NEW BILL WOULD REQUIRE GUN OWNERS TO GET 5 YEAR FEDERAL LICENSE

[Ecclectic Collector]

My cynical self things that one reason EU countries and places like Australia instituted outright bans we a way to pretend to address a problem by tossing the already licensed and law abiding in their respective countries under the bus (so to speak).

The illegal trade of black market military arms is a world wide problem.

The gun ban crowd thrives of self delusion and ignorance to think that by banning legal avenues of ownership they'll end a problem. We know better.

[BuckeyeSteve]

Big IF! There are occasions where long guns can be sold person to person, not so for firearms (primarily pistols) as defined in PA law, but it is Federal law that it is illegal to sell to a prohibited person in any case, in any state, with or without a background check. Most gun show promoters require background checks as a condition of participation.

If a bad guy wants a gun, there are illegal sellers out there. In Australia which has pretty much banned semi-auto guns, the big problem they have with illegal guns is biker gangs bringing in real full auto AKs from overseas. Lots of old true weapons of war out there for the highest bidder if you are so inclined. The drug cartels that import drugs will also import guns, if they were made illegal here.

The real problem is why do folks have the mindset that shooting people is an acceptable way to go thru life? Not the way I was brought up. Popping a cap because that dude dissed me is not a mark of civilized society.

I agree with all of this.... though I think there is still something to be said for making it difficult instead of easy. If a true "bad guy" wants a gun, and has enough money, you are right, they will get it. What can be better controlled is the pissed off kid or ex-BF or suicidal youth who wants to do something drastic. If it requres dealing with the cartel, those mass shootings will go down by 99%. The much less common planned terrorist attack will still happen, because they will spend years of time planning and come up with the money to execute the plan. We'll never get away from that (at this stage of the game), but I think our society can still decrease the low-level planned school shootings and the spur of the moment anger shootings.

Your last point... the "people's mindset" thing.... is absolutely correct. But, I think fixing 100 million parents skills (and efforts) at teaching kids to be better people is more difficult to do than making the most dangerous of guns a little more difficult (not impossible, just difficult) to get.

[RockIsland]

Thank you, and well said. Like I said.... I didn't realize I was opening this can of worms. I'm a gun owner and sportsman, and wasn't here to fight or get attacked as a liberal.

Well, when you are spouting the anti-gunners propaganda and talking points verbatim on a gun owner's forum, what else could you really expect?

This site is actually one of the best places to learn about gun law. There are also substantial debates regarding the Constitution and the intent of our nation's founders in establishing our representative republic. You would also be hard pressed to find a better source of gay stormtrooper and furry/broney memes anywhere.

If you are truly open minded, you will find that most supporters of the 2A, are supporters of the Constitition as a whole. Many are also more well versed on its original intent, and not the latest modern interpretation of a "living/breathing" document, written by old white slave owners, as a large number of constitutional scholars, like our last POTUS tend to believe.

To me, you seem to be quite judgement also, and that you have your mind made up about political talking points without really having given them much thought or research. This is not a personal attack on you, just a casual observation and assessment of your posts.

I beleive that we have two eyes and two ears, but only one mouth for a reason.

[BuckeyeSteve]

My cynical self things that one reason EU countries and places like Australia instituted outright bans we a way to pretend to address a problem by tossing the already licensed and law abiding in their respective countries under the bus (so to speak).

The illegal trade of black market military arms is a world wide problem.

The gun ban crowd thrives of self delusion and ignorance that by banning legal avenues of ownership they'll end a problem. We know better.

I think that it's important to understand that the gun control (I'm not going to go with "gun ban" for myself) crowd doesn't think it will "end a problem". They (we) think it will decrease a problem. If 300 mass shootings (using an overly liberal definition of mass shooting) a year can be turned into 150, it's a win. It's not an ended problem, but it's a big improvement if my kid's school shooting is one of the ones that didn't happen. It would take years, but we could turn 300 in to 200 in a few years, and get it down to 100 ten years after that, and down to 50 ten years after that. With good laws and great enforcement, gun collectors and sportsmen can have guns guns of any reasonable kind and we can minimize the non-terrorist (probably bad verbage) shootings. For the record, without going in to too much detail, my family has been heavily affected by gun violence.... the shooter was my best friend and close relative, and he shouldn't have had the gun. I loved him....but he shouldn't have had the gun.

