Let's pretend...

[HOLYROLLER]

I went to the Brady campaign site and read about the legislation they would currently like to pass;

1. Brady Background Checks at Gun Shows (to include private sales)
2. Strengthening the National Instant Criminal Background Check system (NICS)
3. Child Proof Handguns
4. Assault weapons ban

I KNOW that this will not be a popular opinion, but none of these laws sound so terrible. Am I missing some fine print or something? #1-I am not a criminal-no problem, #2-Again, I am not a criminal, #3-Im all for safety's, #4-Im OK with 10 round mags for pistols/rifles. Granted, I am not that well schooled in the finer points of gun legislation, but I dont believe I would strongly oppose these rules if they were in place. Be gentle....

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Pete]

Strengthening the NICS to what limit? Things can be strengthened to a point where it is impossible to pass the test.
I don't need more safeties on my guns, they should be optional at most.
I do not want any limitations on mag capacity, type of gun etc. Give them an inch and they will take the whole mile.

Do not enter into negotiation with them, you will lose.

[Redneck Repairs]

Brady check and Nics can be handled as one and simply . We dont need them , and certinly dont need them any stronger than they are now . Nics Brady check did a hell of a lot of good on the VT shooting didnt it ? They do nothing but put an artificial tax on firearms .

Nics check for private sales , again Why should we ? The only outcome is a tax on honest folks while criminals will still trade guns among themselves ... it costs time , money , and inconvenience for no reason . It will not keep a single gun out of a criminals hands .

Sport Utility weapon ban or mag restrictions , come on .. get real again no effect on crime .

Instead of asking what is the harm ( the harm is that rights get taken by small steps rather than fiat , and as soon as one small nibble of our rights becomes " normal " they come back for another ) Ask Why should we ? Just EXACTLY how will this help with a problem ? The only problem any of the above helps with is gunowners . It may make it too inconvenient or expensive for someone to bother with a purchace . Not for me , but how about that single mom on a fixed income that can scrape up say 100 bucks for a defenseive gun( purchaced private party ) to go with the restraining order she just got against joe q slob , but if she has to come up with 125 for transfer fees ect.. the kids dont even get mac and cheese for all the meals this week ?

Child proof guns : Are you barking mad ?? do you know how many elderly hand thier medicines to thier grandkids to open ? same principle applys , much better to gun proof your children . Oh but then you have to be RESPONSIBLE to do that. Like for instance ... ohh say most gunowners ?

[Timmy Jimmy]

1. If I want to sell you my Kimber Holyroller how do I go about checking you out. What if I just want to check you out so I say I am thinking about selling you a gun? How much do I have to pay to check you out? What if I want to sell you my car do I have to run a check on you as well you could be a criminal and want to use the gun as a get away car.

Private citizens do not have the ability to check out people.

I think FFLs already have to do the Brady check when they sell at a gun show.

2. NICS how much money do you want to pay in taxes to strengthen NICS and how thorough do you want this check to be? Do you need to know what your loan balance is on your car, what your mortgage is? When the last time you went to the doctor and why did you go? Did you get a speeding ticket last year did you run a stop sign in high school? Did you ever get a detention in high school, how many days were you absent in the 7th grade? Do you belong to a church? Is it the right kind of church? If you are catholic did you go to confession this last week and if so what did you confess? Exactly how much do you want to strengthen the NICS?

3. I think you have kids don't you and what is childproofed in your house and what was child proofed in your parents house that you could not get in to if you really wanted?

4. What is an assault weapon, and which part of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Don't you understand?

[AKsrule]

Ummmmmm, their TRUE GOAL is to Eliminate all Firearms in
Civilian Hands.

[Bob The Great]

Instead of asking what is the harm ( the harm is that rights get taken by small steps rather than fiat , and as soon as one small nibble of our rights becomes " normal " they come back for another ) Ask Why should we ? Just EXACTLY how will this help with a problem ?

This is the core of the problem: Incrementalism and burden of proof. Why should we have to point out the problems or abuses that can (and usually do) come from any given limitation to our rights? It should be up to those who want the limitation to justify its usefulness, not the other way around. And btw, this is true of any rights infringement, not just 2A rights.

[sass20485]

Give them an inch, soon they have a foot, than a yard, then a mile.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is clear enough !!

