Gun Control Proposals Poll

bernorange · April 5, 2018

We've got a couple of threads talking about gun control and many people talking past one another. I think it makes constructive discussion difficult. Maybe this experiment will help. Maybe not, but I think it's worth a try. I don't know if this forum software lets me edit the poll to add more options once it's been posted, but I think I included most of the proposals that had been mentioned in the ongoing discussions. Sorry, no EABOD, DIAF option.

Edit: The forum software does let me edit the poll as long as I'm able to edit this post. I don't know what the current time limit cutoff is, so if you have a suggestion, please say so pronto...

Edited April 5, 2018 by bernorange
add observation

SmokeyBear1861 · April 5, 2018

How about

Enforce current laws, stop with the government incompetence. It makes more sense than turning in the guns to the incompetent government and relying on a police state for safety.

Southerland Springs shooter beat his wife and was violent and should have been on the list, Air Force fucked up.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/11/06/donald-trump-sutherland-springs-shooter-texas-mental-health-guns/

Quote

The Air Force has released a statement that it failed to report Devin Kelley's domestic violence conviction to a national database used to screen firearms buyers.

They fucked up badly on the Parkland kid too, who was reported multiple times to the FBI, they never followed up.

Also, could you post some evidence that proposed gun laws would work, because they don't.

https://heyjackass.com/

Quote

Gun laws in Illinois regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition in the state of Illinois in the United States. To legally possess firearms or ammunition, Illinois residents must have a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card, which is issued by the Illinois State Police to any qualified applicant.

Edited April 5, 2018 by SmokeyBear1861

Hugo Stiglitz · April 5, 2018

Here’s what the cool kids are requesting:

1. Fund gun violence research and gun violence prevention/intervention programs.

We must provide the CDC with dedicated funding to research gun violence as a public health issue. Even the original sponsor of the law that limits the CDC’s ability to do this research, former Congressman Jay Dickey, said that it was a mistake. More than 100 medical organizations have called on Congress to restore funding. Furthermore, we believe that gun violence and prevention community work is essential to reducing gun violence and these groups should be funded fully.

2. Eliminate absurd restrictions on ATF.

The gun industry has operated mostly unchecked for far too long. ATF, the only federal agency with jurisdiction to regulate the gun industry, has been operating with one hand tied behind its back – unable to even digitize records of gun sales – or require gun dealers to conduct annual inventory checks to make sure they aren’t missing any guns. The ATF needs to become a modern agency, one capable of keeping receipts and efficiently regulating this massive industry.

3. Universal background checks.

It is too easy to obtain a firearm. Right now, federal law only requires you to obtain a background check if you purchase a gun from a licensed dealer. We must close the private sale loophole and make sure all sales undergo a background check.

4. High-capacity magazine ban.

High-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds serve only one purpose – to allow someone to shoot as many bullets as possible, in the shortest amount of time. These magazines are devastating and need to be banned.

5. Limit firing power on the streets.

Weapons of war have no place in our communities. Our nation requires a comprehensive assault weapons ban that prohibits the future production and sale of these weapons and provides a solution for dealing with those assault weapons that are already owned, such as a buyback program or registration. Limiting high-powered weapons to the military has worked elsewhere to eliminate the opportunity for mass shootings.

https://marchforourlives.com/how-we-save-lives/

Edited April 5, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

SmokeyBear1861 · April 5, 2018

There is this button you can click for "plain text" that doens't take up a whole page with size 14 font on your copy-paste shit, or just use quotes so it hides it.

Edited April 5, 2018 by SmokeyBear1861

Hugo Stiglitz · April 5, 2018

Instead of a magazine “ban”, I would go with prohibit the sale of centerfire magazines that exceed 10 rounds.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

I updated the poll with Hugo's suggestions that weren't already in the poll. @Hugo Stiglitz - ban / prohibit sale - close enough for Surly purposes?

Hugo Stiglitz · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, bernorange said:

I updated the poll with Hugo's suggestions that weren't already in the poll. @Hugo Stiglitz - ban / prohibit sale - close enough for Surly purposes?

