Gun ownership poll

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

If the perpetrators do not have records associated with them that would suggest risk, then it is, of course, impossible to accurately identify them in advance of a weapons transaction. The scenario dictates the answer. Again, I do not think background checks are constitutionally legal or accomplish much besides virtue signaling.

This is one of many reasons that I do not expect background checks to accomplish anything in resolving massacres (and the facts suggest it indeed does not do this).

As to what specific measures have been proposed as to background checks, it is generally unspecific proposals to strengthen them without stipulating specifically how, in the public debate. The left has advocated to close the 'PPT loophole' and to restrict individuals from doing private transactions without going through a dealer, and thus requiring a 4473 and NICS check, which I think would accomplish absolutely nothing.

I suppose we could have some agency with superpowers flag every questionable social media post and track it down and put restrictions on the posters. Something tells me most people don't want to pay that price.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I suppose we could have some agency with superpowers flag every questionable social media post and track it down and put restrictions on the posters. Something tells me most people don't want to pay that price.

That would be horrifying. Again, I am against background checks, not for.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

That would be horrifying. Again, I am against background checks, not for.

I guess my position would depend on what the specific procedure was, and the evidence that it would have derailed some of these crimes. But I am pretty skeptical. At least some of these have been carried out with a parent's gun, yes?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I guess my position would depend on what the specific procedure was, and the evidence that it would have derailed some of these crimes. But I am pretty skeptical. At least some of these have been carried out with a parent's gun, yes?

Yes, and typically the parent has been shot shortly before the massacres in these cases of theft, as I recall. Once a person has decided to commit an atrocity, I don't know how any law can reasonably be expected to stop them. If a person is in the mental place where they want to kill a school room full of a children or a store full of random shoppers, they will not care if they need to acquire a gun through illegal means. All a law might possibly do, at absolute best, is delay the massacre a little bit while ignoring Constitutionally protected liberties by pushing a very, very small number of these shitbags to the black market or self-manufacture.

I don't think 'safe storage' laws do much of anything either. Most gunners already lock up their firearms when not in use or being carried, it usually just makes criminals out of people who don't live with children and keep a gun out on the table. None of them many shooters I associate with leave firearms out where kids can get them without being carefully supervised. I am not aware of a single case where a safe storage law, as many left states have, has stopped anything. It just makes it illegal for me to stop for lunch on my way home from the range in my state