I am against any gun control which provides only the illusion of actually solving problems.

If the problem you're trying to solve is sellers without information, then the answer is to inform those sellers. Give any seller access to the NICS check and require that they perform a NICS check on firearm transfer just like we already require for any FFL. Then every seller who is selling guns legally will be informed, and we don't need to spend money on implementing some national gun database and we don't needlessly entangle the government in the private matters of private citizens.

If your problem is sellers who are knowingly making illegal sales, then registration doesn't solve the problem because either
A) the requirement to register is on the purchaser, and they're already not going to register the gun or
B) the requirement to register is on the seller, and they're already knowingly engaging in an illegal act, so they're not going to register the gun either.

1/7/2013 12:35:59 PM

private citizens having access to the NICS database?

The requirement for registration would be similar to how it works with cars. The gun is initially registered by the manufacturer or federally licensed dealer. They then update the record with the purchasers information. When you sell the gun it would be your responsibility to update the record so that you are removed from that responsibility, that is where this creates new accountability. There is no situation where the gun would be unregistered, it would just have the last owners information and this would be used to prosecute them for their crime. Currently, we have no way to do this or trace that weapon unless they get lucky investigating.

"Sir, a gun registered to you was recovered during the investigation of a crime"
Either:
"Oh, I sold that and did not update the registration"
-prosecute for illegal sale
Or:
"Oh, that was stolen"
-prosecute for not securing and not reporting theft (stronger penalties and enforcement for not reporting theft was part of my proposal)

Or in another scenario maybe the guy is arrested for a violent crime:
"sir, please present the 3 guns registered to you to the court"
Either:
"i... uh..."
-jail time
"that was stolen, unsecured and not reported"
-jail time

Right now you don't have this check


[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 12:46 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2013 12:37:50 PM

NICS checks return "yes" or "no" with no reason given AFAIK. There's no reason why private citizens should not be able to run their own NICS check any more than a citizen should not be able to run a background check on an individual.

As for registration being like that of a car, it is the purchaser's responsibility, not the seller's responsibility to register a car. So we're back to scenario A, where the purchaser has no intention of registering the gun.

Quote :

""Sir, a gun registered to you was recovered during the investigation of a crime" Either: "Oh, I sold that and did not update the registration" -prosecute for illegal sale "

And what prevents the seller from registering the gun under a false name? How are you going to prove he wasn't provided false ID?

Quote :

" Or: "Oh, that was stolen" -prosecute for not securing and not reporting theft (stronger penalties and enforcement for not reporting theft was part of my proposal) "

What prevents them from filing a false report that the gun was stolen? They're already conducting illegal sales, you think misdemeanor false reporting is going to stop them?

Quote :

" Or in another scenario maybe the guy is arrested for a violent crime: "sir, please present the 3 guns registered to you to the court" Either: "i... uh..." -jail time "that was stolen, unsecured and not reported" -jail time "

Oh good, you've got a guy under arrest for committing a crime, and you've done nothing to stop his already committed crime of illegally selling guns, but you can put him away for a few more years. Excellent use of tax payer money.

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 12:58 PM. Reason : bcn]

1/7/2013 12:49:18 PM

okay, then not like a car, like what i said

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 12:51 PM. Reason : i meant title not registration, you sign it over every time]

1/7/2013 12:50:06 PM

Quote :

"While you're busy being obtuse I want to know if anyone has read what medications Adam Lanza was on? So far I've only seen speculation, but I want to know specifically what drugs were in his system. Seems this particular point is being a bit under-reported... http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant-gaping-hole-in-sandy-hook-reporting/ Looks to me like pills show up at mass-shootings just as often as guns do."

Even if you believe that anti-depressant and anti-psychotic medications are to blame for pushing some of the people who take them over the edge, there are a couple of reasons I strongly disagree with trying to demonize them the way the author of that article seems to.

1) I think incidents of crimes perpetrated by the mentally ill would skyrocket if they didn't have access to those medications, and

2) For the relative few who do snap, access to weapons that most facilitate their desire for mass murder is still an issue.

And as an aside, the logic in that article is atrocious. For example:

Quote :

"Even though initially the New York Times reported, “officials said prescription medications related to the treatment of psychological problems had been found among Mr. Cho’s effects,” and the killer’s roommate, Joseph Aust, had told the Richmond Times-Dispatch that Cho’s routine each morning had included taking prescription drugs, the state’s toxicology report released two months later said “no prescription drugs or toxic substances were found in Cho Seung-Hui.” Perhaps so, but one of the most notoriously unstable and unpredictable times for users of SSRI antidepressants is the period shortly after they’ve stopped taking them, during which time the substance may not be detectable in the body."

Mr. Kupelian has no problem blaming Cho's medication for the killing spree, even without knowing when Cho stopped taking them. He doesn't address the idea that Cho may have been off them for months and as a result his mental state deteriorated. Instead, he implies that the meds are to blame, regardless of their presence in his system. That's just ridiculous.

1/7/2013 1:01:19 PM

Illegally reporting a gun as stolen would not be a misdemeanor under my plan, it would be a federal crime.

