974 to 1998. In what way did it impact crime in Indiana. Name a single prosecution under Indiana's UBC.

Please give us an example of state where the UBC is effective?

You are aware that criminals need not comply with registration schemes, right? The Supreme Court made them immune.

Why would you want to register the guns of the law-abiding? Name one jurisdiction where registration has not lead to confiscation.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Do we support some actual common sense gun laws?

No. We have played their games for decades. It hasn't worked and only made things worse.

Abolish the gun control laws. Let us have our freedom back. Governments have repeatedly failed. They have lost the right to rule over us.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Let me make myself clear: mass confiscation is against the 2nd and 4th amendments. If reregistration escalates to mass confiscation the government would no longer be valid.

Registration only incites governments to confiscation.

There is no Constitutional authority for government to register firearms. Just as there is no Constitutional authority for the government to register newspapers (they tried that once too).

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Registration only incites governments to confiscation.

There is no Constitutional authority for government to register firearms. Just as there is no Constitutional authority for the government to register newspapers (they tried that once too).

If they squint hard enough, I'm sure they could get 5 votes to find the needed authority ... maybe in the Commerce Clause.

 

[KG1]

Look everyone, most of what I support aside from no exemptions on background checks expands firearm liberties.

At least you've stumbled onto the point that most are trying to make in opposition to your background check/registration proposal.

 

[wtfd661]

I support the most common sense gun law of all: Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

I also support another common sense gun law: Indiana Constitution - Article 1 - Bill of Rights - Section 32.

This and only this!

 

[MisterChester]

If we are going to go the legal route we need to do something about the mental health system. Too many people who shouldn't own guns are falling through the cracks. For the most part, gun laws are fine where they are now. Repeal the NFA and gun free zones.

 

[jbombelli]

Removal of gun free zones, federal reciprocal CCWs, A no-nonsense record of transfer of all firearms, background checks on ALL firearms transfers, and armed security in our schools.

Sorry. I won't support mandatory background checks and full registration. And lots of others won't either. Your path leads to eventual confiscation, and isn't workable in the real world anyway.

I'm not registering my guns ever, nor will ever require someone to submit to a background check.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

If we are going to go the legal route we need to do something about the mental health system. Too many people who shouldn't own guns are falling through the cracks. For the most part, gun laws are fine where they are now. Repeal the NFA and gun free zones.

In what way should the "metal health system" be modified that would prevent people from murdering others? Serious question. Mental health problems that lead to people killing other people are 20/20 clear after the fact but I'm not sure how preemptive "the mental health system" can be. I'll be honest, my cynical side believes this will result in gun confiscations on people for nebulous reasons and will still not prevent those with no records, those that suffer in silence, or those whose family and friends are reluctant to step in to still act out.

 

[Mgderf]

I'm not political but this struck a chord with me. In the aftermath of that horrific shooting in Oregon, POTUS pleaded to gun owners of America to support common sense gun laws. Later he says we can follow the examples of Australia and the UK. The UK and Australia have legal gun ownership, if you have the right political connections, but for the basic citizen forget it. He supports a monopoly on firearms by the government and the elite of society it would seem; very un-American in my opinion.


And what of us respectable gun owners? Do we support some actual common sense gun laws? I know I do; but backing the current POTUS efforts for his idea of common sense gun laws is like giving the fox the keys to the hen house. We all remember the ridiculous M855 ban consideration a few months ago, we all remember this administration's efforts to redefine gun violence from crime to a public health concern. All in the name of invasive gun control policies. Does he really think we will back him after that? Or that we do not notice his so-called firearms experts obviously do not have any formal firearms education.

Most gun owners are conservative politically. POTUS acts like he is president of the liberals only, so he burned all the bridges to the conservatives, and any chance he gets to put his thumb in the eye of conservative ideology, he does. Then he asks us to support him, after pretending or political ideology has no voice in "his" America? Well, I guess only when our voice can serve his agendas.

I can honestly say I'm irritated by him using these atrocities as a thin veneer to attempt to push his anti-second amendment agenda.

Sorry, but what's "common sense" to you is complete and utter bovine excrement to me.
Just what part of the term, "...shall not be infringed..." is unclear to you?

 

[calcot7]

Removal of gun free zones, federal reciprocal CCWs, A no-nonsense record of transfer of all firearms, background checks on ALL firearms transfers, and armed security in our schools.

Are you serious about the transfer and background checks? You then, are saying that you are for registration, which we already have anyway, in the NICS system.

 

[pudly]

Are you serious about the transfer and background checks? You then, are saying that you are for registration, which we already have anyway, in the NICS system.

No. Sigs version is much worse. NICS doesn't trace it after you sell it to someone else.