How Pro Gun is the NRA?

[peptoabysmal]

The real problem is when people who have never used a firearm begin to pass laws concerning firearms. These laws usually don't make sense, and are costly to enforce.

One of the best experiences of my youth was a NRA sponsored course in gun safety. It focused on hunting, which I used to enjoy a great deal, and it taught me the correct way to handle a firearm safely. It also taught a great many other things like respect for other peoples property and lives.

Now, there are a bunch of whining, pampered aristocrats accusing the NRA of being out to arm madmen with the highest caliber weapon possible. I just don't buy it.

 

[Richard G]

These organizations are MUCH more pro second amendment than the NRA.

http://www.saf.org/
http://www.ofcc.net/
And the Ted Nugent USA linked by AUP

The NRA has turned into such a fat cash cow, with millions of dollars worth of dues coming in, that if they achieved their ultimate (stated) goal of unhindered gun rights, alot of fat cat lawyers, executive board memebers , etc. would be out of a job.

Its just like the Federal goverment, they have become too big for their own good.

Charlton Heston himself (NRA President) said in an interview that no one in America needs to own an "assault weapon". According to the law he was refering to, my 9mm handgun is an "assault weapon". KMA Mr. Heston.

(Ted Nugent is one of the greatest freedom fighting patriots in America today).

 

[Kiri]

There's no Planet X option!!

And what if I want to choose (A) AND (B)?

 

[Kiri]

The real problem is when people who have never used a firearm begin to pass laws concerning firearms. These laws usually don't make sense, and are costly to enforce.

One of the best experiences of my youth was a NRA sponsored course in gun safety. It focused on hunting, which I used to enjoy a great deal, and it taught me the correct way to handle a firearm safely. It also taught a great many other things like respect for other peoples property and lives.

Now, there are a bunch of whining, pampered aristocrats accusing the NRA of being out to arm madmen with the highest caliber weapon possible. I just don't buy it.

I tend to agree: the NRA does good things for gun owners. I'd only criticize them for occasionally sounding like they DO want everyone to be able to own a howitzer.
Opposition groups ALSO err towards extremism, though.

I can't take a hard-line position either way.

 

[Dancing David]

Thank You for your responses:

On registration: the constitution garuntees my right to acsess the highways, but I can't ride a bike on them. Why aren't the same arguements used for automobiles? We require people to get thier cars registered and liscensed, why not guns?

I agree we need to crack down on the black market, how can we do that. I would propose regegistration but would be thrilled to hear about other strategies.

Why is the First Amendment less important than the Second, many municipalities restrict acsess to pornography and magazines like High Times. But if a municipality restricts hand guns then there is a huge outcry.

Peace
dancing david

PS Pro wrestling is the cure, couldn't I start with something else like old war movies?

 

[Wolverine]

On registration: the constitution garuntees my right to acsess the highways, but I can't ride a bike on them. Why aren't the same arguements used for automobiles? We require people to get thier cars registered and liscensed, why not guns?

Driving is a privilege; firearms ownership is a right.

I would propose regegistration but would be thrilled to hear about other strategies.

How would firearms registration assist in combating the black market?

Why is the First Amendment less important than the Second...

It isn't. Who said it was?

 

[Denise]

Aaah! Ted Nugent! Ok, back to the topic....

 

[Dancing David]

Thank You I guess that cars aren't mentioned in the Constitution, still I should be able to walk on the Interstate if I am so stupid as to do so.

Registration: I have a feeling that right now guns are being purchased every day and then sold illegally to people who aren't entitled to have them by law. Would it not serve as a deterent if the purchaser had to register each gun? Maybe not, I realise that serial numbers can be ground off.

On the First Amendment: The organizations which support free speeech are generaly reviled in our society. As someone who lives in the conservative heartland I just notice how excited everyone gets over the mere registration of guns. They don't get upset at all when free speech is limited.

I do believe that Americans should continue to bear arms!

Peace
dancing david

 

[Houngan]

Thank You I guess that cars aren't mentioned in the Constitution, still I should be able to walk on the Interstate if I am so stupid as to do so.

Registration: I have a feeling that right now guns are being purchased every day and then sold illegally to people who aren't entitled to have them by law. Would it not serve as a deterent if the purchaser had to register each gun? Maybe not, I realise that serial numbers can be ground off.

