Anonymous wrote:You let me know when a gun points itself and pulls the trigger.

Sure, just as soon as you let us know when someone kills 40 people in one minute with a knife.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

Does the NRA still have any power? Have they fallen apart after the scandals of recent years? Can we get legislation through now?

The N.R.A. never HAD the power. They might’ve written a few campaign donation checks, but the REAL power is the hundred million gun owners who vote (mostly) republican, and will not support anyone seen as a gun banner. And the N.R.A. isn’t the only gun rights group who bestows politicians with approval or disapproval. But the real power is and has always been in gun owners who vote.

Give me a break. The NRA is one of the most powerful lobbies in existence. They receive tens of millions of dollars from gun manufacturers and sellers. Gun industry CEOs sit on the NRA board and are deeply entwined in its fundraising and organizational activities. They have armies of lawyers challenging gun regulations. They push propaganda designed to stoke fear. They decide which candidates to promote. Virtually all the NRA’s activities are carried out in pursuit of a single goal: Helping the firearms industry sell more guns.

If you think you have any power compared to them, you’re delusional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

So, no database, persistent, searchable, or otherwise, played any role in determining the source of the MN shooter’s firearms, and would not have played any such role in any event? Got it.

No, a database didn’t play a role because no such database exists. That’s the problem.

Authorities had to do it the hard way: get search warrants, dig through the shooter’s residence, manually comb through papers and devices, and hope they’d find a receipt. They got lucky. But luck isn’t a strategy, and it’s certainly not a substitute for a functioning system.

Now imagine how different that would be if we had a persistent, searchable database of gun transfers. The moment the suspect was identified, investigators could have pulled up:

- Whether he himself bought the gun, and if he bought it,
- When and where he bought it
- Whether his background check came back in time and what he put on his 4473 form
- Whether he’d purchased other weapons recently
- If he was at the store with others buying guns at the same time
- If he and the others bought more guns at other stores

Instead of hours or days of manual work, it could take minutes.

Let’s put it in terms even the “enforce the laws we already have” crowd should grasp: Suppose a mass shooter files off the serial number and destroys the receipt. Without a database, the trail goes cold. Unless a gun shop employee happens to remember him, and happens to call the police, there’s no way to trace the weapon.

Now imagine we do have a database. Investigators search the suspect’s name and discover he bought multiple guns, along with several associates who also made large purchases with him, across different stores. Suddenly, what looked like a lone wolf is now a coordinated cell, and law enforcement has leads, patterns, and names.

That’s the difference between reactive chaos and proactive intelligence. And the reason we don’t have that system? Because lobbying groups made sure it’s illegal to build one.

So yes, we “have laws.” But we’ve also deliberately blinded the people tasked with enforcing them. That’s not liberty. That’s sabotage.

That sounds like doing police work.

Why not make it easier for them to do their job and catch the bad guys?

No one in history would ever use those lists to confiscate weapons from their political opponents. There's no way that could possibly ever lead to killing millions of people in a holocaust.

Painters from Austria would never ever consider it.

Who will be confiscating your guns? Kamala Harris? Joe Biden? What specific actions have they taken that lead you to believe they’re planning to disarm the population as a prelude to concentration camps and genocide?

I mean, people see worrisome tendencies in Trump, but a) he’s not going after you, you’re his base b) whenever Democrats raise similar concerns, we’re told we’re being histrionic and disrespectful to the millions who died in the Holocaust.

So: you’re being histrionic and disrespectful to the millions who died in the Holocaust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disarmament_of_the_German_Jews

Check your history and what Harris even supported in 2005. You will find that registration performed before the nazis led to the nazis being able to sieze weapons years later.

Can you guarantee no one will do so in the future?

You let me know when a gun points itself and pulls the trigger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

So, no database, persistent, searchable, or otherwise, played any role in determining the source of the MN shooter’s firearms, and would not have played any such role in any event? Got it.

No, a database didn’t play a role because no such database exists. That’s the problem.

Authorities had to do it the hard way: get search warrants, dig through the shooter’s residence, manually comb through papers and devices, and hope they’d find a receipt. They got lucky. But luck isn’t a strategy, and it’s certainly not a substitute for a functioning system.

