Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"There's little-to-no punishment for being a straw purchaser," said Brad Beyersdorf, spokesman for the ATF Denver division. "Gang members know it, drug trafficking organizations know it."
So here we have it from someone whose job it is to enforce gun laws that all those things that Conservatives have been saying about straw purchasing amounts to nothing.
And now knowing that we have an effective deterrent against criminals getting their hands on guns, the logical solution would be to strengthen that deterrent, right? Not if you're a Republican.
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved a measure that would make the practice of illegally buying a gun for someone else a felony, and increase penalties for the crime.
The measure, which addresses a practice known as straw purchasing, passed the committee by 11 to 7; the only Republican to vote in favor was Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa.
So here we have it from someone whose job it is to enforce gun laws that all those things that Conservatives have been saying about straw purchasing amounts to nothing.
And now knowing that we have an effective deterrent against criminals getting their hands on guns, the logical solution would be to strengthen that deterrent, right? Not if you're a Republican.
Many people have been saying...well, OK, SCREAMING that we don't need MORE laws, we need better enforcement of the EXISTING laws!
By the way, it would appear that you are saying that if I buy a gun to give to my son for his birthday, you want that to be a FELONY?
Sorry, no, I don't agree!
If they don't enforce the law, what's the point in changing the classification of the crime?
I know that straw purchases are one of the largest sources of guns used in crime, and I support the existence of that law. I don't support ANY new laws until the existing ones are enforced, though.
Every new law takes a chip from our freedom. Sometimes it's a small chip, and sometimes they're cutting us off at the knees. I refuse to accept any new laws that take away any amount of my liberty until they start enforcing the existing ones, and nobody else should, either. This isn't a left/right or a pro-gun/anti-gun thing. This is a freedom/liberty thing. Nobody should stand for a law that restricts their liberties - even if it's one they choose not to exercise - that will not be enforced and will not have the desired effect.
1. The ATF hasn't even had a full-time Director in 7 or 8 years.
2. It's so convoluted and full of loop holes to go after someone for lying on that form that it borders on pointless. Case in point: the gun-walking scandal. The gov't has it documented that over 30 people "lied" on that form, yet prosecutors could only build a case against 1. You consider that a good law?
Many people have been saying...well, OK, SCREAMING that we don't need MORE laws, we need better enforcement of the EXISTING laws!
By the way, it would appear that you are saying that if I buy a gun to give to my son for his birthday, you want that to be a FELONY?
Sorry, no, I don't agree!
This is what happens when laws are written with wreckless abandon. In the last four years they (Feds) have added thousands of them, yet they can't enforce the ones already in the books. When the government finds it impossible to enforce so many laws, the alternative is to start taking freedoms away, making it much easier to control the masses.
Many people have been saying...well, OK, SCREAMING that we don't need MORE laws, we need better enforcement of the EXISTING laws!
By the way, it would appear that you are saying that if I buy a gun to give to my son for his birthday, you want that to be a FELONY?
Sorry, no, I don't agree!
IS your son allowed to have a gun? Your argument that you want to gift something to someone that can buy it themselves is not a reason to leave a loop hole that allows criminals to get guns w/ little-to-no repercussions. That would be like arguing against need a prescription for certain drugs b/c you want to be able to pick them up for your son. At some point the inconvenience of you not being able to do a favor for someone is outweighed by the real-world consequences of criminals using those same methods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
If they don't enforce the law, what's the point in changing the classification of the crime?
I know that straw purchases are one of the largest sources of guns used in crime, and I support the existence of that law. I don't support ANY new laws until the existing ones are enforced, though.
Every new law takes a chip from our freedom. Sometimes it's a small chip, and sometimes they're cutting us off at the knees. I refuse to accept any new laws that take away any amount of my liberty until they start enforcing the existing ones, and nobody else should, either. This isn't a left/right or a pro-gun/anti-gun thing. This is a freedom/liberty thing. Nobody should stand for a law that restricts their liberties - even if it's one they choose not to exercise - that will not be enforced and will not have the desired effect.
Exactly. You don't care about stopping criminals from getting guns. The impact on legal buyers is minimal-to-non-existent. The people that would be the most impacted by strengthening straw purchasing are criminals.
How can one read this and come to the conclusion the OP does? It's just mind boggling. Yes gang members know there is no worry that the laws will actually be enforced. New laws all of a sudden will be?
Enforce the current laws. There is no one against that. Except those in charge of enforcing them it would seem.
1. The ATF hasn't even had a full-time Director in 7 or 8 years.
2. It's so convoluted and full of loop holes to go after someone for lying on that form that it borders on pointless. Case in point: the gun-walking scandal. The gov't has it documented that over 30 people "lied" on that form, yet prosecutors could only build a case against 1. You consider that a good law?
Laws are just like a lock, it only keeps an honest man with in the law.
However, when you have the VP saying....we don't have the time....does not help the situation, now does it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