TOO many worthless laws already, and the BG's still kill people, while ignoring the laws. Yet the sheep stand by thinking another law will stop it.

[Timmy Jimmy]

and one more question Holyroller:

If we gave them those four things do you think for one minute they would then disband the Brady Campaign?

[Smith&Wessonfan]

Holyroller, you have much to learn about our enemies and how they operate.

[p85]

Hell no. Repeat, hell no. Laws limit people who obey them. Laws do not slow the criminal element from doing what they intend to do.
You want change? Enforce the existing laws. Don't allow plea bargaining. Laws without enforcement are not worth the paper they are written on.

[Tye_Defender]

1. Brady Background Checks at Gun Shows (to include private sales)
2. Strengthening the National Instant Criminal Background Check system (NICS)
3. Child Proof Handguns
4. Assault weapons ban

Given that more people die every year by automobile, let's look at the restrictions for the privelege of driving (not a God given right).

1. Mandatory background check for Car purchase, even private party. I mean, you might be a drunk or reckless driver right? Got a DUI, or a speeding ticket for 20+ over? No car! Add the waiting period and you give the guy the money for your car and then wait 10 days, even though you came back clear when you gave him the money.

2. Strengthening the background check. Can't just check for drunk/reckless driving, now any speeding ticket and you have to wait 7 years to purchase a car.

3. Child proof car. This key thing is to easy (remember that kid that drove to the store on his own, side-swiping cars on the way?). Now in order to start your car you must turn the key while pressing brake and gas and rolling down the window. What happens when the window crank is acting up. Imagine that call to the Boss "Sorry, can't get to work, the car window won't roll down"?

4. SUV/high performance vehicle ban. Nobody has any reason to own a vehicle with a 6 cylinder engine. A 4 cylinder, or better yet a 3 will get you everywhere you want to go. And nobody needs a gas tank bigger then 10 gallons. You can't drive for 5 hours without a restroom break anyway.

All of these restrictions are almost reasonable. I am sure at least one of these would save lives. Imagine the decrease in DUI related deaths if all your vehicles were confiscated and you could not purchase another one with a single DUI conviction?

[bones]

The 2nd Amendment is about freedom.
All other amendments to the constitution are ultimately protected by a citizen who understands and who is willing to act upon the premise of the 2nd. The 2nd is not about hunting or providing food for the table or about shooting tin cans off a fence post. It is in reality about protecting the citizens right to a free and elected representative government. When the government pays no attention to the constitution, then, the 2nd is in effect the restart button for the constitution.
Why should I trust a government with guns, when the government doesn't trust me with a gun?

[Cupcake]

OK, I guess in the name of not being a coward, I should stand Idly by and allow Holyroller to be completely undefended and alone.

I would disagree with childproof guns or the assault weapons ban, not because I think they are terrible ideas, but because I do believe that we need to make our stand and not give one inch. They would then push for a little more and a little more. NO!

However, I have no problem with a background check, NOT FIREARM REGISTRATION, but a good NICS system and all transfers go through a FFL dealer, so I can't just check your background at will. Then again, if you are a felon, then it is public record anyway. OK you may beat me up now.

[QKShooter]

I have one huge problem with it all.

And that would be their hidden ultimate goal of never stopping until there are no guns and no gun rights left.

EXAMPLE:

Do you remember when television was free? AKA it didn't cost you anything to watch TV except for buying the TV?

But, damn you had to sit through all those commercials.

Then along came Cable TV and the big initial selling point of Cable TV was that we just pay a small monthly fee and then we can watch TV without any commercials at all. WOW! Great!

Gee Whiz! TV without any commercials!

So everybody "bit" on it and then they started slipping in the commercials.

A few here and there and then a few more....slowly.

And slowly.....slowly...the price started creeping up from $9.00 a month.

Now...here we are TODAY - Everybody pays AT LEAST $40.00 per month to be absolutely bombarded with 15 commercials in a row.

Now we pay BIG money to watch what we originally couldn't stand for free.

That's the Brady Bunch for you.

They are doing the exact same thing.

Incrementalism....is the name of their game.

Do Not Bite On It!

[Redneck Repairs]

No LBrombach no beating up , I had my say on the matter , I am not interested in argueing the issue . I merely present my views and attempt to explain my thought processes behind them . and if you read my post and honestly feel different then we can agree to disagree as gentlemen .