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.
Not sure what that has to do with the NICS. Denial of a weapon as a result of background checks happen all the time. I've seen them, not for me, but for others. Many times they are mistakes and they get cleared up after a day or so on their own. The provisions for appeals are outlined in the NICS Regulations at Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 25.10, and Subsection 103 (f) and (g) and Section 104 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993.
I imagine it would be difficult to get your rights restored here but it would sort of negate the point if it was easy. The problem would be a president who instructed whatever agency that was over this to ignore all requests simply because he said so.
This argument would have at one time been regulated to the conspiracy theorists but when you have presidents arguing they can ignore due process rights, that is no longer the case.
Quite the opposite. The post I was responding to suggested that this was a settled issue, because a former City-Data thread had already discussed it. My post said that my interpretation of the amendment isn't based on a City-Data thread. I certainly haven't denied interpretations of the 2nd amendment other than my own. That's the nature of interpretations. There are people who interpret the amendment who believe citizens should be able to own surface-to-air missiles and tanks, and I've never denied that that interpretation exists.
In my opinion, the only thing settled is that our current laws and policies have left us with a society where the mass slaughter of civilians is a regular occurrence. And that a problem.
Quite the opposite. The post I was responding to suggested that this was a settled issue, because a former City-Data thread had already discussed it. My post said that my interpretation of the amendment isn't based on a City-Data thread. I certainly haven't denied interpretations of the 2nd amendment other than my own. That's the nature of interpretations. There are people who interpret the amendment who believe citizens should be able to own surface-to-air missiles and tanks, and I've never denied that that interpretation exists.
In my opinion, the only thing settled is that our current laws and policies have left us with a society where the mass slaughter of civilians is a regular occurrence. And that a problem.
You are certainly the utmost expert on your opinion. I'm not sure what that gets you though.
You are certainly the utmost expert on your opinion. I'm not sure what that gets you though.
Opinions don't get people anything. But if you have one on the best way to create a society where we can reasonably expect to go 6 months without a massacre of innocent civilians, this is as good a place as any to share it.
"Question for those who are opposed to gun regulation"
Misleading question!
All gun owners are in favor of some minimal, sensible and effective regulations. Beyond that, most regulation proposed or passed do absolutely nothing to address the largest source of gun violence. Gangs, career criminals, drugs and drug users.
The discussion is not divided between those who wants no regulation vs those who want regulation.
It is divided bertween those who support meaningless regulation, which chips away at freedom and those who support effective legislation.
One off events are being used to further anti gun legislation to falsely represent the heart of the gun violence problem; while the greatest offenders are allowed to go unaffected.
The only conclusion to meaningless gun legislation is that antis have roped and branded their 'great slippery slope' argument and turned that legal conjured imaginary monster to work for them by eventually eliminating all firearms. That great slippery slope is used by libs for every social justice issue, to ban words and pop tarts chewed into the shape of a gun and now react in disbelief when gun owners cite the slippery slope bearing down on their gun ownership.
If I could pose another question to those who oppose regulation (an actual question, not an internet HERE"S WHY UR WRONG question): what is your opinion on the dozens of nations that don't have sky-high levels of gun deaths and mass slaughter of civilians on a regular basis, yet have also not been taken over by tyrants? Do you see anything admirable about these systems, and is there anything we can learn from them?
First of all, the United States is unique among nations, even though there are people who try to deny it. We have been called "the great experiment" for a reason. Trying to impose the same laws which are used in a place like Japan or even the U.K. would not only be impossible, it would also be a tragic exercise in failure. Can we learn something from those other nations? Yes. But emulating the nations which many people have left because of their laws in order to come to the United States should never be a goal.
Secondly, while gun deaths are down in those other countries, violent crime is much higher in many of them than it is in the United States. The old axiom of "an armed society is a polite society" is still a valid one, whether the anti-gun crowd wants to admit it or not.
Quite frankly, the only tyranny I'm concerned about occurring in the United States is a democratic tyranny, where government gets away with trampling on constitutionally guaranteed rights by claiming "the majority of the people support it." Our government was intentionally not created as a democracy in order to avoid this very situation. If you pay attention, we have been skirting the edges of a democratic tyranny for a couple of decades now, but many people would like to ignore that fact. Any time someone tries to argue their ideology with the term "the majority support....", it makes me shudder. While I applaud them for doing their research in some cases, but their lack of education in how the U.S. government is supposed to function makes me weep for our future.
Opinions don't get people anything. But if you have one on the best way to create a society where we can reasonably expect to go 6 months without a massacre of innocent civilians, this is as good a place as any to share it.
I know it doesn't consist of removing the rights of people who would never consider doing something like that. But you will note that I said the discussion concerning the mentally ill is a discussion we should have.
I know it doesn't consist of removing the rights of people who would never consider doing something like that. But you will note that I said the discussion concerning the mentally ill is a discussion we should have.
Maybe some day we will.
I hope we will too. But complicated problems rarely have simple solutions. If we're ever able to stop the pattern of mass killings it will probably come from a lot of boring and slow change rather than finding The Answer. But couldn't universal background checks on all firearm purchases be a component of the solution? I don't want to keep firearms out of the hands of responsible owners, but it doesn't seem like background checks would do that.
The Supreme Court felt that people of African descent were 3/5th of a human. Thankfully, my English skills are advanced enough that I'm able to read the following without the aid of 9 other people.
This is really an issue of mind over matter. I don't mind because what you think doesn't matter.
Once again, I'm able to read the amendment without consulting City-Data members.
Once again, I'm able to tell you you're wrong without consulting anyone.
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.