Yeah

TahoeHorn · April 5, 2018

I voted for five I think, but I wouldn't support just any law. For example I'd support expanding background checks but there would be a lot of proposals I wouldn't support. It needs to have tyhe right exceptions, cost and so on.

77horn · April 5, 2018

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We must close the private sale loophole and make sure all sales undergo a background check.

Serious question. Would this open the door (if it is not already open) to anyone being able to do a background check on anyone? Is that what we want? Back in the early nineties, I was in a brought in to lead a Cub Scout Pack in which the previous leader was a cop who ran background checks on other potential adult leaders. Caused a hell of a ruckus.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

If there is sufficient interest after this poll runs it's course, maybe we can do another with proposals we absolutely would not support. For now though, I thought it might be constructive to see what folks DO support.

Hugo Stiglitz · April 5, 2018

Just now, 77horn said:

Serious question. Would this open the door (if it is not already open) to anyone being able to do a background check on anyone? Is that what we want? Back in the early nineties, I was in a brought in to lead a Cub Scout Pack in which the previous leader was a cop who ran background checks on other potential adult leaders. Caused a hell of a ruckus.

I don’t know how that would work.

There would be some fine details to iron out if legislation attempted to go down that road.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

Just now, 77horn said:

Serious question. Would this open the door (if it is not already open) to anyone being able to do a background check on anyone? Is that what we want? Back in the early nineties, I was in a brought in to lead a Cub Scout Pack in which the previous leader was a cop who ran background checks on other potential adult leaders. Caused a hell of a ruckus.

Universal background checks (or Expand/require NICS background checks for private sales as listed in the poll), assuming the checks are maintained in a database, eventually build a searchable record of gun ownership. It's a de facto gun registration list.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

38 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We must close the private sale loophole and make sure all sales undergo a background check

How? So I have already given my son my old Henry Golden Boy .22lr and my Ruger 10/22. He's 11. So you are saying he must undergo a background check. OK, fine. Let's say I am the one gun owner on the planet that complies with this absurd policy. What are you going to find? What is in his "background" that will be uncovered?

The Columbine kids? Major Nadal? Cruz? What in their background becomes actionable? Cruz posted on social media he wanted to be a "professional school shooter". Is the background check picking that up? He's approached after a 'pause' in placed on his purchase then. He laughs it off, says he's soooo sorry, was just kidding, realizes his mistake, waits a little while longer. These are planned attacks. Kid had smoke grenades (anyone want to chime on how he got those?) and was able to shoot and move while wearing a gas mask - if you've ever tried it, it's not easy. Takes quite a bit of practice. He also had his end-game planned out to blend in with the ensuing chaos as just another scared teenager. So with this level of detailed planning, how are you thwarting this exactly as you have it detailed out with a background check? These are not spur of the moment crimes of passion.

Say you get a hit on social media: Is he banned for life? Is this like the opaque no-fly list that you don't know you are on, nor have a clear process on how to get off? Do you alert local LE? We tried that. More than 30 times? The feds? Tried that too. Both failed.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

32 minutes ago, bernorange said:

It's a de facto gun registration list.

And we all know it is - which is why it's a disqualified as an option.

bad_teammate · April 5, 2018

Where's the option for "More Gun Control Threads"?

bernorange · April 5, 2018

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Where's the option for "More Gun Control Threads"?

http://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?forumId=17&do=add

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

The list is also quite incomplete. It has the usual litany of options the left likes to trot out, but it's missing most of what the right has proposed. Why are both sides not represented?

Enforce existing laws before we add an others. The FBI failed twice after they were alerted. Broward CO. sheriff contacted 39 times! LE screwed up with the S.Carolina shooter. They screwed up in the Texas church shooting. They screwed up in San Bernadino.

As a side note - with these clear failures at every level, why would you assume law abiding gun owners would turn over their means of protection in the face of such utter incompetence?

