More ideally something both sides walk away feeling they got the better side of the deal. Keeping in guns only one might trade a federal magazine-capacity limit for easing access to concealed carry permits in those states that make it a nightmare. In a guns for cash sense, I might trade a 10-rnd cap for de-funding PBS and the NEA. It is really just about ensuring that the concession actually offers both sides a victory and leave them feeling they got the better deal or at least didn't get ripped off too badly.
i don't see how the ability to fire fewer bullets at a time even comes close to de-funding one of the largest education benefits this country has ever produced. nor do i see how the de-funding has anything to do with guns whatsoever, and to me this is merely a ploy to destroy something conservatives have insisted is rotting our children's brains by simply existing.
now, on a trade for concealed carry permits -- that is something that could be discussed in this scenario. my position, and others advocating for these laws also believe, that we should be able to deter criminals from getting guns as much as possible without infringing on the rights of the responsible individuals. and although i think CCW does not make anyone any safer, if we establish a federal minimum guideline which includes mandatory repeat testing like a driver's license i would feel more at ease with expanding its reach.
i was merely pointing out the nature of how this type of discussion does not ever focus on the death toll, when that is the sole purpose of having a gun to begin with. if you like, i could link a set of stories (and even confine it to one single thread since you say you're tired of the gun debate here) of the number of people who mishandle or misuse their guns resulting in the death of innocent people. and this would be in addition to the number of innocents killed for no other reason than someone had a gun and used it on them. and all the other 20-50 deaths per day related to guns in the US. when the number of gun related deaths is nearly equal to the number of people killed by cars, we have more than just a personal rights issue. i don't care if you're swayed by anything i say, i only care that you understand it is a societal issue, not an individual one. we have limits on our 1st amendment rights, but for some reason the 2nd one gets a free pass.
You ask that mere months after that hack-rag of a newspaper released the names and addresses of citizens with concealed carry?
i won't defend their decision to publish the names, because i thought it was a boneheaded move to try to score a political point. it was also not quite the same type of data we are talking about. if we want to stop going in circles about how deadly guns are to our society, we need to be able to study the issue properly. as a numbers guy, i would expect you to see the value in data that can be shared and studied. instead we get data which must be locked away, lest we learn anything from it.
Kind of ducking the issue, I'm not really interested in why you think guns should be restricted. As to that case though, I don't know the specific, I would point out that if a store lost 600 TVs in one year it would be none of anyone's business except the owner of the store, unless he was claiming theft. To you a gun is an evil thing, one being lost is a big deal, to me it is no more of a concern then if they'd lost a bunch of toasters or blenders.
if people began killing each other with TVs or toasters or blenders, i could see your point. also, one lost gun is probably not a big deal. 600 in one year (to the tune of 1.5 lost per day on average) is definitely an evil thing. a gun dealer which is known to have a lax attitude about following the federal laws and is putting weapons into the hands of criminals? yes that is also definitely an evil thing. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/badger-guns-lost-license-over-serious-infractions-f64f9bt-142277065.html
see the article above and the link below. the store is/was called "Badger Guns" and they are under "new ownership" for the 3rd time in 7 years, although the "new" owner is simply the original owner's second son after both the father and son had their dealership licenses revoked. the article below does a great job explaining how rogue dealerships can stay in business by reincorporating with a different owner and erasing their outstanding violations. it also explains how the ATF is basically hamstrung on enforcement because of the Tiahrt amendment, among other reasons. it is reported that only 1% of gun dealers are responsible for over 50% of guns used in crimes. let's get some enforcement of the laws which already exist and shut down these rogue shops. maybe then we can have a civil discussion as a nation about how best to stop the rest of the gun violence.
and as i have said elsewhere in this thread: i don't see anything being taken away from gun owners with the legislation pending in the Senate, so i'm not sure how to begin to have a quid pro quo on the issue when gun owners are literally having nothing taken from them if all of the new bills pass. as stated above, i don't mind the idea of trading one gun related bill for another if it means actually being able to enforce the laws as written, and making it safer and less deadly to have so many guns in our society.
"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
*NM*
- 22/03/2013 07:35:13 PM
610 Views