Are individuals able to access criminal records? By and large, they are not. In the absence of any evidence demonstrating that private sales or gifts account for a significant number of gun offenses, what is the reason for demanding that citizens do background checks when they really can’t?
250,000,000 guns in this country. How many people with mental illness do you believe there are? Easy access is a problem.
Seriously, it’s not completely impossible. This would be funny if it wasn’t so serious. Laws don’t work, criminals are going to get guns, people with mental illnesses have rights, etc. etc.
It is an inevitable part of the process of sorting.
Seems some believe minor inconveniences are too much to sacrifice to stop any number of trouble makers, who might take another person’s life.
No, that’s not the reason. Four bishops, by your count, have called for more stringent gun laws. None of the others have. Stop saying it’s “the bishops” as if to include them all. It’s a maximum of four out of what, 534?
It’s your choice to exclude the other bishops, when a chairman of a USCCB committee speaks, and what he said is posted on their website. So, I have no intention of excluding the American bishops. There are more in agreement with controls.
So there is an acceptable body count, according to the source you’re providing?
This. I’m still waiting to see what documentation we have that this would have any effect on crime. When it comes to the Bill of Rights, I think a stict scrutiny review is called for.
The bill of rights does not remove the government’s right to regulate.
Understood, but if we are weighing the government’s interest against a constitutional right, for me there has to be an attainable and measurable effect on crime (which no one has provided) a compelling gov’t interest (probably have one here), the legislation should be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest (don’t think so, in this case), and done in the least restrictive means (again, I don’t think the Toomey/Manchin bill did this).
Not all of us are weighing the government’s interest. As the bishops referenced, this is in the interest of those innocent victims who lost their lives to gun violence.
So … you already know that the school shooters have been long established as dangers to the community … and you persist in acting as if they are first-timers.
No it doesn’t add up. Not all mental illnesses are identified until a person acts on them. We’ve had more than just school mass shootings.
You sure do a good job of keeping this thread at the top.
Then you are misrepresenting the position of the vast majority of the American bishops, which you don’t know any more than you know what Vladimir Putin had for lunch, and should be ashamed. If there are “more in agreement with controls” then name them and give the sources so we can see what they say. Otherwise, you have a maximum of four bishops who share your political position.
Show me one bishop being misrepresented. I am not ashamed. Those men are not so out of touch. They have a USSCB committee chairman who speaks, and then his words are posted on their website. As I say, I produced men of position within the USCCB, and the Vatican Chief Spokesman. You speak for who?
You have not demonstrated that a single person has died because lawful people don’t do background checks in private sales.
You don’t know the intent of my heart brother, It is also wrong, in my honest opinion, to attempt to inflame personally. Do you not realize that speaks for itself? Do you also feel the same way about the USCCB and Vatican?
