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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We need more surveillance when it comes to guns [View all]Orrex
(63,189 posts)72. I started using that term in response to the term "gun grabbers"
And I will continue using it as long as that insulting term remains popular among its fans.
Full prosecution and investigation as a national law enforcement priority of prohibited persons in possession.
I support this. Also, a conviction for domestic violence should prohibit future firearm ownership by the abuser.
The mental health angle is overplayed IMO, since the mentally ill are vastly more likely to be the victims of violence than its perpetrators. But it makes for a popular soundbyte and helps deflect attention from gun owners who go from "responsible" to "murderous" with little warning.
A fraudulent 4473 should result in fines and a lifelong ban on firearm ownership by the applicant. A second fraudulent 4473 should result in larger fines and a lifelong ban on firearm ownership or use by the applicant. A third fraudulent 4473 should result in jail time at the very least, along with massive fines and lifelong bans on ownership and use of firearms. And so on.
We need a comprehensive and publicly accessible national registry of gun ownership. This is no more a violation of privacy than publicly accessible databases of homeownership, of criminal history, of licensing (e.g., insurance or brokerage) or of credit history readily accessible by lenders.
Gun ownership should require regularly renewed licensing along with specific liability insurance for any firearms used on, transported via or fired across public lands. I would even support a requirement of periodic formal inspection to ensure safety. Firearm owners should be required to provide proof of license, insurance & inspection upon reasonable demand by law enforcement, with failure to comply resulting in fines and/or confiscation of the firearm(s) in question.
Firearm owners should be held accountable for their firearms. Failure to report the theft of a firearm within 3 business days will qualify the owner as an accessory to any crimes committed with that firearm subsequent to the theft. This is not an unreasonable request, because responsible firearm owners should certainly know where all of their firearms are at all times.
I support any legislation that requires gun owners to be more fully responsible for their firearms.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
93 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yes. The mentally ill are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators of violence.
Kang Colby
Jun 2016
#14
I'm not playing a game. Very rude of you to call gun rights supporters "gun enablers."
Kang Colby
Jun 2016
#68
"Also, a conviction for domestic violence should prohibit future firearm ownership by the abuser. "
beevul
Jun 2016
#85
Mandating government surveillance of private property touches on a few other bits...
TipTok
Jun 2016
#49
The bill of rights is a 'the government shall not' document, not a 'the people can' document.
X_Digger
Jun 2016
#6
If the only requirement to make a law was 'provide for the general welfare', we'd be screwed.
X_Digger
Jun 2016
#21
Ah, yes- the "saving innocents" claim. It's an old and time honored political technique:
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#91
Good luck. And oh... its surrounded by slightly less than a billion square miles of desert.
cherokeeprogressive
Jun 2016
#23
What kind of behavior surveilled on those roads would trigger an investigation?
Marengo
Jun 2016
#76
Controllers always assume that this stuff will only apply to the folks they are afraid of...
TipTok
Jun 2016
#52
You'll never convince a grabber. They think our rights are derived from the courts
Press Virginia
Jun 2016
#38
"Your denial of any lines is a foolish denial." It *would* be, if such a denial had been made.
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#89
The gunners will throw Constitution BS at you, to point of sounding like right wingers.
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#37
Yeah, that pesky constitution bs. If it weren't for that meddling document
Press Virginia
Jun 2016
#39
Gunners are a good example. They'll whine about clip vs. magazine, but can't comprehend
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#46
In the most simplistic form they are manufactured to let yahoos shoot people. Whether it's a clip
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#67
I grew up when the Constitution was used to discriminate. Now it's used to enable bigots,
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#66
The 4th amendment says "right of the people" too. Is that also a collective right in your view?
NutmegYankee
Jun 2016
#51