On the First Amendment: The organizations which support free speeech are generaly reviled in our society. As someone who lives in the conservative heartland I just notice how excited everyone gets over the mere registration of guns. They don't get upset at all when free speech is limited.

I do believe that Americans should continue to bear arms!

Peace
dancing david

David,

You've got the point that everyone gets, if the genie weren't already out of the bottle. Guns last a long, long time, and with the current amount available in the US, registration would do nothing to stop the black market. Especially since the law doesn't address private transfer of weapons. I can buy all the guns I want (being an upstanding member of the community), register them, and then hand them out at the local homeless shelter. My legal culpability? None.

H.

 

[Wolverine]

Registration: I have a feeling that right now guns are being purchased every day and then sold illegally to people who aren't entitled to have them by law. Would it not serve as a deterent if the purchaser had to register each gun? Maybe not, I realise that serial numbers can be ground off.

There are in excess of 20,000 gun laws on the books in the US, spanning federal, state, and municipal levels. One would think those would act as deterrents also, but they do not. "Straw purchases" are already illegal, as is the transfer to/possession of a firearm by anyone who cannot fulfill legal requirements for purchase/ownership.

As noted by John Lott here:

In theory, if a gun is left at the scene of the crime, licensing and registration will allow a gun to be traced back to its owner. But, amazingly, despite police spending tens of thousands of man hours administering these laws in Hawaii (the one state with both rules), as well as in big urban areas with similar laws, such as Chicago and Washington, D.C., there is not even a single case where the laws have been instrumental in identifying someone who has committed a crime.

(amazing, isn't it? )
... and, here:

Even in the unlikely case that the average criminal uses the same gun just twice, only 0.09% of all guns are used for criminal purposes in any given year.

In the end, as has been demonstrated repeatedly in the past, such measures are ineffective against gun crime or criminals, who have this nasty habit of disobeying the law . Law-abiding gun owners end up being penalized for the ineffectiveness elsewhere in the system. We need enforcement of existing laws, not more legislation.

 

[Kiri]

PS Pro wrestling is the cure, couldn't I start with something else like old war movies?

Yeah, get yourself a copy of "The Dirty Dozen"!

 

[Thanz]

From a strictly legal perspective (not cost - what I propose would cost a ton of money) what is wrong with a system that requires registration and liscensing for firearms?

The specific system I would advocate is a licence to individuals, who would be required to demonstrate proper safety in handling and storing guns in some sort of test (like a driving test) before being able to purchase a gun. The license would be firearm class specific, like a drivers licence is. Once someone has a license, they can buy a gun, which is registered in a manner similar to a car. Registration would involve the granting of some sort of part that makes the weapon operable, and this part of the gun is non-transferable. It is an individual part (like a licence plate for a car) and the person who buys a gun privately would have to prove they have the proper licence, and then register the gun to get the part.

Any accidents in the home that are due to the improper handling of the firearm would be the legal responsibility of the owner of the gun.

I know that setting up this system would cost a bundle. But from a legal stndpoint, what is the problem with it? It does not deny someone their rights - it just regulates it. From what I understand, gun ownership is already somewhat regulated. So what specifically would make this system illegal (if, indeed, it would be)?

 

[Kiri]

From a strictly legal perspective (not cost - what I propose would cost a ton of money) what is wrong with a system that requires registration and liscensing for firearms?

The specific system I would advocate is a licence to individuals, who would be required to demonstrate proper safety in handling and storing guns in some sort of test (like a driving test) before being able to purchase a gun. The license would be firearm class specific, like a drivers licence is. Once someone has a license, they can buy a gun, which is registered in a manner similar to a car. Registration would involve the granting of some sort of part that makes the weapon operable, and this part of the gun is non-transferable. It is an individual part (like a licence plate for a car) and the person who buys a gun privately would have to prove they have the proper licence, and then register the gun to get the part.

Any accidents in the home that are due to the improper handling of the firearm would be the legal responsibility of the owner of the gun.

I know that setting up this system would cost a bundle. But from a legal stndpoint, what is the problem with it? It does not deny someone their rights - it just regulates it. From what I understand, gun ownership is already somewhat regulated. So what specifically would make this system illegal (if, indeed, it would be)?

This would probably meet a constitutionality test, but it wouldn't address the problem of guns being in the wrong hands, either from theft or black-market sources.

 

[Wolverine]

Well, we've gone hijack crazy here so I'll start a new thread specifically devoted to the concept of gun registration.

Stay tuned.