|
Zachack posted:Shifting from an annual fee of $30 to a monthly fee of $30 would seem to shift it into an unreasonable burden. I'm not saying it can't be done but I'm having a hard time thinking of many "common man" government activities that require monthly renewals, let alone constitutional rights. The suggestion wasn't a monthly fee to keep your guns, it was a pre-approval check to buy a new gun in order to make it possible to expand background checks to purchases from private sellers. It would actually save you money if you planned to buy multiple guns from different locations within a 30-day window.
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Different nations should be governed differently. There is no appropriate one-size-fits-all legal regime. Japan, Germany and Iraq do not operate under the US Constitution because we know better than to do things that way. Nothing I posted ever mentored a "one size fits all" policy, unless you that's how you feel about the general preservation of human life. Seriously, after you just responding to this just to try and score points while doing the utmost to completely ignore the point? Why did you even bother? So instead of posting built to knock this down, let's hear your loving plan to stop this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
I think this is the first time we've ever seen a senate mobilize like this in years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Shifting from an annual fee of $30 to a monthly fee of $30 would seem to shift it into an unreasonable burden. I'm not saying it can't be done but I'm having a hard time thinking of many "common man" government activities that require monthly renewals, let alone constitutional rights. To be clear (since some people have accidentally misinterpreted it), the original proposal: Jarmak posted:I like this though I'd make it mandatory and instead of making it a card make it more like a mortgage pre-approvals where I could go to a licensed FFL and for $20 to cover costs get a piece of paper that says I've passed a background check that's good for 30 days or whatever. was that the fee would cover costs and be good for 30 days. If you intend to purchase a gun every 31 days, I suppose it'd be a monthly fee-but that seems like one hell of an edge case. If you bought a gun every other year, you'd need to pay it once every other year. It's not as if you need to re-up your background check monthly in order to maintain legal ownership.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Different nations should be governed differently. There is no appropriate one-size-fits-all legal regime. Japan, Germany and Iraq do not operate under the US Constitution because we know better than to do things that way. You know its a bad day in DnD when a obvious troll is making alot of sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
Geoff Peterson posted:If you start from the idea that any gun license is done with the intent of establishing an economic barrier to gun ownership, then you're entirely correct. My point was that we accept licensing, limitation, and restriction on the practice of religion. I included a couple of examples for the zoning aspect. You're correct that they rarely run into issues with rezoning, but those applications frequently include substantial fees. On tents, the argument is that they aren't really being barred from nicer buildings, they just can't afford them or the fees, and as long as the fees aren't applied in a discriminatory way or shaped to be specifically overburdensome ("everywhere besides this manure field has giant fees") then the tent option should suffice. "Worship in a fancy building complete with AC and decorative fountains" isn't, I think, a tenant of Islam. And governments really have to be careful when structuring these fees, this can't be stressed enough. On Official Gun, I don't think an 18th century blunderbuss would be acceptable, but rather something that meets the expressed purpose of "gun" in the 2nd and in a modern sense. For example (and I get my gun info from video games and most of those have space guns), a 9mm that requires some sort of specific interaction to shoot a 2nd bullet, or only holds 1 bullet, or whatever, and is also not particularly "sexy". Maybe designed in a way that makes modification difficult and obvious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
I have a question regarding gun law and the Orlando shooter. The FBI had been investigating him, could or should they flag his file to let them know he was having a background check done and check up on him? The fact they investigated him several times and they didn't find anything but he did end up commiting these murders sort of advocates for a long line approach.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Different nations should be governed differently. There is no appropriate one-size-fits-all legal regime. Japan, Germany and Iraq do not operate under the US Constitution because we know better than to do things that way. So why is the US of 2016 still being governed under its own Constitution when it's as different from Germany and Japan and Iraq as it was during its inception, if not more?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
Geoff Peterson posted:To be clear (since some people have accidentally misinterpreted it), the original proposal: No, I got that, I'm arguing it could be hard to make a case for a monthly fee to pay for a background check to purchase guns vs an annual fee to do the same without being accused of erecting a barrier for reasons unrelated to the background check's purpose (eg filtering crazies). I think you'd have better luck making a more expensive annual fee for a more thorough background check.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
FowlTheOwl posted:I have a question regarding gun law and the Orlando shooter. The FBI had been investigating him, could or should they flag his file to let them know he was having a background check done and check up on him? The fact they investigated him several times and they didn't find anything but he did end up commiting these murders sort of advocates for a long line approach. In a perfect world, the purchase or attempted purchase of a firearm by someone under investigation would be reported to the FBI as a potential precursor to bad poo poo going down, yes. Granted, it would also work in the other direction where NICS (or whatever improved replacement) would deny/delay the sale but it could be construed as potentially tipping someone off if they went to go buy a gun and were denied.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:08