[BuckeyeSteve]

Well, when you are spouting the anti-gunners propaganda and talking points verbatim on a gun owner's forum, what else could you really expect?

This site is actually one of the best places to learn about gun law. There are also substantial debates regarding the Constitution and the intent of our nation's founders in establishing our representative republic. You would also be hard pressed to find a better source of gay stormtrooper and furry/broney memes anywhere.

If you are truly open minded, you will find that most supporters of the 2A, are supporters of the Constitition as a whole. Many are also more well versed on its original intent, and not the latest modern interpretation of a "living/breathing" document, written by old white slave owners, as a large number of constitutional scholars, like our last POTUS tend to believe.

To me, you seem to be quite judgement also, and that you have your mind made up about political talking points without really having given them much thought or research. This is not a personal attack on you, just a casual observation and assessment of your posts.

I beleive that we have two eyes and two ears, but only one mouth for a reason.

Fair enough... I don't agree that my positions aren't fairly thoroughly thought out....but your points are valid and understandable.

[Tacgunner]

I"ll jump in on this with some gasoline:

It boils down to WHO is allowed to own a firearm, right? We can go out in the weeds on this and start splitting hairs over every infraction that denies you the right. There's insanity in the rules right now. If a person accidentally kills somebody, they go to jail. They are denied the right to own firearms, yes? They "serve their time" of XX years and are done with the system. Once you have served, you should have all your rights reinstated, correct? So the person who accidentally killed somebody (not using a firearm) can vote, drive a car and own knives, but not a gun? how is that right, to permanently remove a right once they have fully served their sentence?

As for this silly "National Firearms Owner Permit" bullshyte: then what is the whole point of having an FFL to go to? Make this NFOP thing equal to an FFL, and while we are at it, have an APP for your phone to do background checks. Why even have the FFL and NICS at a brick & mortar store? Automate it and we are done. Put all the info in the phone, tap a button and you get a green or red light for the transfer. Done. Person wanting the gun pays a flat fee via electronic payment before the button is pushed.

Do I want an electronic system like this? No, it begs for data that can be used wrongly. A better answer is enforcing the sentencing laws we have and keeping criminals in jail for crimes committed. No one wants full prisons to pay for, but bringing back the "Big House" way of doing things might make even the stupid criminals think twice before committing crimes.

There is no easy answer to any of these things. No big blanket answer to throw over the whole ugly mess. All these issues need great thought as to how they work together in a larger picture. It's just as complicated as the healthcare issue (that we never really solved). A quickly cobbled together answer is no answer at all, it will only create more problems that we have to address later. All of us need to ponder what, if anything, needs to change, and how it affects not just our side of the debate, but all angles of it. Politicians who want to stand up and wave flags and shout need to sit down and shut up. They only have votes in the game, the rest of us have our way of life in this game.

//Rant off//

[Ecclectic Collector]

First: sorry that you've personally been affected by someone who committed a violent act. Knowing someone should not possess a weapon and feeling helpless to stop them certainly adds weight to your conviction that something better should have happened before the tragedy.

While you feel that a licensing system would be helpful I really think you are alluding to the proposed Red Flag laws.

The current problem with the majority of these is that they are being proposed by people who are ignoring all the legal precedent in regards to "due process" clause so central to United States law. Those legal protections are there for a very good reason and cannot be discarded so easily.

Nobody wants to see a Parkland type mass shooting. However the dude (I refuse to use his name) had multiple police encounters prior to the shooting. The FBI was even warned about his intentions... and nobody did a DAMN thing until he carried it out.

There was ample just cause to do an involuntary mental evaluation (which would have automatically made him a prohibited person for life). Yet, he was ignored with tragic consequences.

