On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 06:47:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"Urin Asshole" wrote in message
.. .

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 21:33:43 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"Urin Asshole" wrote in message
. ..


And dippy if there's a required trace on all guns, the gun runners
will have a tougher time peddling their death and destrcution.

--------------------------------

The problem is nobody knows for sure how many guns currently exist in
the US. Most states do not require registration so there's no way of
tracing them.

The best estimates are between 200 million and 350 million privately
owned guns. Even if a federal registration law was passed tomorrow,
that's quite an inventory of potentially available guns with no
record
of ownership or traceability.


Yes, true. Does that mean we should just not worry about all the new
ones and all the future deaths that might be prevented. Oh ****, I
might have to fill out a form!

---------------------------------------------

I just don't think it makes sense to pass laws just for the sake of
passing laws. Makes the politicians look good as a response to media
hype and emotional public responses but doesn't really do anything to
address the problem.

Personally, I don't have any problem with background checks. It's in
place in my state and has been for years. I don't really have any
personal gripe about a national registry of gun owners either but I
can understand the case made by those who oppose it. Frankly, doing
background checks and calling in every gun purchase made from a dealer
like they do here in Massachusetts creates the data base required for
a national registry anyway. Your name, permit number, gun type and
digital fingerprint image is taken every time you purchase a gun.
Private sale requirements are lax however. You are supposed to report
the transaction within a certain number of days, but I doubt everyone
does.

However, it still doesn't regulate the 300 million plus guns that
can't be traced now. That's why a law requiring a national registry
would have very little effect on those with criminal intent. Hell, if
private ownership of all guns were banned tomorrow, there's no way of
telling who has them and who doesn't.

I think we need to be a little realistic about gun control. As
starters, here's what I'd propose:

1. Require background checks and permits for gun ownership
nationwide.
2. Require mandatory safety training for issuance of the permit.
The training should be more extensive than a single 5 hour session.
I was very surprised at the sketchy training required in MA in
order to obtain a LTC. It should be much longer and cover more.
3. Require mental health data to be made available in the background
checks. This includes drug addiction or alcoholism.
4. Enforce current laws. Put criminals and violent people away. If
there were fewer on the streets, fewer people would feel the need to
own a gun. That said, we also have to accept the fact that we
don't live in a perfect world, never will, and the right to own a gun
for personal and family defense is justified.
5. Finally ... use your friggin' head. Make damn well sure the gun
isn't loaded when cleaning it. As you get used to handling a gun,
it's very easy to get sloppy about handling it. When cleaning,
checking, loading or unloading, turn off the damn TV, computer and
cell phone. Concentrate on what you are doing, thinking every step
through. I think people that get too cavalier about this are the
ones who cause accidents to happen.


My wife just completed a five hour course in gun safety and firing. How much more time should be
spent in telling a person that every gun is loaded, point only down range, and don't put finger on
the trigger until ready to shoot.

What kinds of things would you add to the course that should require a lot more time.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling'...the liberals' last resort.