|
|
|
Although in this case the FBI had wrapped up their investigation in 2013 or 2014 anyway, so probably nothing would have been done even if it was flagged because they're not going to have the manpower to start tailing everyone they've ever investigated anytime someone tries to buy a gun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Although in this case the FBI had wrapped up their investigation in 2013 or 2014 anyway, so probably nothing would have been done even if it was flagged because they're not going to have the manpower to start tailing everyone they've ever investigated anytime someone tries to buy a gun. True, then again this is the kind of poo poo that financial intelligence units have highly complex and finely tuned monitoring systems for, and (ideally) the FBI would be able to implement a risk scoring program which would narrow that sort of thing down. Like if they were investigated for white-collar wire fraud 15 years prior, buying a firearm would mean something different from a guy who had been checked on for terrorism poo poo within the past 2-3 years buying a gun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:It should also be mentioned that the 2A forbids infringement on the right to keep and bear arms without any reference to regulation of their acquisition. There are ways to say this that are more explanatory, but it is probably sufficient to just point out that Constitutional jurisprudence doesn't work like an enchanted monkey's paw. In short, no, what you wrote should not be mentioned because it is nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:So why is the US of 2016 still being governed under its own Constitution when it's as different from Germany and Japan and Iraq as it was during its inception, if not more? Well, the US Constitution is also different from its original form now, so that is one reason why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:OK, let's do that: good, now try reading the posts he was responding to. He was being flippant at Drizzle because Drizzle took my suggestion of "pay 20-30, get a 30 day card to purchase guns (which itself was just a spit-balled number) and responded with "$242/yr is an unconstitutional poll tax!" Zachack posted:Shifting from an annual fee of $30 to a monthly fee of $30 would seem to shift it into an unreasonable burden. I'm not saying it can't be done but I'm having a hard time thinking of many "common man" government activities that require monthly renewals, let alone constitutional rights. No one was seriously suggesting that
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:54
|
|
|
His argument is not any less dumb for being posted in response to something you think is dumb.Crain posted:Silencers get brought up a lot too wrt the NFA. Bumpfire isn't illegal because it is literally a thing you can do with your bare hands. Hence the endless videos on YouTube of new shooters doubling magnum revolvers. The stock just makes it easier. Really, the government should regulate the device known as "Jerry Miculek's hand", which is capable of converting any gun it attaches to into an automatic weapon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyIq9FdTgwM Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
Why do people seem to think that corner cases invalidate an entire argument? Theres always going to be rules lawyering. The regulators need to be empowered to go after these guys and the punishment needs to be horribly severe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
Why shoot guns when you can brandish them and prevent any violence
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:Why do people seem to think that corner cases invalidate an entire argument? Theres always going to be rules lawyering. The regulators need to be empowered to go after these guys and the punishment needs to be horribly severe. The horrors of bump fire stocks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
The worst part of gun chat is getting bogged down in minutiae that only gun nerds care about. Truely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 11:23
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:It's kind of hard to take gun control discussion seriously when you guys just flat out openly hate gun owners I liked Phil Hartman.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 11:36
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I think the argument is more along the lines of "today background checks, tomorrow hitler." Skipping the Godwin, is that attitude surprising when most of the vocal Congressional gun control supporters and lobbyists have been pretty open about any measure passed being part of an overall incrementalist approach to a full ban? At what point does that ever seem like it would encourage those who disagree to buy in?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 11:48
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Skipping the Godwin, is that attitude surprising when most of the vocal Congressional gun control supporters and lobbyists have been pretty open about any measure passed being part of an overall incrementalist approach to a full ban? Yes, that attitude is surprising because passing regulations that you agree with doesn't magically obligate you to pass everything anyone suggests ever. Try it with any other bill and you'll see how absurd it sounds: "I support a $12 minimum wage and I think it's good policy but I will oppose it forever because Bernie wants a $15 wage and he'll keep asking for that if I ever agree to raise it, so we can never raise it ever" "Mass transit would be a benefit to our city but we can't have it because environmentalists want it too and they're always trying to ban coal"
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
I know I participated in it earlier, but gun chat really needs to die here because we are incapable of being anything but huge loving assholes about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 12:28
|
|
|
