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

hack89

(39,171 posts)
9. I agree with Marcus on universal background checks
Sun Mar 31, 2013, 08:14 AM
Mar 2013

the fixation on banning weapons is too polarizing and prevents other, easier to pass, laws from being enacted.

1,000 bullets is now a "war arsenal"? ZOB Mar 2013 #1
And the 20 year old Adam Lanza had worked how long for DHS? mbperrin Mar 2013 #3
To be acccurate, Lanza didn't need to be proficient. ZOB Mar 2013 #4
All targets are helpless, except other armed people. mbperrin Mar 2013 #6
A thousand rounds on hand at any given time? hack89 Mar 2013 #8
The point is, it's a start. I personally believe that every round ought to be marked mbperrin Mar 2013 #17
That is an ambitious agenda there hack89 Mar 2013 #18
It has an impact. It gets people used to the idea that regulation of dangerous mbperrin Mar 2013 #21
Should it be lower? Maybe 50? AAO Mar 2013 #20
You can't enforce a law like that. hack89 Mar 2013 #22
A computer could do it without breaking a sweat AAO Mar 2013 #23
How exactly would a computer do such a thing? NickB79 Apr 2013 #25
It's the people that "SNAP" that I'm most worried about AAO Apr 2013 #29
But no one has snapped and shot a thousand rounds NickB79 Apr 2013 #31
How does a computer look into my house and count my rounds? hack89 Apr 2013 #28
A private citizen should have ZERO bullets. ZERO. Reinterpretation of the 2nd ASAP! graham4anything Mar 2013 #7
Have you ever read the Bill of Rights? ZOB Mar 2013 #10
Militias are the National Guard as interpreted by the 2nd graham4anything Mar 2013 #11
As you noted earlier, the Supreme Court disagrees with your claim. ZOB Mar 2013 #12
It don't matter. A reinterpreted 2nd by a new not corrupt court will change it graham4anything Mar 2013 #13
Well, we will see. I doubt that will happen. ZOB Mar 2013 #14
You are aware that in the Heller decision premium Mar 2013 #15
I would assume, you are aware that 2 liberal justices are new since then, don't you? graham4anything Mar 2013 #16
You are talking to someone who suggested that the .gov buy all the bullets. Socal31 Apr 2013 #24
Overturning Heller wouldn't have the impact you think it would NickB79 Apr 2013 #26
I didn't bring Heller into the conversation. It is meaningless to me. graham4anything Apr 2013 #27
Even a "complete reinterpretation" wouldn't do what you think NickB79 Apr 2013 #30
90% of the public used to smoke. 90% of the public now doesn't smoke. graham4anything Apr 2013 #32
And that took 50 years to change NickB79 Apr 2013 #33
its the slow time of the political cycle quadrature Mar 2013 #2
Good! thanks to the President for Cha Mar 2013 #5
I agree with Marcus on universal background checks hack89 Mar 2013 #9
Why was he silent before the election? Ter Mar 2013 #19
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Obama heads to Colorado t...»Reply #9