Pincus teaming up with former Brady president

[Borderland]

I don't know who Kelly Ann is, I don't watch daytime talk shows and soap operas, but it sounds like red coat horse shit to me.

Neither do I.

I misspelled her name. Sorry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellyanne_Conway. Counselor to the president. You'll see her on MSM from time to time.

[Borderland]

Funny. The universally unreasonably low and oppressively enforced speed limits in the area where you live have only recently been surpassed by the anti-gun b.s. as a reason to not live there, IME.

So where do you suggest I move to. I've lived in AZ. They have speed limits there also along with a lot of other repressive crap like border patrol checkpoints where they stop you, run your plates and ask you questions like do you have any passengers in the back of your vehicle.

That's a lot more annoying to me than driving the speed limit.

[LOKNLOD]

I thought when I specified "violent felons" in the text above the portion you quoted, I was clear. I may not have been.

Minor semantics on my part. As I said, I just didn't read it as you intended.

There are examples all over the country where incarcerating known violent offenders on firearms possession/use/etc. charges works. I can think of one US Attorney's Office I'm aware of which regularly will take referrals of known violent prohibited possessors who post dumb photos of themselves on social media and use that evidence to get somewhat serious time for them. It works, if nothing else by taking those people out of circulation for a time. I want more of that.

You spoke earlier of simply prosecuting a robbery as a robbery, instead of making it a special gun robbery with extra time. That's all fine and well in principle, but it's also pissing in the wind -- the national trend is decidedly against incarcerating people for long periods of time, even for violent offenses. In my state you pretty much have to commit murder or rape a child in order to serve even a bare majority of the time the judge sentenced you to -- if you're incarcerated at all. If your state hasn't gone that route yet, it's probably coming soon. In that environment, if a felon with a gun enhancement lets me at least remove a person with a documented history of violence from the community for a serious length of time, even if a similarly-situated person without a violent felony history wouldn't receive anywhere close to that amount of time, I'm going to take what I can get.

No denying that that system if fucked up and not working correctly to put the right people away -- but problems with laws and sentencing are not fixed by doubling down on bad laws and sentencing. I realize that it's probably unrealistic to expect the real issues to be addressed, and I understand the pragmatic view of using this as a tool to lock up animals.

But turning a gun into a magical talisman that makes crime more crimey is just a self-inflicted wound in the culture war we're rapidly losing.

My family's safety is worth me going to jail over if I had to defend them someplace it's not allowed.

But what if you go to DOUBLE JAIL! because you did it with a gun?

[Poconnor]

Any talk about a blind background check? Any background check should include enhanced drivers licenses and ID cards. It should also include voter ID and severe penalties for identity thefts.

[Wendell]

We simply do not know enough about this organization to know if it is a good thing or not.

Rob Pincus is all that I need to know about this organization.

[Borderland]

Any talk about a blind background check? Any background check should include enhanced drivers licenses and ID cards. It should also include voter ID and severe penalties for identity thefts.

That gets to the heart of the term "restricted person". I'm sure there are plenty of people walking around with false ID or stolen ID. We have a problem with mail theft where I live (rural delivery) and it was explained to me by LEO that it happens primarily because it's a good way to collect enough information to steal someones ID.

In a country that has no system to insure that people who vote are eligible to vote, that says it's unconstitutional to even try to determine that, it's no wonder that people reject background checks for firearms transfers. How on earth are you supposed to purchase a firearm to defend yourself and family if you have to actually identify yourself to the police in the process. Background checks are not restrictions on unrestricted people 99% of the time.

I was on a no fly list after 911. I was never denied a boarding pass but delayed many times, a few times over an hour. I just got used to it and made sure I had enough time to get a boarding pass.

I think we're at a point in this country where we are either going to start taking away more freedoms (AWB's and mag restrictions) from people who play by the rules or take away more freedoms from people who don't. That will probably be a tough choice for most socialist democrats.

[Poconnor]

Good point. That’s why I mentioned a blind background test. The idea is there is no record. The false ID is a separate but related issue as is the voter ID. Nobody wants a national ID card but with computers your identity, your credit and your SSN are all tied together. As a gun owner I don’t want mentally ill or criminals getting guns but it seems like anti gunners never want to actually reduce crime; just infringe on gun owners rights.

[LOKNLOD]

. As a gun owner I don’t want mentally ill or criminals getting guns but it seems like anti gunners never want to actually reduce crime; just infringe on gun owners rights.

There are a lot of “reasonable restrictions” that actually would be reasonable if they were done in 100% good faith. But so long as a big proportion of the people supporting and suggesting them are also out to eliminate gun ownership all together, they’re an unacceptable compromise.


This is one of the (many) ways the “...but cars...” argument falls apart; people would feel very differently about licensing and Registration if it were being proposed while a media darling political candidate was ranting and raving that “hell yes I’m going to take your V8s and V6s! Nobody needs more than 100hp to commute!”

The failure to negotiate in good faith is also highlighted in that voter ID discussion already mentioned. Most of us cant imagine any desire to disenfranchise anyone who is an actual citizen. But we just want a reasonable restriction to ensure non-prohibited people aren’t voting. But to the other side, it’s a clear step toward a systematic program of making sure people darker than “eggshell“ on the paint chart never have a voice ever again.

[OlongJohnson]

The failure to negotiate in good faith is also highlighted in that voter ID discussion already mentioned. Most of us cant imagine any desire to disenfranchise anyone who is an actual citizen. But we just want a reasonable restriction to ensure non-prohibited people aren’t voting. But to the other side, it’s a clear step toward a systematic program of making sure people darker than “eggshell“ on the paint chart never have a voice ever again.

Fully agree with the rest of your post. Cut down the quote to emphasize this.

The difference is, there hasn't been any serious legislation that is obviously aimed at wholesale disenfranchisement of any legal voting population in my lifetime. At least nothing I've heard about.

ETA:

This is one of the (many) ways the “...but cars...” argument falls apart; people would feel very differently about licensing and Registration if it were being proposed while a media darling political candidate was ranting and raving that “hell yes I’m going to take your V8s and V6s! Nobody needs more than 100hp to commute!”

Don't think that isn't coming. Read up on Vision Zero and where it's been going.

[LOKNLOD]

Fully agree with the rest of your post. Cut down the quote to emphasize this.

The difference is, there hasn't been any serious legislation that is obviously aimed at wholesale disenfranchisement of any legal voting population in my lifetime. At least nothing I've heard about.

You're right. The reasonings are similar, but the validity isn't.