Quote:
Originally Posted by realcoray
The question I have is, how is verifying in all transactions that the buyer can legally own the weapon, infringing on your rights?
What if to purchase a gun, from ANY source, you needed a permit. The permit process would be equivilent to the current process, with a waiting period and background searches. The permit would be valid for say 6 months.
With a permit, you could purchase any weapon with no wait but it would either have to be overseen by law enforcement, or you could certainly create a situation where licensed sellers could handle this.
The same would apply to private sales, you'd have to perform the transaction through a seller or your sherrif.
Granted, this sort of stuff would probably mean higher fees, but it has benefits for gun purchasers, and would help close the giant loophole where criminals have plenty of ways to get guns.
Essentially, the more we are able to be sure that guns are getting into the hands of responsible people, the less control you need on the guns themselves. If it's just willy nilly which it basically is right now, then I'd rather not have assault rifles be everywhere, but if only stand up people have them, then I could care less.
|
How will this slow down criminals? We have laws against drugs you know, and they're more readily available than ever, haven't even made a dent in them. I am not against background checks, I think they need to be continued. I just don't think that's going to prevent what just happened. The previous assault weapon ban would not have changed anything in this instance.