Straw buyers. Prosecute these occurrences. In 2013 there were 48k+ cases brought against straw buyers. 44 were prosecuted.
GRVO's: gun violence restraining orders
Mental Health - why is this not included in background checks? Virtually all these shooters had this in common and were actively take meds for it.
Focus on the schools themselves:

The utter absurdity of these gun-free zones need to go. Minus one (Gifford), every shooting has occurred in these zones. Every one. How this is not brought up each and every time is baffling. Schools. College campuses. Theatre. Military base. It's the one common denominator.

Physical barriers at schools: armed security, monitored entry points. Even metal detectors as you see in inner-city schools.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The list is also quite incomplete. It has the usual litany of options the left likes to trot out, but it's missing most of what the right has proposed. Why are both sides not represented?

Did you read the OP? I included everything I recalled seeing being discussed. I asked for your help in identifying anything missing that should be there. Hugo offered some suggestions and I included them. This isn't difficult.

"Enforce existing laws" is not a policy proposal for a new law, so it's not included in a poll of new law proposals. I'm not oppressing you, I promise.

GRVO = red flag law

If you can flesh out what specific change you are supporting wrt mental health and the NICS system, I'll be happy to add it to the poll.

I'll add a poll option to ban gun free zones.

FondrenRoad · April 5, 2018

1 hour ago, bernorange said:

Universal background checks (or Expand/require NICS background checks for private sales as listed in the poll), assuming the checks are maintained in a database, eventually build a searchable record of gun ownership. It's a de facto gun registration list.

Theres already a de facto gun registration list. The ATF database is digitized but not searchable. It requires a negligible amount of work to index them. The camel's nose is in the tent if someone wants to round up your guns. Might as well allow that info to be useful now since its already usable enough to achieve your biggest fear if big gov't ever wants to do it.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

... Might as well allow that info to be useful now ...

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

Theres already a de facto gun registration list. The ATF database is digitized but not searchable. It requires a negligible amount of work to index them. The camel's nose is in the tent if someone wants to round up your guns. Might as well allow that info to be useful now since its already usable enough to achieve your biggest fear if big gov't ever wants to do it.

The ATF is stuck in the stone age thanks to the NRA lobby. There's no way they're getting more money, ever.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

19 minutes ago, bernorange said:

"Enforce existing laws" is not a policy proposal for a new law, so it's not included in a poll of new law proposals.

If the point of this exercise is to flush out various options to further reduce already declining homicide and gun-related crimes, then this absolutely needs to be a part of the discussion. The point being we are unable to effectively fund and enforce the laws we have currently - so reconcile this with layering new laws on top of the ones we already have trouble managing?

Edited April 5, 2018 by BabaYaga

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

If the point of this exercise is to flush out various options to further reduce already declining homicide and gun-related crimes, then this absolutely needs to be a part of the discussion. The point being we are unable to effectively fund and enforce the laws we have currently - so reconcile this with layering new laws on top of the ones we already have trouble managing?

I actually agree with this, but it also probably falls under the scope of "Increase funding for / modernize BATF"

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

I actually agree with this, but it also probably falls under the scope of "Increase funding for / modernize BATF"

The right fears a gun registry. Understand this concern, and work from there. The right also supports the ATF. So when discussions of "gun research" and "modernization" of the databases are discussed, laser-like specifics need to be on the table. Regarding research, we talking about education strategies, gun storage, or we talking about restrictions on purchases?

As for databases/tracking - we talking about tracking occurrences & statistics, or tracking the firearms themselves? There is a real fear of ATF overreach.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

I have no quarrel with the meta issue being part of the discussion. I included "none of the other options" for peeps who take a hard line against any new policy proposals. I just don't see how any legislator is supposed move the needle with "enforce existing laws". That's a bigger issue than any legislation can accomplish.

"The left" is angry. "They" demand action (from Congress). My intention with this poll was to survey popular support (as much as Surly Politics board represents "popular" opinion) for the various things I have seen people advocating. If more people think the answer is to let Congress wither in gridlock and focus on the Administrative branch of our government to put higher priority on assigning resources, training and management culture to effect better enforcement of existing laws and opportunities, that would be fine with me.

