Skip to main content

View Diary: Thwarting Gun Violence (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  any particular reason why you think (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    leftcoastghost

    that weapons bought this way should be exempt? the weapons aren't as lethal? people who buy them are saner?

    Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

    by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:59:01 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think it'd be useful. (4+ / 0-)

      How do you enforce it?

      I have 20 firearms. The state only knows of 4 (this is legal in my state.) What's to keep me from selling these illegally to someone without a background check?

      How do you set up the background check? Do you allow anyone to call into the NICS? This can be abused by people who are looking into you and give them information you don't want someone to have.

      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:09:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  how do you enforce it? how do we enforce any law? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        leftcoastghost

        you throw people who disobey the law in jail. your argument seems to be that any law would be inconvenient, so forget about any law. when people buy an automobile, it needs to be registered & insured before it can be driven, why not require registration & insurance for a mechanism which is conceived, designed, manufactured, marketed, purchased & carried with lethal intent?

        Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

        by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:20:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No. (6+ / 0-)

          There are millions of firearms out there, most of which aren't registered. So how do you know if I broke the law for those 16 firearms or if I just purchased them?

          Because RKBA is a civil right. We don't license our right to practice religion or insure our mouths when it comes to freedom of speech.

          Another argument is that registration leads to restriction and banning (See the SKS and California.) Either way, registration would lead to MORE Republicans in power. I don't want to see that.

          (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

          by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:24:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  hundreds of millions of firearms loose in the u.s (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SoCalSal

            a law requiring they be registered - & myself, i'd require ballistic fingerprinting of them as well - would be a start toward true accountability for their ownership. we have speed limits, they don't keep all people from speeding. so by your definition they aren't enforceable & shouldn't exist.
            rkba is a civil right if you define (or our supremely enlightened supreme court defines) a militia as anybody with a gun. we actually do have regulation of religion, otherwise everybody would claim to be a tax free entity & every meth lab would be a place of worship. the right to free speech is not unlimited or unabridged either. we have slander & libel laws. we have laws against speech that incites violence. we have truth in advertising laws.
            ah yes, the final argument: registration leads to banning. that's the paranoid heart of your argument isn't it? people are trying to take your beloved weapons away from you. nobody i know wants or even thinks it in any way possible to remove all the guns in this country. not gonna happen. but some restrictions on ownership & more importantly the operation of firearms would be a step to sanity - at least for those of us who like to think we have an equal right to not bear arms.
            "registration leads to more republicans in power?" i don't even want to think about which orifice that was pulled out of. & you are one of the sane gun advocates?

            Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

            by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:03:14 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  ballistic fingerprinting canard (10+ / 0-)

              that's like getting a tire imprint, every time you buy a car... things 'wear' Sherlock

              PROUDLY dressing like Tarzan growing my hair like Jane and smelling like -Cheetah- Cheetos since 1967

              by OMwordTHRUdaFOG on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:09:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  no actually it's like finding out who owns the (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                SoCalSal

                gun that fired the bullet that ends up in your daughter's shoulder on july 4th as she's outside watching the fireworks. it's like being able to track the weapon that was used in a drive by.

                Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:21:11 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Except it's not like a human fingerprint. (4+ / 0-)

                  It's easily changed manually or over time.

                  (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                  by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:23:00 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  here's the thing, deliberately changing (0+ / 0-)

                    the ballistic fingerprint of your firearm is a virtual admission that you would be using it to commit a crime. just like filing off the serial numbers. you make that illegal.
                    d.c. (before heller, at least) had mandatory sentences for unlicensed carrying of handguns. there was a considerably higher mandatory sentence for carrying a handgun with the serial number filed off. result? even criminals didn't want a handgun with the serial number filed off.
                    i fail to see the argument of any safe, sane, law abiding gun owner to having on file a ballistic fingerprint of their weapon. why should cars have license plates? don't they wear down? can't they be altered or stolen?
                    your argument that you don't think your collection shouldn't be documented because somebody else somewhere might alter theirs is a bit weak.

                    Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                    by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:45:47 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You mean (5+ / 0-)

                      shooting my gun (which changes the fingerprint) is a virtual admission that I will be committing a crime with it?

                      You mean changing out my barrel to suit a different type of shooting is a virtual etc...?

                      Your argument is wrong. Ballistic fingerprints change when you use the firearm as intended.