Now imagine how different that would be if we had a persistent, searchable database of gun transfers. The moment the suspect was identified, investigators could have pulled up:

- Whether he himself bought the gun, and if he bought it,
- When and where he bought it
- Whether his background check came back in time and what he put on his 4473 form
- Whether he’d purchased other weapons recently
- If he was at the store with others buying guns at the same time
- If he and the others bought more guns at other stores

Instead of hours or days of manual work, it could take minutes.

Let’s put it in terms even the “enforce the laws we already have” crowd should grasp: Suppose a mass shooter files off the serial number and destroys the receipt. Without a database, the trail goes cold. Unless a gun shop employee happens to remember him, and happens to call the police, there’s no way to trace the weapon.

Now imagine we do have a database. Investigators search the suspect’s name and discover he bought multiple guns, along with several associates who also made large purchases with him, across different stores. Suddenly, what looked like a lone wolf is now a coordinated cell, and law enforcement has leads, patterns, and names.

That’s the difference between reactive chaos and proactive intelligence. And the reason we don’t have that system? Because lobbying groups made sure it’s illegal to build one.

So yes, we “have laws.” But we’ve also deliberately blinded the people tasked with enforcing them. That’s not liberty. That’s sabotage.

That sounds like doing police work.

Why not make it easier for them to do their job and catch the bad guys?

No one in history would ever use those lists to confiscate weapons from their political opponents. There's no way that could possibly ever lead to killing millions of people in a holocaust.

Painters from Austria would never ever consider it.

Who will be confiscating your guns? Kamala Harris? Joe Biden? What specific actions have they taken that lead you to believe they’re planning to disarm the population as a prelude to concentration camps and genocide?

I mean, people see worrisome tendencies in Trump, but a) he’s not going after you, you’re his base b) whenever Democrats raise similar concerns, we’re told we’re being histrionic and disrespectful to the millions who died in the Holocaust.

So: you’re being histrionic and disrespectful to the millions who died in the Holocaust.

The US is a vast wasteland of ignorant people who love guns. Gun control will not happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. They’ve proposed several ideas. All you’re doing is shrugging and coming up with excuses for why nothing can ever be done to reduce gun violence.

Other countries have addressed the issue. It’s not impossible like you claim.

If people keep fantasizing about illegal and unconstitutional “solutions” I’ll keep pointing it out. I’ve heard all of these arguments before, yet here we are. That people here think they’re coming with unique solutions is interesting.

There's no such thing as unconstitutional solutions. All we need is a President to take action and SCOTUS to interpret those actions. That's the roadmap Trump has established. It's not going to happen now, but it can happen in the future. There is absolutely nothing sacred about the Second Amendment or permanent with respect to how it's currently interpreted.

You won’t live to see it, but I wish you luck. At least you’re realistic, which is more than I can say for most gun control advocates here.

I mean, you don't really wish me luck. I assume you're still eagerly awaiting more school slaughters so that you get the opportunity to loosen more restrictions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. They’ve proposed several ideas. All you’re doing is shrugging and coming up with excuses for why nothing can ever be done to reduce gun violence.

Other countries have addressed the issue. It’s not impossible like you claim.

If people keep fantasizing about illegal and unconstitutional “solutions” I’ll keep pointing it out. I’ve heard all of these arguments before, yet here we are. That people here think they’re coming with unique solutions is interesting.

There's no such thing as unconstitutional solutions. All we need is a President to take action and SCOTUS to interpret those actions. That's the roadmap Trump has established. It's not going to happen now, but it can happen in the future. There is absolutely nothing sacred about the Second Amendment or permanent with respect to how it's currently interpreted.

You won’t live to see it, but I wish you luck. At least you’re realistic, which is more than I can say for most gun control advocates here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

Does the NRA still have any power? Have they fallen apart after the scandals of recent years? Can we get legislation through now?

The N.R.A. never HAD the power. They might’ve written a few campaign donation checks, but the REAL power is the hundred million gun owners who vote (mostly) republican, and will not support anyone seen as a gun banner. And the N.R.A. isn’t the only gun rights group who bestows politicians with approval or disapproval. But the real power is and has always been in gun owners who vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. They’ve proposed several ideas. All you’re doing is shrugging and coming up with excuses for why nothing can ever be done to reduce gun violence.

Other countries have addressed the issue. It’s not impossible like you claim.

If people keep fantasizing about illegal and unconstitutional “solutions” I’ll keep pointing it out. I’ve heard all of these arguments before, yet here we are. That people here think they’re coming with unique solutions is interesting.

