Response to ellisonz (Original post)
Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:39 AM
gejohnston (16,827 posts)
9. a good start, but still needs work
Last edited Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:59 AM - Edit history (1)
- Other dangerous people who are currently not prohibited from purchasing firearms include: terrorists, violent misdemeanants (not involving domestic violence), violent juvenile offenders, and some substance abusers.
But civil liberties groups argue that the government's new criteria, which went into effect over the summer, have made it even more likely that individuals who pose no threat will be swept up in the nation's security apparatus, leading to potential violations of their privacy and making it difficult for them to travel.
"They are secret lists with no way for people to petition to get off or even to know if they're on," said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Guilty until proven innocent, no due process? That sounds pretty right wing to me.
- Strengthen the background check system that already exists to ensure, for example, that mental health and other relevant records are in the background check system and readily available within the states.That has more to do with medical privacy laws than gun laws.
- Improve the ability to identify dangerous people who present the most risk, especially among the mentally ill.
- We should provide legal mechanisms to prevent those dangerously mentally ill who present the most significant risk from possessing guns, while carefully protecting the rights of those who are mentally ill but do not pose a risk.
- Other dangerous people who are currently not prohibited from purchasing firearms include: terrorists, violent misdemeanants (not involving domestic violence), violent juvenile offenders, and some substance abusers.It just said pot smokers are a threat to public safety. Not a very liberal stance, but the rest has merit.
- Support law enforcement by giving them the tools to crack down on gun trafficking and prevent straw purchases.Good principle but would have to see the specifics.
- Limit the number of guns that can be purchased in a short period of time.The economy is already doing that
- Make gun trafficking a federal offense.I thought it was
- Allow the ATF to conduct more than one spot inspection a year for dealers (currently prohibited).I'm OK with that
- Eliminate legal loopholes that unfairly protect dangerous practices that contribute to gun deaths and injuries.weasel words, meaningless.
- Guns are the only consumer product exempt from federal product safety regulations, so feasible safety features are not required.Not true. The law only protects against meritless law suits modeled after SLAPP suits.
- Negligent gun companies are the only businesses shielded from state civil justice laws, so corrupt gun sellers are not held accountable.
- Crime gun data is the only special industry exception to public disclosure under FOIA, so officials, law enforcement and researchers are kept in the dark.Also not true, law enforcement does in fact have access.
- Department of Health and Human Services agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control, are prevented from studying guns as a public safety risk, so important public health data on policies and programs to prevent gun injury are unavailable.There is no such ban, only a ban on lobbying and junk science. Guns are not infectious diseases and can not seriously be studied the same.
- ATF is prevented from requiring basic store inventories that would prevent thefts and expose corrupt dealers, and minimal punishment and excessive evidentiary hurdles make it unduly difficult to punish traffickers and corrupt dealers.what are they talking about? I doubt if that is true.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#7|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#12|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#24|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#57|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#59|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#61|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#26|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#56|
|Post removed||Jan 2013||#27|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#32|
a good start, but still needs work
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#14|
|Starboard Tack||Jan 2013||#23|
|Bay Boy||Jan 2013||#43|
Please login to view edit histories.