No, liberals scare people with warnings of imminent confiscation or Australian type gun plans. Teeray, you're a smart guy. Research every mass killing in the past 5 years and use your new laws. Let us know how it prevents it, who in addition to the perp gets punished, etc. Run your law through all those scenarios.
It was a simple question. Maybe/maybe not won't suffice. For you to infringe (on what many people believe whether you like it or not) on their rights...you better have a more concise answer than maybe/maybe not.
So you're trying to prosecute someone for not reporting a gun theft or selling a gun (private sell/gift) to a person not knowing their intent? Oh the hypotheticals this nonsense could raise. I really don't think you have thought everything through. Besides, it does nothing about the existing stock. You're ready to prosecute grandpa for giving a gun to his grandson (when he was 15), who goes schizo in his 20s and mass kills a bunch of people. Even IF we have a system in place to do all this, you cannot prosecute someone when intent is not known. We have those laws now. The database for new sales might work, but as I mentioned does not speak to the millions already out there. Are you going to force a registration on those? Ahem...5th amendment. Just look at states that have already tried forced registration. How's that working out. This issue is much bigger than a few simple words in a forum thread. But as the people in those states that have been asked to register their guns and get into a db....there is a major pushback and rightfully so. If the state had a listing of all purchases (which they may), then they have a listing of a lot of new criminals. They plan to simply round everyone up? Good luck with that.
LOL...and doesn't hurt when the debate moderator was a member of the Clinton Global Initiative. Way to go CNN! http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stephanopoulos-was-also-member-of-clinton-global-initiative-along-with-these-13-big-media-names/ You won't hear much from the other candidates on this though...cause everyone's on board with the coronation. Bernie is just exciting the left base for the eventual handoff.
I've never been against comprehensive background checks, BUT I'm completely against being in any sort of database. I've specified how I feel it should work. There should be a generic government background check that checks for felons, people with restraining orders, sexual predators, mentally insane/red flag based on prescriptions, etc....BUT the moment the person passes or fails the check...the transaction can occur. The government does not know whether the check was for a teacher's application, a gun purchase, or working with youth. There should never be a government gun confiscation database that would incriminate me the moment a gun confiscation/ban should ever occur in the future. That in and of itself would be a violation of my fifth amendment I would think.
I say we put breathalizers in every bar so someone has to blow and prove they aren't drunk before they can purchase a drink. Sound good? Or maybe unless a DD can sign an affidavit, or you can show a taxi voucher.
Any bets whether Anderson Cooper will ask HRC if she'll run her government security as stupidly as she did her state department? Just read the AP story today... http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/ap-clinton-server-ran-software-risked-hacking-34435250