                      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                      by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:54:57 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i mean if your intend to have multiple barrels (0+ / 0-)

                        & your intentions are as beneficent as you claim, you should have no objection to having a ballistic fingerprint of each barrel on file. you should likewise have no objection to having your firearms periodically inspected. i have to have my car inspected & reregistered every year. of course i don't change license plates to suit my sense of whimsy, if i decide to use stolen, er, borrowed or altered plates & i'm stopped? well, there are laws.

                        Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                        by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:05:41 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  rasbobbo, do you know anything at all about (4+ / 0-)

                      firearms and their use?

                      Everytime I run 10 rounds through the barrel at the range, I change the ballistic fingerprint of the weapon. It's wear and tear on the mechanism as a result of normal use.

                      Maybe my extractor hangs when I'm doing a pre-hunting-season zero, or maybe my firing pin breaks while I'm trying to tune my eye and hand to a deer rifle; I repair or replace those pieces,and my weapon no longer marks casings and/or bullets exactly the same way as before I did that.

                      By your logic I've now committed a crime, because changing the ballistic fingerprint of the weapon is a criminal offense.

                      Such thinking is nearly laughable.

                      LBJ & Lady Bird, Sully Sullenberger, Molly Ivins, Barbara Jordan, Ann Richards, Drew Brees: Texas is No Bush League! -7.50,-5.59

                      by BlackSheep1 on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:49:11 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  takes a simple thing like a boring bar (4+ / 0-)

                    I watched an episode of the ORIGINAL Hawaii-Five-O, sometime in the 1970s, where one of the things a guy did to cover up having shot someone was rebore his firearms afterward -- he had access to a machine shop evenings / weekends, though I don't remember now if it was at his home or some pro shop.

                    It foreshadowed the whole CSI franchise when Steve McGarrett (as played by Jack Lord) found the metal shavings in the shop, and got a lab match between those shavings and the barrel of the weapon suspected in the killings. That was the piece of evidence they used for the arrest, at the end of the show.

                    LBJ & Lady Bird, Sully Sullenberger, Molly Ivins, Barbara Jordan, Ann Richards, Drew Brees: Texas is No Bush League! -7.50,-5.59

                    by BlackSheep1 on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:42:07 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  yeah, exactly. the bore of his firearm was (0+ / 0-)

                      changed because? & if there had been a fingerprint of the weapon on file it would have been easy to prove that the bore had been altered even if there were no filings lying around. it might have been even easier to link the weapon to the crime in the first place.

                      Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                      by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:59:52 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  but in reality it doesn't work that way (5+ / 0-)

                  you can tell the make and model of the gun used to fire a bullet, based on the size and number of rifling grooves, but that's about it. Any micro details that vary from gun to gun also vary every time the gun is fired, and every time it's cleaned.

                  Intellectually I know that America is no better than any other country; emotionally I know she is better than every other country. ~Sinclair Lewis

                  by SaMx on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:24:12 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  micro details that vary (4+ / 0-)

                    like changing the barrel, that only takes a few seconds on modern auto pistols

                    PROUDLY dressing like Tarzan growing my hair like Jane and smelling like -Cheetah- Cheetos since 1967

                    by OMwordTHRUdaFOG on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:31:22 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  & why would someone do such a thing w/out (0+ / 0-)

                      properly reregistering the weapon?

                      Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                      by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:47:34 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  roflmao. nt (5+ / 0-)

                        (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

                        by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:55:21 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  well, you're easy. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          leftcoastghost

                          i'm sure typing in "brady bunch" gave you uncontrollable giggles as well. fortunately it didn't deter you from writing a diary, that as far i can tell, posits the proposition that not enough damage has been done by handguns in this country to merit doing anything about them. how many shootings would you consider an appropriate amount before you get your laughing ass off the floor & treat the problem seriously?

                          Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                          by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:45:00 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  Barrels which are not, (8+ / 0-)

                        and will not be, controlled by law.

                        I buy a gun. It is "ballistically fingerprinted". I take it to range, and it does not shoot as accurately as I'd like. So I buy a new barrel for it, in hopes of getting it to shoot better.

                        I have invalidated the "ballistic fingerprint", but in what sense can I be said to have shown intent to commit a crime of violence?

                        And that says nothing about the fact that simply shooting the gun changes the physical profile of the action and barrel enough to make the identification of a particular firearm impossible when referenced to the markings made by the firearm when it was manufactured. The most that can be done is to match a gun that the police have in their possession to the bullet that was fired from that gun at a particular time.

