You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Guns - What do you think of this proposal?
On your first point - I thought this would make it much easier for police to enforce against criminals. Is it semi-automatic? Yes. Do they have a license? If not - go straight to jail.
Abuse of power seems to have been perfected at the FBI and DOJ in recent years - so I can understand why that would be a concern. You would need to make sure there were not clauses like that in their (an any sneaky ways of achieving the same)
No, you go to jail for murder, assault, crimes, regardless of whether or not you have a gun license, permit, documents, or anything. Prohibition didn't stop drugs, beer, sex, guns, music, goods, etc, in so many countries for so many years. It creates black markets. Texas has more guns but less violence, murder, than GUN-FREE CHICAGO. We all know this.
I am against prohibitions generally as well - but I do not think the author is proposing a prohibition. It looks like it would be easier to get a gun in many states under his proposal.
"This bargain would be scary for both sides. Cities like New York and Chicago would have to allow licensed, law-abiding citizens to own AR-15s and high-capacity magazines within their borders, and residents of gun-friendly states like Texas would have to accept a more thorough level of vetting of ownership of certain guns than they currently do. The gun rights side would be justifiably concerned that a hostile Congress and president could one day attempt to use the licensing scheme to limit the gun rights of large, law-abiding sections of the population, possibly on some arbitrary pretext."
The problem is not within law-abiding citizens who follow gun laws. The people that kill are people the FBI investigate in most cases. The FBI failed to stop them. We see this happen in America so many times. We also see people with guns shooting down the shooters, the serial killers.