Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel_wiesel
all the back ground checks and mental stability checks
are not going to make a pinch of coon poop,
there are so many black market firearms in the US of A
that if a person wanted a firearm that person would have no problem acquiring one,
the problem has gone far past just doing back ground and mental stability checks , for the US of A,
it would and will work for the law abiding people, but where they have to crack down is the black market , off the street fire arms,
to say do back ground and mental stability checks to make it harder for the honest people to acquire firearms is fine, but that's like saying if they make guns illegal no one will get shot, they made drugs illegal that's how they stopped everyone from using drugs isn't it???
I don't believe there is one right answer, or combination of answers to fix their problem,
the biggest thing is fire arm education, most of these people have never witnessed a bullet wound on an animal let alone a human being
the most education most people get is from tv from watching a die hard movie or watching something that Arnold starred in,
it seems Hollywood has portrayed, the streets and cities and buildings in the US of A get blown up or is outlandish gun battles happen on a daily basis down there, and the youth of today have it in their minds this is perfectly acceptable, they have a problem between fantasy and reality
|
I understand your position - and you are right - tragedies will still happen and no law will prevent all incidents.
However, If we, as gun owners do nothing, the antis will push for a BAN and the topic will further polarise this issue. That is a war we may not win - so, IMO, we should get on the same page and reach a consensus.
The agenda is to save lives and avoid these tragedies.
If we, as a group, focus on this as a "people control" issue versus a "gun control" issue it may change perspectives on both sides of the argument.
We can, as gun advocates,
initiate comprehensive background checks and screening protocols designed to eliminate any possibility of a person who has been deemed to be risk to legally purchase a firearm then we have satisfied the need for action and have come to the table first.
The reality is, strictly from a pragmatic perspective, that these regulations may have the effect as designed .... and perhaps a person on the high risk list will have to seek other (illegal) conduits to acquire a firearm and that increases his chance of getting busted and/or facing additional charges.
It could lead to a tragedy like this being prevented.
No law will ever prevent everything - because people break laws - but doing nothing isn't an option.
I have carefully considered the "slippery slope" part of this position, but at the end of the day, we are about preventing tragedies whilst
retaining our rights to ownership without unreasonable restriction.
Just my 2 cents anyways.