                        It is mechanically impossible to take a bullet fired from an unknown firearm and, by matching it with a database of imprints taken from new guns, determine that that gun fired that bullet, and from that, trace that firearm to it's current legal owner... which is what the idea of "ballistic fingerprint" is supposed to do.

                        It can't work, and as such it shouldn't even be tried.

                        --Shannon

                        "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                        "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                        by Leftie Gunner on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:59:18 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  new barrel? new registration of your weapon. (0+ / 0-)

                          it absolutely could work & here's why: we have laws for & against various things, not because they always work - most homicides, robberies & burglaries are not solved - but to deter some people from breaking them. the guy who (& there are plenty, every 4th of july or new years) fires his pistol in the air indiscriminately might think twice about it if the projectile might be traced back to him. likewise any other promiscuous or criminal use of a firearm might be curtailed. if it is traced back to someone who sold it, without registering the sale, criminalizing that sale might be a deterrent to such sales.
                          when you buy a weapon from someone, wouldn't you want to know if it had been used in an armed robbery or homicide?  

                          Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                          by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:25:56 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  You still haven't gotten around the fact (5+ / 0-)

                            that simply shooting the gun changes the contour of the parts that imprint the bullet such that tracing back a bullet fired in a crime to the original firearm via database comparison is impossible, unless the gun was used in the crime immediately after it was purchased.

                            If I buy a new, "ballistically fingerprinted" firearm, and shoot a thousand rounds through it, (which won't take long, I typically shout over a hundred rounds per handgun every time I go to the range,) and then use the 1001st bullet to kill someone, there is no chance that that bullet could be matched with the "fingerprint" on file and show that I am the owner of that firearm.

                            What's your solution to that problem? Re-licensing the firearm after every 1000 rounds? The basic idea is mechanically flawed... it cannot do what is hoped.

                            --Shannon

                            "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                            "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                            by Leftie Gunner on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:52:21 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  & what percent would you say of gun owners (0+ / 0-)

                            typically have fired a thousand rounds through their weapons? how many just have them because, well, just because? i don't see the basis for all this argument from "safe, sane, law abiding" gun owners. you keep coming up with reasons not to do anything that might curtail the "unsafe, insane, unlawful" gun holders. it's as if your loyalty is with all gun owners rather than with "safe, sane, lawful" non owners of guns. your objection to something like ballistic fingerprinting is that you will be falsely accused of firing a weapon used in a crime? anyone who comes up with any & i mean any kind of idea for curtailing gun violence gets met with this same "it won't work" nonsense. that & the "i'm a militia" or eventually "guns aren't dangerous" tripe. here in arizona it has reached its apogee in the "if you are worried about gun violence, you need to carry a gun. then we'll all be safe."
                            the fact that people get away with crimes every day doesn't mean we should get rid of laws against those crimes.

                            Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. The Gita 3.21

                            by rasbobbo on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:23:15 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My fundamental objection to most proposed (4+ / 0-)

                            gun control laws is that they will not do, (and, indeed, have not done,) what they are purported to do, namely, reduce violent crime.

                            In this particular case, the objection is simple. The proposed law cannot work reliably enough to be worth the effort to implement it, nor to justify the compliance burden on otherwise law-abiding gun owners... who are, I think it's clear, the only people who would bother.

                            I don't see the practical value in laws that cannot further the public interest they are enacted to further and which also present no burden to those who would break other, more serious laws, but which only fall upon those who, in the absence of such administrative laws, would be committing no crimes.

                            If somebody unlawfully kills someone, you charge them with murder. You do not create a whole new class of laws for everyone else to follow, simply on the (provably incorrect) assumption that those laws will somehow make the initial crime less likely. Laws against murder pass the test, not because murder is less likely because it's illegal, but because someone who is willing to kill another human being (except in immediate self-defense) is a demonstrated danger to others, and thus needs to be removed from society to prevent them from causing further harm.

                            In and of itself, my choice to own whatever firearms I wish to own presents no danger to any other, and thus is not something over which the State should exert control. This same principle, by the way, rules out private ownership of explosives, WMDs, and a bunch of other stuff... lest you throw up that tired old man of straw.

