sort by best latest
And this is what passes for "common sense" amoung the anti-firearm crowd. No wonder they have lost in the public opinion, the courts and the legislatures.
Yeah...and we should fine all the automakers and the UAW every time someone with a suspended license finds his way behind the wheel of a car. Or for that matter every time someone speeds and causes an accident since the car can go faster than 70 mph
Actually I think manufacturers would be pretty good at registering and keeping track of guns. I didn't say I'd actually do it, but it is at least a proposed solution. The pro-gun side has offered nothing so really is in no position to complain.
hard to argue with the fact that the NRA and Rabid pro-gun lobby realy has offered up nothing,... and i'm pro-gun,.. and i'm the 1st to admit that all the pro-gun side has offered is the word "NO"
The "pro gun": side has offered up the radical solution of punishing those who offend and hurt the innocent. I know that some of you consider this a "non starter" since it actually requires people to be responsible for their own actions
Guns do end up in the hands of people who should not have them. People or organizations along that transfer chain should be held "responsible for their actions." That is what registration would allow for. That's the point.
Calif. has full registration. Calif has some of the highest crime rates in the country. Same with Chicago. Junk would have the maker of seat belt material for a car be responsible for the drunk driver who kills an innocent. And this is "reasonable."
Jack, I said nothing about registration impacting crime rates. I said nothing about automobiles. I said nothing about reasonable, but yes many people do find registration to be perfectly reasonable. Deal with it.
Of course, they can't actually justify with logic or reason why registration is "reasonable" but it makes them ffeeelll ggoodd to call for it. Some people search for Bigfoot, others for the Loch Ness serpent, and some for gun registration rationals.
My justification was posted a few comments up. No one is searching for a rational. You are just ignoring it and posting some creepy comments about the Lochness monster making you feel good. No one is interested in what you do with your gun in private
Here's his "justification." Ed shoots a man with a gun he stole from Bob, who bought the gun from Sam 3 years ago, who bought the gun from Sue's Gun Shop 9 years ago. Junk wants registration so Bob, Sam and Sue can be charged money for Fred's crime.
If Bob properly secured his weapon and immediately reported it stolen than he did nothing wrong. Fred, who stole it and committed the crime would be fully responsible. You are once again inventing arguments I haven't made.
We do have scroll back, junk, and that is not what you posted earlier. Besides, I don't know very many people who leave their guns laying about on lawns, sidewalks and street corners for anyone to steal. Do you really think this is a problem?
I talked about holding people accountable for their actions. If no wrong action occurred (e.g. improperly securing or transferring weapon) than there is no action to hold accountable. You brought up theft, not me, but yes, proper storage is an issue.
I guess it was some other Junk who wanted to fine those who had nothing to do with the gun's misuse in a crime a "million dollars." My bad...
Then again, upon further reflection (and scroll back) I find out it really was ~you.~ What a surprise.
The point of the threat of a fine would be to induce manufactures to implement an effective registration system. They would rarely, if ever, actually be fined. It isn't surprising that you don't understand a relatively simple policy strategy.
Passing a law threatening a law abiding company on an issue that they have absolutely no control over once the gun leaves their building and never enforcing the law regardless is "common sense" gun control? We can't make this type of nonsense up,
It's a simple idea to develop a registration system. Your dramatics, name-calling, and inventing stuff I supposedly said don't change that. Do you have something rational at all to say about the idea or not? Your spastics really aren't of interest.
Junk can't actually lay out a simple, workable idea for a registration system run by the manufacturers that will actually do what he says. But he can post about it all day long, eh. And then blame others when we point out his obvious failings.
The point isn't to actually develop the system. The point would be to incentivize the development of a system by manufacturers. I think that is pretty clear. So again, do you have an actual thought about the idea or just more insults?
as noted.... junk really can't come up with his supposed "simple" system that is actually workable. But it sure is a common sense solution, eh. And he has to blame me for pointing out his inability. :-)
The idea is to provide the incentive for someone ELSE to develop the system. I can't be any clearer than that. You are still evidently talking to an imaginary person in your head.
junk is all hat and no cattle. He understands that his idea is totally unreasonable so he passes the responsibility for somehow making it "reasonable" to another party. And this is "common sense" gun control at its finest.
I obviously don't find my own idea unreasonable and never said anything about passing responsibility, so I still have no idea who you are talking to.
That's okay, junk.... we understand.
- See all 25 commentsHide extra comments