Now write a post about this long that directly applies to the 49 dead at Pulse nightclub. That goes into why this only happens with any regularity in the United States and what your plan is to prevent this from happening again. Surely you hold human life more valuable then minutia about screw threading than you can easily write just as much just as quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 12:33
|
|
|
To be fair, it's to be expected that goons know a lot about some esoteric aspect of their hobby and not much about human life 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
Wikileaks has the DNC Trump Oppo Report already posted this morning.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:05
|
|
|
Day late and a dollar short
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Its funny because back in the day gun manufacturers were for regulation. The president of the connecticut gun company (ruger?) would say things like "obviously no one needs more than 10 bullets in a gun." Now greed rules the day and ethics is dead! All hail capitalism! Stackin paper and bodies
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Wikileaks has the DNC Trump Oppo Report already posted this morning. Anything juicy? Like dead hooker levels of juicy. Something that'd make Ramsay Bolton smile.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Anything juicy? Like dead hooker levels of juicy. Something that'd make Ramsay Bolton smile. It's just a factfile of newspaper articles and statements he's made. Skimming through it I didn't find super juicy like the Fair Housing Act violations in the '70s that kept springing up. One of the more juicy tidbits is he was "gifted" 3.5 million in chips from his father's casino illegally; the casino had to pay a fine for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:I know I participated in it earlier, but gun chat really needs to die here because we are incapable of being anything but huge loving assholes about it. Nah I like gun chat because it's a clear indication that the general outlook of Democratic voters is shifting from silent resolution that we'll never get anything done to an attitude of gently caress the NRA and burn it all down I know everyone says nothing ever changes lol but for sure people are more vocal than they've ever been so it seems like we're moving in the right direction and all we need is one more justice to get some poo poo done also gently caress the NRA and burn it all down
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:24
|
|
|
one year ago, today:
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:It's just a factfile of newspaper articles and statements he's made. Skimming through it I didn't find super juicy like the Fair Housing Act violations in the '70s that kept springing up. One of the more juicy tidbits is he was "gifted" 3.5 million in chips from his father's casino illegally; the casino had to pay a fine for it. Well that's boring. Except the casino part bwahahaha.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
Who gives a gently caress about suppressors anyway, the only reason they're regulated is that toothless regulations are all that can be passed in the current climate/under the bill of rights. Mass murders might be largely prevented by banning semi automatics. That would do something, but it might not be constitutional and it might not stop most of the non-spree gun violence. Obviously just banning AR-15s would just be a bandaid until AR16s or ridiculous pistol mods are available. The actual roots of the issue are the human problems that create killers, not their ability to arm themselves. It's not as easy to come up with a fix for that. This filibuster thing just seems like political theater. Morally, pushing for gun control is either right or wrong regardless of timing, but in 2016 I think it gives a reeling GOP an effective wedge issue. At least come up with well reasoned, effective, implementable regulation instead of whatever kneejerk amendments that will fail.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
hhhat posted:Nah I like gun chat because it's a clear indication that the general outlook of Democratic voters is shifting from silent resolution that we'll never get anything done to an attitude of gently caress the NRA and burn it all down Gun owners are right to be pissed, because the current state of their hobby is really hamstrung by rules and regs that dont work. Here is a sks its based on a design that is from the 1940s Notice the nice wood stock.  Here is the same rife with a different stock and some add on's  One is not an "assault weapon" the other is The law is based on peoples "feels" oh no thats a scary gun. Basically the word assault weapon was dreamed up by politicians to make it seem like there was a truth in middle of the road compromise, when really there isnt. There isnt "Gun Control" Tell me how many people in favor of "Gun Control" also favor a repeal of the 2nd amendment? If there is alot of over lap then drop the gun control poo poo and just go for a proper ban. If you support a Ban Dont support gun control Ask "how does having 10 bullets make me safer?" Politicians push these bullshit laws as a way to get a feather in their cap and cred ignoring the fact they dont slove the problem The shooter is CA did their crime with a legal AR. CA baned 50 rifles never mind no one has used a 10K rifles that shoots 7$ bullets in a crime. It was a non loving issue but people can "feel" like they did something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
max4me posted:Gun owners are right to be pissed, because the current state of their hobby is really hamstrung by rules and regs that dont work. Holy poo poo the differnce between these two rifles is loving obvious. Isn't the modded one going to shoot a lot more before needing to reload? What other fuctional differences are there? How does being clumsily misleading help your argument?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
You could cut and paste every gun chat noun with abortion related nouns and make a perfectly readable, although equally as loving stupid you poo poo fucks, discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
Ban gunchat
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Ban gunchat Gunchat free zones don't work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 13:49
|
|