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

The right fears a gun registry. Understand this concern, and work from there. The right also supports the ATF. So when discussions of "gun research" and "modernization" of the databases are discussed, laser-like specifics need to be on the table. Regarding research, we talking about education strategies, gun storage, or we talking about restrictions on purchases?

As for databases/tracking - we talking about tracking occurrences & statistics, or tracking the firearms themselves? There is a real fear of ATF overreach.

Track the guns and who they're owned by. If you're afraid of that you're a fucking nut and too fucking bad.

The right does not support the ATF. The ATF is funded like Oklahoma public schools. It's a joke. They do their jobs with all their limbs bound.

Bat Guano · April 5, 2018

Fixed magazines - 10 rounds

Detachable mags - 7 rounds.

Numbers pulled out of my ass, but they seem about right.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

Just now, Brian Fantana said:

Track the guns and who they're owned by. If you're afraid of that you're a fucking nut and too fucking bad.

...

That kind of rhetoric is not constructive to honest discussion. It's also very ignorant of history, including very recent history.

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2017/12/04/honolulu-pd-review-gun-confiscation-policy/

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

If you're afraid of that you're a fucking nut and too fucking bad.

If you are afraid of that you are a student of history and know that every mass gun confiscation was precipitated by a national gun registry.

David Dennison · April 5, 2018

I agree with Justice Stevens on this. The Second Amendment is the problem.

I know it will never happen.

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

13 minutes ago, bernorange said:

That kind of rhetoric is not constructive to honest discussion. It's also very ignorant of history, including very recent history.

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2017/12/04/honolulu-pd-review-gun-confiscation-policy/

Were anyone's guns actually confiscated? No. The Honolulu PD misinterpreted the law, intentionally or not, and were rightly called out on it.

12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

If you are afraid of that you are a student of history and know that every mass gun confiscation was precipitated by a national gun registry.

Yeah, I'm not buying it. As a gun owner, I have no issue with the government knowing what guns I own.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Brian Fantana

FondrenRoad · April 5, 2018

38 minutes ago, bernorange said:

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

It means 285 million plus gun purchases are imaged and on ATF servers already. All that needs to happen is an OCR and index and you have a searchable db. If future evil govt wants to do that, theyll just do that and confiscate away. We could just go ahead and make it searchable now so we can use it to screen for nutjobs and all we would be doing is saving future evil govt a month of IT project mgmt fees.

Edited April 5, 2018 by FondrenRoad

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

19 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Were anyone's guns actually confiscated? No. The Honolulu PD misinterpreted the law, intentionally or not, and were rightly called out on it.

Yeah, I'm not buying it. As a gun owner, I have no issue with the government knowing what guns I own.

Not "buying it"? Good for you. I'm sure neither were the Turks (1.5 Armenians disarmed and ethnically "cleansed"), Cambodians under Pol Pot (2 million murdered post-confiscation), the Chinese under Mao (20 million), the Russians under Stalin (20 million), or the Germans (13 million).

Closer then? Guatemala in the 80's. Gun control precipitating close to 100,000 killed. 1994 - Rwanda (Tutsi's disarmed) and over a million were slaughtered.

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

Nobody's advocating mass disarmament or mass confiscation so you can fuck right off (again) with that strawman garbage.

Edit: Actually I'm just going to ignore you because I'm not going to play a part in letting you derail another thread with your hand-wringing alarmist bullshit.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Brian Fantana

bernorange · April 5, 2018

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

... We could just go ahead and make it searchable now so we can use it to screen for nutjobs ...

To be sure I'm understanding you, you want the NICS background check database to be used as a gun registry to allow govco (DHS, local LEOs, etc.) to search for peeps whenever they want to see if they own a gun?

Anastasis · April 5, 2018

22 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

It means 285 million plus gun purchases are imaged and on ATF servers already. All that needs to happen is an OCR and index and you have a searchable db. If future evil govt wants to do that, theyll just do that and confiscate away. We could just go ahead and make it searchable now so we can use it to screen for nutjobs and all we would be doing is saving future evil govt a month of IT project mgmt fees.

