A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said.A lot of that makes sense to me. But sensible policy is not necessarily popular policy. Let's face it -- Biden and Obama are injecting "go juice" directly into the veins of the Tea Party. Do they really want to revive the monster just before the fight over the debt ceiling?
Tuesday, January 08, 2013
Aw, shoot
Never mind the arguments for and against gun control: I do not favor the idea of Barack Obama wasting hard-won political capital on this issue. If you can't win a fight, don't fight. Polls indicate that most Americans still oppose any restrictions on the right to own firearms. From the WP:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
No restrictions? Are any background checks required in the US, or can anyone just go and buy themselves a dozen guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition??
There's the Brady Bill, b.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Handgun_Violence_Prevention_Act
But it applies only if you buy from a licensed dealer. If you're buying from the average shmoe -- have fun!
Yeah, when my husband and I purchased guns down here in Dixie Land, we were required to submit to a background check. It was done with a picture ID and right through the computer [or maybe it was phoned in, I don't recall]. But it was almost an instantaneous sort of thing. We got a clean check and we were good to go.
My understanding is that it's the myriad of gun shows [big in my area] where the problems crop up. No ID, no background check, nada. For me recently the LA buyback was a mind-blowing article--lots of nasty looking weapons and . . . grenade launchers turned in for gift certificates.
Grenade launchers? Really? How do you square that with hunting or even home defense?
As for the push for gun regulation, particularly when it involves military-grade weapons and clips? To me it sounds absolutely reasonable. Which, I guess is why the Tea Party contingent is howling.
But you're right--there are many unresolved issues on the table. And the politicians in DC don't appear capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. IMHO, they have to get this filibuster question resolved, toute suite. Otherwise, we're going to have another 4 years of obstruction and nothing will get done, regardless of the merits.
Obama is going to have to pick and choose his battles carefully because within 18 months his political clout will be the stuff of memory.
This is what happens when you're learning on the job!
Peggysue
The problem is, when they know who has the weapons, they know who to confiscate from.
Many remember the Katrina gun round-up, so they choose to buy from say, Tennessee where no waiting period, or registrations is required.
I'm afraid you are going to have to close comments on this one too Joe.
Ben
Anonymous @ 7:57 protections from confiscations by overzealous local officials could be written into any registration and storage laws but wouldn't have to because such legislation doesn't violate the intent of the Second Amendment.
The gun grab paranoia is a topic best left for another blogs because it eclipses the CD Loons output any day.
Actually, a very narrow interpretation would limit gun ownership to National Guard members only.
http://inthesetimes.com/article/14287/executioner_in_chief/
why should the "anti-government right" surrender guns to a war criminal regieme?
or a-g left, if there is still one extant.
A few short notes:
The "gunshow loophole" is simple: A face to face sale between two private parties does not require a Form 9973 or a NICS check. Its private. You can opt for one, and you can probably find a FFL (Fed Firearm Liscened) dealer willing to do one for $5 or so, but at the same time many of these guys want $25-50 to do this. $5 is reasonable, $25 is not. Sorry.
Grenade Launchers are NFA (National Firearms Act) DDs (Destructive Devices) and are limited to a full ATF background check, LEO signoff, and a $200 tax stamp. Furthermore, each grenade, should you find them, would be applicable to the SAME rules.
That said, you do not find NFA equipment at your average gun show, and all of those grenades appearing South of the border aren't being bought legally anywhere, but are probably shipped over from former Soviet countries who need to make a buck, same as all the automatic machine guns ("assault rifles," if you will) that you see on the tables.
Common sense needs to apply both ways in gun control, but all too often if you're not with the Antis, you're against them. That's the problem.
FWIW, this pro-gunner is very much a fan of the NICS system, would love to open it to private use, and thinks intelligent use of mental health is a great thing as long as its not abused.
That said, most of the nonsense crapped out of the anti's thinktanks isn't very common sense, either, and all it does is galvanize actual gunnuts into flipping their shit.
Do they really want to revive the monster just before the fight over the debt ceiling?
But there'll always be something in the way - some excuse - that's probably how things have got this bad....on many other fronts too.
"If not now - when?"
I think you're right Mr. Mike; in fact, prescient.
The National Guard Loophole looks bigger, every day.
Ben
You cannot simply walk into another state and purchase you firearm without "registration." Well, you can, but then the TN FFL has to transfer it to your homestate FFL, who in turn files a 9973 for your weapon (as well as the one out there when you bought it in TN, NICS is Federal, not state).
FWIW, the National Guard is not the Militia. The Militia has already been described verbatim in early documents (and no, I'm not researching because I'm lazy) as essetintally all abled bodied men between 16 and 34.
Finally, Heller already interperts it as an individual right, and "well regulated" does not mean what you think it means.
Its cliche, but if you take away guns, people will just find other ways to brutalize each other...and the places where the weak and easily hurt congregate will be even more of a juicy target than before. If, as an insane dbag, I want to murder 20 people but I only have a baseball bat am I going to goto a street corner with adult men on it, or an nursery school with women and babies?
You've been looking at the wrong polls, Joe. I'm a gun owner and a shooter. But there are people walking among us that have no business owning or even thinking about using a weapon. Registering a user and a weapon IS NOT confiscation. And the paranoids among us who believe that are just that, poor pathetic paranoids that need adult supervision. Military weaponry is designed to kill people and the poor paranoids who think that they have to have one or more...well what's next? RPG's? Mortars?
The major problem beyond the proliferation of guns is the legislators that we call on to deal with it. If that that bunch was any more stupid, they'd have to watered twice a week.
Post a Comment