There's no such thing as unconstitutional solutions. All we need is a President to take action and SCOTUS to interpret those actions. That's the roadmap Trump has established. It's not going to happen now, but it can happen in the future. There is absolutely nothing sacred about the Second Amendment or permanent with respect to how it's currently interpreted.

It would be great if somebody would do the right thing and propose a constitutional amendment. I feel certain if it was brought to the voters, it would be approved.

That’s not how amending the Constitution works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

So, no database, persistent, searchable, or otherwise, played any role in determining the source of the MN shooter’s firearms, and would not have played any such role in any event? Got it.

No, a database didn’t play a role because no such database exists. That’s the problem.

Authorities had to do it the hard way: get search warrants, dig through the shooter’s residence, manually comb through papers and devices, and hope they’d find a receipt. They got lucky. But luck isn’t a strategy, and it’s certainly not a substitute for a functioning system.

Now imagine how different that would be if we had a persistent, searchable database of gun transfers. The moment the suspect was identified, investigators could have pulled up:

- Whether he himself bought the gun, and if he bought it,
- When and where he bought it
- Whether his background check came back in time and what he put on his 4473 form
- Whether he’d purchased other weapons recently
- If he was at the store with others buying guns at the same time
- If he and the others bought more guns at other stores

Instead of hours or days of manual work, it could take minutes.

Let’s put it in terms even the “enforce the laws we already have” crowd should grasp: Suppose a mass shooter files off the serial number and destroys the receipt. Without a database, the trail goes cold. Unless a gun shop employee happens to remember him, and happens to call the police, there’s no way to trace the weapon.

Now imagine we do have a database. Investigators search the suspect’s name and discover he bought multiple guns, along with several associates who also made large purchases with him, across different stores. Suddenly, what looked like a lone wolf is now a coordinated cell, and law enforcement has leads, patterns, and names.

That’s the difference between reactive chaos and proactive intelligence. And the reason we don’t have that system? Because lobbying groups made sure it’s illegal to build one.

So yes, we “have laws.” But we’ve also deliberately blinded the people tasked with enforcing them. That’s not liberty. That’s sabotage.

That sounds like doing police work.

Why not make it easier for them to do their job and catch the bad guys?

No one in history would ever use those lists to confiscate weapons from their political opponents. There's no way that could possibly ever lead to killing millions of people in a holocaust.

Painters from Austria would never ever consider it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

So, no database, persistent, searchable, or otherwise, played any role in determining the source of the MN shooter’s firearms, and would not have played any such role in any event? Got it.

No, a database didn’t play a role because no such database exists. That’s the problem.

Authorities had to do it the hard way: get search warrants, dig through the shooter’s residence, manually comb through papers and devices, and hope they’d find a receipt. They got lucky. But luck isn’t a strategy, and it’s certainly not a substitute for a functioning system.

Now imagine how different that would be if we had a persistent, searchable database of gun transfers. The moment the suspect was identified, investigators could have pulled up:

- Whether he himself bought the gun, and if he bought it,
- When and where he bought it
- Whether his background check came back in time and what he put on his 4473 form
- Whether he’d purchased other weapons recently
- If he was at the store with others buying guns at the same time
- If he and the others bought more guns at other stores

Instead of hours or days of manual work, it could take minutes.

Let’s put it in terms even the “enforce the laws we already have” crowd should grasp: Suppose a mass shooter files off the serial number and destroys the receipt. Without a database, the trail goes cold. Unless a gun shop employee happens to remember him, and happens to call the police, there’s no way to trace the weapon.

Now imagine we do have a database. Investigators search the suspect’s name and discover he bought multiple guns, along with several associates who also made large purchases with him, across different stores. Suddenly, what looked like a lone wolf is now a coordinated cell, and law enforcement has leads, patterns, and names.

That’s the difference between reactive chaos and proactive intelligence. And the reason we don’t have that system? Because lobbying groups made sure it’s illegal to build one.

So yes, we “have laws.” But we’ve also deliberately blinded the people tasked with enforcing them. That’s not liberty. That’s sabotage.

That sounds like doing police work.

Why not make it easier for them to do their job and catch the bad guys?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

So, no database, persistent, searchable, or otherwise, played any role in determining the source of the MN shooter’s firearms, and would not have played any such role in any event? Got it.

