Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
26 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Serious question for gun control advocates - has the Brady Bill helped? (Original Post) banned from Kos Dec 2012 OP
Yes. nt rrneck Dec 2012 #1
not much, people who own guns are still blasting people left and right nt msongs Dec 2012 #2
What's your opinion? neverforget Dec 2012 #3
I honestly don't know. banned from Kos Dec 2012 #5
No, you have to ban all guns and imprison/deport all NRA members. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #4
Do you have any serious suggestions? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #7
I think it would be easy. If they resist... Too bad. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #9
Did you think this through? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #13
Any post addressed tp gun control advocates that begins with "Serious question" MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #6
I am only fishing for knowledgeable responses - because like I said banned from Kos Dec 2012 #10
How would you donco Dec 2012 #11
Yes. We need more. morningfog Dec 2012 #8
Any control is better than no control. n/t leeroysphitz Dec 2012 #12
Minimal, It has limited scope and has been weakened in the courts. ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #14
Thanks. But I thought all gun sales were retail "private" sales? banned from Kos Dec 2012 #16
Depends on the state. X_Digger Dec 2012 #18
No ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #21
Serious answer, research shows that gun control saves lives... Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #15
Parts of it helped, parts were useless.. X_Digger Dec 2012 #17
Thanks. I don't see any upside on more gun control. banned from Kos Dec 2012 #19
One big glaring hole that needs to be plugged is mental health records in NICS. X_Digger Dec 2012 #20
I agree. But mass shootings will not end in full. banned from Kos Dec 2012 #22
Obviously not...we need far, far, far more restrictive gun laws at the federal level alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #23
Yes, we need more legislation like the Brady Bill. ellisonz Dec 2012 #24
written for you Skittles Dec 2012 #25
Yes. And I'll explain. Glassunion Dec 2012 #26
 

banned from Kos

(4,017 posts)
5. I honestly don't know.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:12 PM
Dec 2012

Background checks are more formal now but crime is down while mass shootings continue.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
7. Do you have any serious suggestions?
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:13 PM
Dec 2012

Although I realize venting is cathartic, what we need are serious, pragmatic, do-able suggestions...

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
13. Did you think this through?
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:23 PM
Dec 2012

Actual active enforcement would not be something the police could handle. They'd be vastly outnumbered, and all but the SWAT guys would be outgunned. A significant percentage would probably comply with orders to enforce confiscation (cops these days have an incredibly insular, "us vs the rest of the word" culture), but they'd fail. Spectacularly.

Any attempt would thus require military intervention. Leaving aside the obvious violation of posse comitatus, you do realize that the military is markedly conservative and its members overwhelmingly support civilian ownership of firearms, right? It doesn't possess that insular cop culture (that's strongly discouraged, in fact...as it tends to lead to military juntas). There is virtually zero chance that orders to actively enforce confiscation of civilian firearms would be more than sporadically obeyed.

Like I said...we need serious, practical suggestions...

 

MotherPetrie

(3,145 posts)
6. Any post addressed tp gun control advocates that begins with "Serious question"
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:13 PM
Dec 2012

Is not a serious question. It is bait - stinky bait.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
14. Minimal, It has limited scope and has been weakened in the courts.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:08 PM
Dec 2012

Typical for such legislation, it is a good idea mucked up by the pols who among other things specifically blocked its use for private transactions.

 

banned from Kos

(4,017 posts)
16. Thanks. But I thought all gun sales were retail "private" sales?
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:14 PM
Dec 2012

That is another thorny side issue.

I can buy a gun from any individual without a background check.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
18. Depends on the state.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:20 PM
Dec 2012

Sales between state residents are intra-state commerce (as opposed to inter-state). But a few states have placed limits on such person-to-person sales, requiring a background check and/or registration.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
21. No
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:19 AM
Dec 2012

Dealer sales require NCIS check or equivalent, which includes transactions that cross state lines. Waiting periods also vary by state. IIRC in some states a CCW waives the background check and the waiting period. The dealer just checks that the CCW is still valid.

Private party sales within a state may not require a background check depending on the state. If the state (like CA) requires a background check, it must go through a dealer.

Currently private sellers cannot perform background checks, something I think should change.

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
15. Serious answer, research shows that gun control saves lives...
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:13 PM
Dec 2012
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2012/12/what-research-can-tell-us-about-newtown-shootings/60022/
The assault weapons ban passed in 1994 expired. The Brady bill that authorizes background checks is still in effect.

We need serioius regulation of gun sales and owner ship. An unregulated militia just murders children.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
17. Parts of it helped, parts were useless..
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:19 PM
Dec 2012

The waiting period for handguns did nothing to deter crime or suicide, and may have contributed to harm to those in actual danger.

The background check has turned away some criminals, but there's no way to know how many of those turned down went on to acquire a firearm through other means. According to the DOJ, the main source of guns is friends/family and 'illegal sources' (totalling 80% between those two sources).

In that way, I'm sure it did help somewhat.

 

banned from Kos

(4,017 posts)
19. Thanks. I don't see any upside on more gun control.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:59 PM
Dec 2012

Tighten up the Brady Bill on background checks? Sure. Do it.;

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
20. One big glaring hole that needs to be plugged is mental health records in NICS.
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:03 AM
Dec 2012

Some states have ZERO records in NICS for mental health committments. *sigh*

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
23. Obviously not...we need far, far, far more restrictive gun laws at the federal level
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:22 AM
Dec 2012

Europe-level restrictions.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Glassunion

(10,201 posts)
26. Yes. And I'll explain.
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:38 AM
Dec 2012

The have been denials via NICS (current name of Brady Background Check System). From those denials, criminals have been arrested.

However, I feel that there should be more funding to aggressively go after those who try to violate the system.

From 2000 to 2008 some relatively gun friendly states have made a huge chunk of arrests directly stemming from the attempt of an illegal purchase stemming from a background check.

Virginia 6,661
Pennsylvania 2,524
Colorado 1,826
Oregon 1,048

However there are a lot of holes that still need to be plugged up. PA for example checks their purchases using their own system called PICS, it is a mash up of the NICS and the state's own system. The problem is that PA does not share its state info with the NICS system. So if you have a mental illness in PA, the state of PA will deny you from purchasing. However if you move out of the state, you could buy one, because PA did not share your mental health history with the national system that all of the states use.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Serious question for gun ...