Can you provide some links or additional details on this. My understanding is that 4473 forms are stored locally at the FFL and only under very rare situations are they transferred to BATF.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

14 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Nobody's advocating mass disarmament or mass confiscation so you can fuck right off (again) with that strawman garbage.

Edit: Actually I'm just going to ignore you because I'm not going to play a part in letting you derail another thread with your hand-wringing alarmist bullshit.

Yeah. Despite a hundred years worth of examples of a direct link from registration to confiscation....we'll just take your word for it.

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

9 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Yeah. Despite a hundred years worth of examples of a direct link from registration to confiscation....we'll just take your word for it.

I'll give it to you that perhaps having every gun on file is a bit extreme, but let me ask you this question:

What about licensing? i.e. following the Swedish model.

hayden_horn · April 5, 2018

the issue with registration and licensing is the second amendment. that's the argument.

however, as a gun owner, i'm not against registration. i think transfer of ownership should be tracked, and that there should be some kind of penalty for owning an unregistered gun. ie, you inherit dad's single shot 410? fill in a card and mail it in, or something like that.

i don't fear a massive gun registry. i understand that those who do see it as a natural first step to the government coming and getting your guns. but here's the rub - gun advocates are going to have to give some inches here or the anti-gun people WILL eventually take the whole mile. this zero-sum game bullshit is going to come back and bite us responsible gun owners in the ass.

this way, when someone is convicted of a felony, we know they have three registered handguns, those are surrendered. this way, when someone is declared mentally "dangerous," the registered guns can be surrendered and held in escrow until such time they are deemed "stable." you can do what you want with the terms, but i think that is reasonable.

i know the privilege of driving is not enshrined in the constitution, but comparing the number of boxes we have to check to 1) have a DL, 2) maintain a street legal car to that of gun ownership is a complete incongruity for me.

hayden_horn · April 5, 2018

also, i fully believe in the idea of licensing certain classes of weapons. the discussion would get a bit complex at that point, but i think handguns and multi-shot long rifles are probably classes i would consider. i would not consider a shotgun, i don't think. completion of a gun safety course would be part. this is more about preventing accidents than mass shootings.

maybe a suggestion: everyone who wants to own a handgun has to have a CCL. or something like that. i don't know, just spitballing here.

Parliament · April 5, 2018

Common sense gun laws:

Enforce existing laws on reporting psychos, wife-beaters, etc. FBI and/or ATF does their job and investigates tips.

Today, a licenced ccw holder doesn't need a background check to buy a retail gun. Big loophole there that nobody talks about. A card can be faked. They don't take cards from violent offenders. Gun store just looks at your card for its expiration date. Change that. Background call to the ATF for every retail sale.

Take silencers, AOW's and SBR's off of the Class 3 list. Law-abiding Americans can buy them like any other firearm.

Amobie · April 5, 2018

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

also, i fully believe in the idea of licensing certain classes of weapons. the discussion would get a bit complex at that point, but i think handguns and multi-shot long rifles are probably classes i would consider. i would not consider a shotgun, i don't think. completion of a gun safety course would be part. this is more about preventing accidents than mass shootings.

maybe a suggestion: everyone who wants to own a handgun has to have a CCL. or something like that. i don't know, just spitballing here.

We already have licensing for "certain classes of weapons". You can own a fully automatic weapon right now, you just have to register it with the ATF and pay ~$200 for the stamp. There just isn't that much demand for them so it's not really commercially viable to sell them like you would with a regular gun.

I don't agree on the CCL classes and I'll tell you why.

Those courses covers basic gun safety. The CCL classes make sure that people who are complete novices don't hurt themselves and others because they don't know what they are doing. Having to sit through a video presentation and spending a few minutes with an instructor isn't going to weed out crazy motherfuckers who intend to use that weapon to cause harm. Even the crazies can put on a good show and place nice for 30 minutes to an hour.

Amobie · April 5, 2018

2 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Enforce existing laws on reporting psychos, wife-beaters, etc. FBI and/or ATF does their job and investigates tips.

