"Senate Blocks Drive for Gun Control" -NYTimes

www.nytimes.com...

I Know you guys have a lot on mind right now concerning Boston, the Ricin letters and the Texas explosion, but wasn't this a highly debated issue over the last months?

Not a single new law concerning gun control passed in the Senate.

From my outside view, it looks like the US Government is not able to operate at a sane level right now. Why would someone oppose a so called backround check for future gun owners?

Only a non-criminal with a stable mind should own gun/s or rifles, don't you think?

In Germany you have to pass a test, which is very expensive and also have to have a safe, where you store the weapons.
If you lose your divers license due to alcohol or drugs or are having mental health problems you get your gun license revoked. Same is for comitting a crime in general. Your guns will be ceased and stored. Is that so bad?

reply to post by pjfry


Background checks will never pass just like any other stepping stone to confiscation will not pass, the people in Washington are exposed to a lot more than we are, they can do a lot more snooping on any potential corruption a lot better than internet-surfing theorists. To me, these votes are a clear act of defiance to a hidden agenda that our elected officials have sniffed out and aren't taking any more of.

Here's the other arising question from this whole debate: WHEN will it stop?! There were just bombings in Boston and at a fertilizer plant, should we start running background checks on people buying backpacks or fertilizer, maybe even vinegar and baking soda. Or here's a better question, seeing as 14 people were just stabbed a matter of days ago, why haven't we introduced legislation on the background checks of anyone owning any type of cutlery, from a butter knife to a pocket knife we need to make sure we know criminals aren't going to be in possession of such devilish and pointy weapons of war. /sarc off

Also. what even constitutes a criminal anyways? Someone who's commited a murder, most definitely, how about someone who accidentaly ran a red light? What about someone who got marked speeding 3 miles above the limit? Where will those limits stop? I think the thing our senate -and everybody else- is learning most is that our fellow citizens aren't our biggest threat to society as of right now, I think we can all guess on what is

We have background checks already to begin with. What would be so special about those new background checks? Oh, yeah, it's not about background checks. That's right, and no one even got a chance to read the bill, the Dems were trying to push it through as fast as they could and failed, hoping in vein that no one would read it.
No one (American) wants their gun control bills, it's just a gun control fantasy that they won't give up on.

reply to post by pjfry


I am from NY. The laws already exist. You would be surprised how difficult it is to get a concealed carry permit.

That said you have to understand that we are a union of states. What you propose the government to do would be like Germany telling Italy to ban fatty foods for health concerns or Spain to ban bull fighting for animal rights. Europe would be going red in the face telling Germany to mind its business and remember its place.

It is up to each state to decide how and how much regulation is placed.

The federal government would be risking the union itself and all credibility if it tried to mandate gun control like you suggest. Europe's union is still facing changes in its role of cohesion amongst many houses. Think of the chaos that would erupt there if Germany tried to FORCE a member state into any resolution it openly opposed.

Hell, with the banking scandals its plate is full as how to balance out Germany's and Frances economy without making lesser states sink into poverty. That's just money. Now imagine if a cultural issue was the crux of the problem.

That is essentially what is happening here. It is age old federalism VS anti federalism from the civil war and even our revolution of independence.

It is much more complex than simple "guns are bad....OK" logic....

reply to post by tadaman


Now I have got to say, that is about as well as I've ever seen it put. Very well!

Originally posted by pjfry
www.nytimes.com...


Not a single new law concerning gun control passed in the Senate.

From my outside view, it looks like the US Government is not able to operate at a sane level right now. Why would someone oppose a so called backround check for future gun owners?

Only a non-criminal with a stable mind should own gun/s or rifles, don't you think?

The problem, and Ill state this as simply as I can for an outsider, is that we have all these laws on the books already that could of prevented the tragedies, they are not enforced for some reason...

The passage of these bills is being hinged on the tragedies that have happen, the bills not a single one of the bills proposed, would do what they are saying, prevent the tragedies.

The people involved used OTHER peoples guns, its that simple. If gun responsibility laws that are on the books where enforced THAT might, just might of stopped the tragedies, The scoundrels in government are being opportunistic in order to pass MORE restrictions, laws they have eagerly been waiting and trying to pass for as long as I can remember.

Worst of all is they are using the children to do it, Obama condemning and than Propping up the victims to sneak one by, mean while authorizing drone strikes around the world that kill more children and innocents than any of these tragedies.

You can't compare Europe with its diffrent cultures to the USA. It's like comparing Brasil and Canada.