Identity theft is the only reasonable response that you have posted so far, my solution would be to require that all transactions work through federally licensed dealers. It wouldn't solve it completely, but it would help by eliminating situations where both parties are complacent. Not requiring that was a compromise.

1/7/2013 1:02:18 PM

Why not simply require that all sales be preceded by a NICS check then? What does registration provide that a NICS check for all sales wouldn't?

Bear in mind that in all of the scenarios you've posted, a crime has already been committed with the illegally transferred firearm, therefore your registration database has done nothing to actually lower the crimes committed.

1/7/2013 1:07:27 PM

Tracking the gun through its life, providing all of the double checks

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 1:16 PM. Reason : the crime reduction comes from making it harder for criminals to get and adding accountability]

1/7/2013 1:15:49 PM

Tracking a gun through it's life is useless and a waste of resources. By your own admission, all that's relevant to you is the last legal owner. Double checks are provided by NICS. And I still don't see how getting a gun illegally is any made any more difficult by making it illegal to get the gun illegally.

1/7/2013 1:55:17 PM

Exactly!!

1/7/2013 2:12:46 PM

Because the number of untraced/unregistered guns fall, its harder to get a gun illegally

1/7/2013 2:20:13 PM

How much further could 1337 b4k4 possibly break it down for you?

Please help us to understand your disconnect here.

1/7/2013 3:07:08 PM

I'm very clear on your position, please help me bridge the disconnect so you can understand my simple position and how it has responded to your position.

How can I break it down further for you? Three line paper and crayons?

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 3:49 PM. Reason : please do the needful]

1/7/2013 3:48:31 PM

^^^ no, it's not.... the problem with pro gun control people is they're naive...

if you're going to break the law with a gun you will break the law to have the gun... how fucking hard is that concept to grasp?

guns used in crimes are often stollen...

now you're going to punish the person that had their gun stolen?

OR you are going to see gun smuggling become a bigger industry and once that happens, if you're risking the same penalty for semi auto and full-auto why not go full auto.. probably cheaper for gun runners to import because THAT'S HOW AKs COME ANYWAY.

Then people won't just get shot they'll get mowed down...

and if you think i'm wrong, i will leave you with this... i could get coke, weed, and heroin at my high school if i wanted to ( none of which have been legal in our country within the past 99 years)... do you really think guns would be that much more difficult to obtain?

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2013 4:07:58 PM

Please show me what percentage of guns used in gun crimes are stolen, my (educated) guess is that its about 10%-15%. Straw purchases, purchases from dealers, private party purchases will be much much higher.

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM. Reason : ^Can i grow a gun in my closet?]

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM. Reason : Even a random pro-gun rights website of questionable accuracy says 9% stolen]

1/7/2013 4:15:21 PM

any machinist worth $.02 could make one.

and not all drugs are grown in our borders.

^ bahahaha you went off the PBS (top result in google) study where they asked criminals where they got them?

BAHHAHAHAHAHHAH

i go back to NAIVE.

70% of stolen guns are recovered while investigating other crimes is the stat i had in my head



[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2013 4:21:38 PM

Please, I would be very interested to learn that 60% of gun crimes are committed by stolen guns.

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM. Reason : ^ I didn't "go" to anything, thats my guess from reading various journals. I'm asking you to find it]

1/7/2013 4:23:51 PM

Lets try an association word story.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. We should register all people and make sure that they are here legally. We should make them register when they move, when they are created, when they die. We should tax their existence. It doesn't matter that they are allowed to live, they still should be taxed. Some people don't like to be registered and taxed. They come and go as they please and never register themselves. We have laws that make these illegal people criminals, but it doesn't do any good. They don't care that they are illegal. As a matter of fact, it is easier to be illegal than become legal. We have passed more and more laws to stop these illegal people, but it doesn't stop them. We even called them 'undocumented' because illegal was a negative connotation. How well does the undocumented person registration going? All the laws stop the criminal undocumented people doesn't it? Making laws against being undocumented really work, don't they?

See where I'm going with this?

1/7/2013 4:26:12 PM

^^ updated.

1/7/2013 4:28:21 PM

you realize the 70% stat is absolutely not what we are talking about right?

also, make sure you don't conflate stolen with illegal gun market

did you find anything yet?

1/7/2013 4:30:38 PM

Quote :

"Lets try an association word story"

nah

http://www.tracetheguns.org/#

[Edited on January 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2013 4:31:42 PM

^That sight isn't even fully accurate, and you did not address anything in my post.

1/7/2013 4:49:10 PM

I'm not going to, it's a silly analogy

1/7/2013 5:22:40 PM

Quote :

"See where I'm going with this?"

Somewhere racist?

1/7/2013 5:27:14 PM

maybe in your head.


More laws don't address root cause, and do little if anything to solve a given problem.

1/7/2013 5:37:11 PM

If you want to know why we can't carry on campus, it's because of idiots like this:
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/01/07/2589611/nc-state-employee-arrested-after.html

Which one of you is it?