Today, a licenced ccw holder doesn't need a background check to buy a retail gun. Big loophole there that nobody talks about. A card can be faked. They don't take cards from violent offenders. Gun store just looks at your card for its expiration date. Change that. Background call to the ATF for every retail sale.

Take silencers, AOW's and SBR's off of the Class 3 list. Law-abiding Americans can buy them like any other firearm.

The FBI has really dropped the ball recently on a few of these high profile shootings so reforming it's role might be a good starting point.

Having the license linked to a main database might be able to fix that problem. That way it's something more than a piece of paper. Figuring out the logistics so that the database is always updated would be challenging.

bernorange · April 5, 2018

Re:gun registry/confiscation...

It wasn't that long ago that the eye of Sauron was set to nuke anyone labeled terrorist whether rightly or wrongly:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip-giraldi/the-violent-radicalizatio_b_74091.html

It also wasn't that long ago (2009) that the SPLC (and MIAC) was in the DHS' bonnet and targeting peeps for their political beliefs (Ron Paul supporter = terrorist). Also from 2009:

Quote

Antiterrorism training materials used by the Department of Defense teach that public protests should be regarded as “low-level terrorism,” according to a letter of complaint sent to the department by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California.

https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2009/06/14/defense-department-sees-protests-as-terrorism/

But go ahead and ridicule peeps for worrying about slippery slopes. I'm sure the next incarnation of Hitler (aka POTUS that I don't like) will be totally fine with dissent from now until forever.

Brian Fantana · April 5, 2018

Worrying about slippery slopes is one thing. Being a concern troll is quite another.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

52 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

gun advocates are going to have to give some inches here or the anti-gun people WILL eventually take the whole mile. this zero-sum game bullshit is going to come back and bite us responsible gun owners in the ass.

I think this is quite the mischaracterization. Gun owners are the only ones decade after decade giving anything. They've given and given and given. And after each concession, the only request from the left is more. It's never-ending. We have thousands upon thousands of pages of existing gun laws that are NOT being enforced. Today. And the left has the audacity to question millions of responsible gun owners who point this out?

Now we have actual policy makers openly advocating for an outright abolition of the amendment itself despite a precipitous drop YOY in homicides and gun-related crimes. If you are going to have intellectually honest discussion, this trend has to be a part of the discussion. And what is the left willing to give? Are they even going to entertain the idea of abolishing gun-free zones? Of course they aren't. To date they have scoffed at the idea.

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

27 minutes ago, Amobie said:

a licenced ccw holder doesn't need a background check to buy a retail gun.

They've already passed a background to have their CHL - so we need two? And how many CHL holders have committed a mass shooting? Or an NRA member for that matter? Are you being intellectually honest in who you point the finger at here?

BabaYaga · April 5, 2018

42 minutes ago, Amobie said:

isn't going to weed out crazy motherfuckers who intend to use that weapon to cause harm. Even the crazies can put on a good show and place nice for 30 minutes to an hour.

So what will? How are we going to regulate and legislate out "crazy"? These are not crimes of passion. They are premeditated and carefully crafted attacks. We have seen some have been planned for months and even years. Using different locations. Different weapon platforms. Different target demographics. Know what isn't different? They ALL occur in gun-free zones. Are you going to even attempt to reconcile this if the end-game truly is protecting people?

Johnny Sack · April 5, 2018

No way on the CDC. The Dickey amendment does not stop them from collecting data and studying gun violence. It stops them from lobbying for gun control. Which is what they wanted to do before Clinton signed the bill banning them from using tax dollars to lobby for gun control.

Amobie · April 5, 2018

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

They've already passed a background to have their CHL - so we need two? And how many CHL holders have committed a mass shooting? Or an NRA member for that matter? Are you being intellectually honest in who you point the finger at here?

Not in disagreement with you but if the CHL isn't revoked after someone has been convicted of a felony, that's a pretty big deal. I would classify that as an actual loophole.

If something happens to make it so someone would no longer pass a background check, somehow the retailer needs to know.

Sign In

Gun Control Proposals Poll