Should we blame the gun in this case, or a systematic failure of every safeguard in place? You can find plenty of cases where there were warning signs that were ignored with a majority of other spree shooters as well. So if we really want to do something, perhaps the first step should be to have law enforcement be more proactive within the body of existing law and use tools they already have.

[Hodgie]

I"ll jump in on this with some gasoline:

It boils down to WHO is allowed to own a firearm, right? We can go out in the weeds on this and start splitting hairs over every infraction that denies you the right. There's insanity in the rules right now. If a person accidentally kills somebody, they go to jail. They are denied the right to own firearms, yes? They "serve their time" of XX years and are done with the system. Once you have served, you should have all your rights reinstated, correct? So the person who accidentally killed somebody (not using a firearm) can vote, drive a car and own knives, but not a gun? how is that right, to permanently remove a right once they have fully served their sentence?

As for this silly "National Firearms Owner Permit" bullshyte: then what is the whole point of having an FFL to go to? Make this NFOP thing equal to an FFL, and while we are at it, have an APP for your phone to do background checks. Why even have the FFL and NICS at a brick & mortar store? Automate it and we are done. Put all the info in the phone, tap a button and you get a green or red light for the transfer. Done. Person wanting the gun pays a flat fee via electronic payment before the button is pushed.

Do I want an electronic system like this? No, it begs for data that can be used wrongly. A better answer is enforcing the sentencing laws we have and keeping criminals in jail for crimes committed. No one wants full prisons to pay for, but bringing back the "Big House" way of doing things might make even the stupid criminals think twice before committing crimes.

There is no easy answer to any of these things. No big blanket answer to throw over the whole ugly mess. All these issues need great thought as to how they work together in a larger picture. It's just as complicated as the healthcare issue (that we never really solved). A quickly cobbled together answer is no answer at all, it will only create more problems that we have to address later. All of us need to ponder what, if anything, needs to change, and how it affects not just our side of the debate, but all angles of it. Politicians who want to stand up and wave flags and shout need to sit down and shut up. They only have votes in the game, the rest of us have our way of life in this game.

//Rant off//

But then people like Larry Krasner wouldn't have a job as well as an endless supply of victims.

[gghbi]

I think that it's important to understand that the gun control (I'm not going to go with "gun ban" for myself) crowd doesn't think it will "end a problem". They (we) think it will decrease a problem. If 300 mass shootings (using an overly liberal definition of mass shooting) a year can be turned into 150, it's a win. It's not an ended problem, but it's a big improvement if my kid's school shooting is one of the ones that didn't happen. It would take years, but we could turn 300 in to 200 in a few years, and get it down to 100 ten years after that, and down to 50 ten years after that. With good laws and great enforcement, gun collectors and sportsmen can have guns guns of any reasonable kind and we can minimize the non-terrorist (probably bad verbage) shootings. For the record, without going in to too much detail, my family has been heavily affected by gun violence.... the shooter was my best friend and close relative, and he shouldn't have had the gun. I loved him....but he shouldn't have had the gun.

Thanks for opening up on that perspective. You might find the info in this link of interest; https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...nty-officials/ It points out how the push to 'normalize' mental issues has caused a lot of folks who should be secured for their own and others safety cannot be is responsible for at least one of our recent school shootings. I believe that a bit of research will also show it is this resistance to securing the mentally ill is behind Adam Lanza killing his mom and giong on that killing spree. I am sorry to hear of your situation, there is not much more I can say on that.

[streaker69]

How about we just actually enforce the existing gun laws, and not plead down and give probation to those that break those laws? I'm reminded of the story that I posted hear previously about the heroin addict that stole her father's guns and sold them. Her punishment? House arrest and $4000 in restitution. The justice system is broken, but hey, let's keep putting more obstacles in the way of those that actually follow the law, because that will solve all the problems.

The majority of cases where someone went on a killing spree, there were clear signs and failures along the way to actually do something before it happened. I'm not in favor of redflag laws, as we know they will be abused, but there are many cases where someone knew the person was prone to violence and did nothing. It isn't that they couldn't have done something without the red flag laws in place, they just didn't do anything.