1/7/2013 9:56:41 PM

we can't have guns on campus because someone brought guns on campus?

1/7/2013 9:58:28 PM

Yeah, he erodes any movement we've made and is terrible PR

1/7/2013 10:01:23 PM

They better not demonize the Colt Delta Elite they found.

Thas a badass gun mang.

1/7/2013 10:04:17 PM

Not adding to any discussion, but Alex Jones is funny.

1/8/2013 8:04:15 AM

Quote :

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people. We should register all people and make sure that they are here legally. We should make them register when they move, when they are created, when they die. We should tax their existence. It doesn't matter that they are allowed to live, they still should be taxed. Some people don't like to be registered and taxed. They come and go as they please and never register themselves. We have laws that make these illegal people criminals, but it doesn't do any good. They don't care that they are illegal. As a matter of fact, it is easier to be illegal than become legal. We have passed more and more laws to stop these illegal people, but it doesn't stop them. We even called them 'undocumented' because illegal was a negative connotation. How well does the undocumented person registration going? All the laws stop the criminal undocumented people doesn't it? Making laws against being undocumented really work, don't they?"

Or instead of making their existence illegal, make their driving/spreading force diminish or be cost prohibitive through limitations.. For people, it would be jobs, for guns it would be purchase/availability.

And yes in this analogy guns = people

1/8/2013 8:40:59 AM

Alex Jones is a certifiable nut-job and he only strengthens the anti-gun movement. But yeah, he is still pretty damn funny (and irritating at times).

1/8/2013 8:49:20 AM

there are total nutjobs on both sides of the argument

1/8/2013 9:30:50 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fEbBM4DG9V0

1/8/2013 9:52:01 AM

Alex Jones is doing the gun right side any favors. He seems a little unbalanced. I'd be scared to be around him when he's angry, if he was carrying.

Did anyone see the Simpson's Sunday night? It was a pardoy on preppers and and their desire to be right about the decline of society. No, that's not really relevant in this thread.

1/8/2013 12:30:48 PM

We're all just happy that you're happy, Bullet.

1/8/2013 12:47:18 PM

what? i'm not.

1/8/2013 12:52:35 PM

ScubaSteve

Quote :

"Or instead of making their existence illegal, make their driving/spreading force diminish or be cost prohibitive through limitations.. For people, it would be jobs, for guns it would be purchase/availability. And yes in this analogy guns = people"

Yet currently, we just give the illegal/undocumented driving licenses and ids, and extra money for tuition, plus amnesty
Lets do that with guns, increase ease and availability.

1/8/2013 12:55:43 PM

Do you see why I ignored your dumb analogy? Because now we have to argue about amnesty.

You did this on purpose, to change the topic from a real discussion about gun control.

[Edited on January 8, 2013 at 12:57 PM. Reason : I mean seriously, its a seriously dumb analogy]

1/8/2013 12:56:52 PM

(i meant to say earlier that Alex Jones is NOT doing the gun rights side any favors. He's feeding into the loud, angry, large, out-of-control wing-nut stereotype)

1/8/2013 1:16:47 PM

which is why the media puts him on tv

1/8/2013 1:49:10 PM

I see. Why do they give Piers Morgan his own show?

1/8/2013 2:01:43 PM

i guess some folks will watch that sleazeball

1/8/2013 2:06:30 PM

Is the Alex Jones show and infowars part of this media conspiracy to make idiots look like idiots too?

1/8/2013 2:07:58 PM

there you go putting words in my mouth again


all i'm saying is that CNN's target audience does not want to sit and watch two people have a calm, civil discussion on reasonable, effective gun control.

1/8/2013 2:12:39 PM

Fox News viewers do?

[Edited on January 8, 2013 at 2:32 PM. Reason : in other words: welcome to media]

1/8/2013 2:31:57 PM

no, fox news viewers do not either

1/8/2013 2:36:42 PM

Since we were talking about Alex Jones and infowars:

http://gawker.com/5974364/florida-atlantic-university-professor-wonders-if-the-sandy-hook-shooting-isnt-just-one-big-mass-media-conspiracy

Quote :

"Likewise, the central thesis of his argument — and that of a host of conspiracy theorists — is that there were multiple shooters inside Sandy Hook that day. Several independent researchers and most recently Infowars.com reporter Rob Dew have over the past few days pointed to evidence strongly suggesting how two additional Sandy Hook shooting suspects were apprehended by police in the minutes following 9:35AM when officers were dispatched to the elementary school.[2]"

maybe I need to make an infowars thread, these people are nuts

1/9/2013 7:31:14 AM

its really sad that last year had a record low gun violence but since it's tossed in your face everyone is all freaking out about shootings.

[Edited on January 9, 2013 at 7:35 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2013 7:33:43 AM

It's not unreasonable to appropriate a greater response to 20 school kids being massacred all at once in an elementary school than to 20 school kids getting individually shot throughout the day/week/whatever.

The school massacre caused an inordinate amount of suffering and instability to a much greater population.

1/9/2013 8:40:11 AM