No, a database didn’t play a role because no such database exists. That’s the problem.

Authorities had to do it the hard way: get search warrants, dig through the shooter’s residence, manually comb through papers and devices, and hope they’d find a receipt. They got lucky. But luck isn’t a strategy, and it’s certainly not a substitute for a functioning system.

Now imagine how different that would be if we had a persistent, searchable database of gun transfers. The moment the suspect was identified, investigators could have pulled up:

- Whether he himself bought the gun, and if he bought it,
- When and where he bought it
- Whether his background check came back in time and what he put on his 4473 form
- Whether he’d purchased other weapons recently
- If he was at the store with others buying guns at the same time
- If he and the others bought more guns at other stores

Instead of hours or days of manual work, it could take minutes.

Let’s put it in terms even the “enforce the laws we already have” crowd should grasp: Suppose a mass shooter files off the serial number and destroys the receipt. Without a database, the trail goes cold. Unless a gun shop employee happens to remember him, and happens to call the police, there’s no way to trace the weapon.

Now imagine we do have a database. Investigators search the suspect’s name and discover he bought multiple guns, along with several associates who also made large purchases with him, across different stores. Suddenly, what looked like a lone wolf is now a coordinated cell, and law enforcement has leads, patterns, and names.

That’s the difference between reactive chaos and proactive intelligence. And the reason we don’t have that system? Because lobbying groups made sure it’s illegal to build one.

So yes, we “have laws.” But we’ve also deliberately blinded the people tasked with enforcing them. That’s not liberty. That’s sabotage.

That sounds like doing police work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Persistent, searchable database.”

Is that like a regular old boring database, but with extra names, like when Mom calls Larlo by his full name “Larlolargo Campagne Maleffluente,” to show she’s really mad?

How would it differ from the one that seems to have allowed authorities to determine in just minutes where the MN sicko got his guns and that the purchases had complied with all of MN’s very extensive and stringent regulations?

They executed a search warrant on his residence and found the purchase record. That's how.

ATF only has a database that tracks guns going from manufacturers to dealers. Not to purchasers. The 4473s are currently only held by the retailer, they are not entered into any central ATF database. And in fact the NRA pushed legislation to make it illegal for ATF to put it into a central database. So there's no central system to help identify and flag someone who may have bought 2000 guns over the span of 10 years to resell to criminals. That alone is a crystal clear demonstration of a broken system, and those expected to "enforce the current laws" having their hands tied and being blindfolded.

Does the NRA still have any power? Have they fallen apart after the scandals of recent years? Can we get legislation through now?

We’re the only country in the world where people argue with a straight face that the Constitution requires us to sacrifice countless lives to gun deaths every year so that a subset of the population can feel secure. It’s ghoulish.

We’re told that we can’t have background checks or red flag laws because they might inconvenience law abiding gun owners. But conservatives have no problem punishing other innocent people to prevent crime. When you object to, for example, ICE sweeping up law abiding immigrants alongside violent criminals, you’re told that it’s too bad but the very fact they were arrested means they must also be violent criminals, and it’s just an unfortunate byproduct of cleaning up the streets. Somehow, it’s always other people paying the price for conservatives to feel secure.

When commonly available items start being used to commit crimes, we don’t hide behind thoughts and prayers. We don’t say “oh well, criminals will always find a way, so we shouldn’t do anything”. We put up restrictions and roadblocks to make them less easy to obtain. You need an ID to buy spray paint and Sudafed. Tylenol now comes in tamper-proof bottles. Guns shouldn’t be any different.

The truth is, guns rarely get used in violent crimes. Firearms are involved in about 5% of rapes, 11% of aggravated assaults, and 17% of robberies (US Dept of Justice data from 2018). Three quarters of the victims involved in those crimes end up with no gunshot wounds. Criminals generally use guns for intimidation and compliance, not homicide. The majority of fatalities actually occur within the home (60%). A non gun owner who lives with a gun owner is seven times more likely to be killed by that gun, whether it’s DV, suicide, or accident. Using crime as an excuse to stonewall is a red herring.

I don’t accept any of the standard arguments for why we can do absolutely nothing about gun violence. I don’t even accept the thoughts and prayers. They ring hollow from politicians who do absolutely nothing to fix the problem, and a gun industry that sees profits soar every time there’s a mass shooting.