WSJ - Menino & Bloomberg on Heller

[jar]

Jose, I think Garys was talking about the employee background check.

I'm also in the oppose every single law camp. When gun-grabbers say compromise, they don't mean a compromise between total freedom and a total ban (which is where we are now), they mean a compromise between where we are now and a total ban. Post-Heller, they may not be trying for a total ban, but they're still trying to asymptotically approach one.

 

[PaulD]

I don't know what it takes to be able to legally own a gun in NYC. However, in Boston it takes an initial cost of ~$500 to get an LTC A or B and it will then be restricted. The costs involved are the safety course, the application fee and the fee to join a club.

How is this a middle ground? In fact, how does it not push a poor person towards an illegal firearm?

 

[drgrant]

How is this a middle ground? In fact, how does it not push a poor person towards an illegal firearm?

And in places like shitcago, one doesn't have much of a choice. An article was posted here awhile back that basically was talking about shitcago residents going downstate, buying handguns, and illegally keeping them in the city. If you think about it, what choices do they have? They can stay unarmed, and be robbed/beaten/killed, or do whatever they can to get a gun.

One part of the debate that frequently is ignored is how many more criminals are CREATED by gun laws. For example, there are tons of (otherwise non criminals) walking around with guns in CA, despite the fact that in most
populated areas it is impossible to obtain a permit there.

Ironically that is another angle to the antis end game- to turn gun owners into criminals so they can just throw them in prison. Anti chiefs and the like willingly go along with this because it allows them to look like they're
"doing something" by having more people to arrest.

-Mike

 

[Nickle]

What is everyones thoughts on this one?

Require gun dealers to do background checks on employees.

Though I do hate Bloomberg and Mumbles to pieces, this one seems very reasonable and non-infringing on our rights.

And to be clear, I AM against the other 'recommendations'.

The BATFE already run those checks on gun shop employees that are deemed "responsible parties".

I would know this, as they ran checks on me, when I got officially put on my father's business as a "responsible party".

So what does a "responsible party" let me do?

Basically operate the business under no supervision, including making the NCIC check calls.

The managers at Wal-Mart have to make those checks, and I can tell you they are on the FFL, almost certain of it.

So, mark this one down as a dead issue and the 2 bozo's doing what they do best.

Fearmongering.

 

[matt1956]

34 Americans are murdered with a firearm

wait... the brady bunch says it's 80 people a day... I'm so confused... is one of them not being honest?

 

[matt1956]

What is everyones thoughts on this one?

Require gun dealers to do background checks on employees.

Though I do hate Bloomberg and Mumbles to pieces, this one seems very reasonable and non-infringing on our rights.

And to be clear, I AM against the other 'recommendations'.

seems like a no brainer to me...

 

[Edzo]

Here are some very positive letters to the editor in response to the Menino/Bloomberg piece.

Mayors Really Want Gun Prohibition, Not Temperance

 

[Garys]

Jose, I think Garys was talking about the employee background check.

I was.