All the Europeans want is a strong opinion on foreign affairs and market regulation (Banks etc.) The Anglo-American marketsystem has failed in the EU, so we need reforms and regulation. Thatcher and Reagan began to liberalise markets and Clinton/ Blair didn't stop, where it would have been neccessary to reevaluate regulations. The unions were too strong in the 70s and now they barely exist. Both options are bad for the people.

The issues about gun legislation are just a symptom of the divided opinions on how to create better living conditions in the US, I guess.

I think most people are afraid of chaos and riot within the US, because of the challenges they face from day to day.

The US is a very hostile environment from my point of view. If you don't have a job, there is no backup plan. You lose everything. The only thing that is left is the gun you're holding in your hand and if someone tries to take it away, or limit some aspects of posession, people get mad.

reply to post by pjfry


Background checks are already required for purchasing new or used firearms from licensed dealers. If the government were serious about gun violence, they would enforce the existing laws on the books. As an example of that, only a tiny fraction of those who fail the existing background check due to a criminal history are ever investigated further or prosecuted.

This was really just a backdoor attempt at creating a national firearms registry.

this is a good thing

we do not need more gun laws

liberty=freedom from excessive law

reply to post by tadaman


That was well put, great analogy that europeans might just understand.

reply to post by vor78


Why should they be investigated? Failing a background check should not be prosecuted, anymore than someone should be prosecuted for being denied any other "permit".

reply to post by TKDRL


When a person is found guilty of a felony, they are not allowed to purchase a firearm, have one in their possession, home or vehicle.

It is a felony to attempt to purchase a firearm with a felony on your record.
The attempt to purchase carries a sentence of ten years in prison.

(IOt is also a 10 year felony to lie on the form 4473)

Last year there were 28,000 felons who attempted to purchase a firearm. They failed the instant background check due to their felony conviction.

President Obama and Eric Holder only attempted to prosecute 77 of those felony attempts to purchase firearms. They let 27,923 cases of FEDERAL felony crimes just languish and go to waste.

If they were serious about keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals then they would have prosecuted 28,000 FEDERAL felony attempts to purchase firearms. That is what the "instant background check is all about".

They do not want to keep firearms out of criminals hands, they want to keep them out of everyones hands.

TKDRL they are being : Can you say dishonest liars?

reply to post by pjfry


besides, you guys were begging for American firearms during WWII.
we will have to get the guns back one of these days for the Canadians, British and Australians.

They were our biggest allies in WWI and WWII.
In the last thirty years the guns have been taken from the Aussies, the British and Canadians, almost I might add, without a shot being fired.


Not so easy here in USA. The sleeping giant is waking up.

reply to post by slugger9787


Guns were not taken from canadians, anymore than they were from americans. You find the disarmed people in large cities, same as the US.

reply to post by slugger9787


I stand corrected then. For the record, I am against convicts being stripped of their right to bare arms, unless the conviction involved usuing a firearm unlawfully myself.

American government is not trying to create 'better/safer background checks' and it is not 'for the safety of the American people'. Most of the factions of the American government are in a slow process, that is currently accelerating, to take away ALL gun owning rights.

The end goal is not safety, background checks or 'saving the children'. This is the source of the backlash against these recent measures being pushed - the resistance that is people who see the conspiracy.

Originally posted by pjfry
You can't compare Europe with its diffrent cultures to the USA. It's like comparing Brasil and Canada.

All the Europeans want is a strong opinion on foreign affairs and market regulation (Banks etc.) The Anglo-American marketsystem has failed in the EU, so we need reforms and regulation. Thatcher and Reagan began to liberalise markets and Clinton/ Blair didn't stop, where it would have been neccessary to reevaluate regulations. The unions were too strong in the 70s and now they barely exist. Both options are bad for the people.

The issues about gun legislation are just a symptom of the divided opinions on how to create better living conditions in the US, I guess.

I think most people are afraid of chaos and riot within the US, because of the challenges they face from day to day.

The US is a very hostile environment from my point of view. If you don't have a job, there is no backup plan. You lose everything. The only thing that is left is the gun you're holding in your hand and if someone tries to take it away, or limit some aspects of posession, people get mad.

From your point of view, the US is a hostile environment? Have you ever lived here? Ever heard of unemployment? Perhaps you should visit before making such assumptions.

reply to post by TKDRL


I also am in favor of ex=felons being
returned the right to bear arms, under
the condition that it was not a violent felony.

There was a grand attempt to begin the taking away of guns from the Canadians, which backfired, due to massive non compliance to the law.
Yes large metropolitan areas seem to breed folks who like socialism type ideas.