                            If, by my actions, I show that I am a hazard, then the calculus changes, which is why, for example, the prohibition on convicted felons makes sense... although I think a lifetime, unappealable ban is going too far. I am in favor of a rigorous, difficult (but not expensive,) process for felons to get all of  their rights back, including voting rights and the right to keep and bear arms.

                            What I am not OK with is allowing the government to decide that I am, by default, dangerous, and to use that determination to limit my freedom unless I prove otherwise.

                            That's exactly backwards from the proper relationship between a government and it's sovereign citizens.

                            --Shannon

                            "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                            "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                            by Leftie Gunner on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:41:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, I forgot to answer your initial question... (4+ / 0-)

                            sorry about that.

                            I'd bet that a majority of handguns in private ownership have had more than a thousand rounds fired through them. Handgun ammunition comes 50 to a box, and even if the average shooter only fired a box per range session, you're only talking about 20 trips to the range. Most shoot more than that, at least at the ranges I go to.

                            Hunting rifles, maybe not so much, as rifle ammo comes 20 to a box, and a lot of hunters don't put more than a box or two per year through their rifles. But then, hunting rifles aren't really at issue here, are they?

                            --Shannon

                            "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                            "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                            by Leftie Gunner on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:45:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                •  30 seconds after tha shot is fired... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  KVoimakas

                  you can ensure they'll never match that bullet to that gun.

                  It's quite pointless.

                  Can you point to anywhere that has been able to solve an appreciable number of crimes with your proposed database?

              •  People watch way to much CSI..................... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Abra Crabcakeya, Elmar, KVoimakas

                The FBI doesn't even have the resources shown on those programs.

            •  OK, issues. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rockhound, meagert

              How would you enforce the registration? I know a lot of people who would not register their firearms.

              Ballistic fingerprinting doesn't work. The barrel wears and the finger print changes over use.

              We have laws regulating and restricting firearms. Are you saying otherwise?

              My weapons are not beloved. My wife is beloved. My cats are beloved. My other family members are beloved.

              They passed an AWB back in Clinton's day and in his autobio, he gave the NRA credit for a chunk of that. What do you think would happen now? Orifice my ass (ha HA.) Try history.

              (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:22:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Even though these steps can not be shown... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas

              to have prevented crime anywhere they have been implemented?  All they did was spend public money (almost always going at least an order of magnitude over budget) to have no beneficial effect?

              Why?

        •  rasbobbo, the law ain't equal (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee, KVoimakas

          look at the numbers of folks in jail now for things like personal-use amounts of weed.

          look at the disparity of sentencing in virtually every area of 'criminal justice' ...

          look at what happens when an accused can afford a rock-star lawyer (OJ) versus when s/he can't (that woman Bush laughed about executing, or Cameron Lee Willingham, to use two examples from Texas).

          People steal cars to commit robberies.
          Some woman in Houston used her car to murder her husband.

          Cars are already controlled in the way you cite.
          Does that mean nobody should be able to own a car?

          Now before you write me off ... I'm an advocate of gun control -- the way the Israelis or Swiss control guns: EVERYBODY is trained in the use, storage, maintenance; there's an annual refresher; and the entire population KNOWS that there's at least one gun in every household.

          It's actually not dissimilar to the way we control cars, here. Getting the initial training and issue is a bit of a coming-of-age ritual, like getting your first driver's license.

          LBJ & Lady Bird, Sully Sullenberger, Molly Ivins, Barbara Jordan, Ann Richards, Drew Brees: Texas is No Bush League! -7.50,-5.59

          by BlackSheep1 on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 11:38:24 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  naw, it would work! (0+ / 0-)

            every year you reregister your gun, at the DMV or Postaltoffice, shoot a couple of new bullets for the current pattern, and off you go.

            Just need to warn the PO and/or DMV you're coming so they can ad new people and more security.

            Simple, No?
            :>

            Responsible people leave neither loaded guns nor paranoid, eliminationist ideologies laying around for the mentally ill to play with.

            by KenBee on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 12:48:58 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No it's not that simple. I lived in Madrid for.. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              BlackSheep1, KenBee, KVoimakas

              a few years and I had to pass the Guardia Civil headquarters to get the metro.  There was a frequently a line of individuals carrying long guns in locked hard cases that were there to demonstrate that still had their gun from last year. The line would go down the sidewalk for some distance.  There might be a hundred people in the line.  The checks were only done at that one location in Madrid and on specific dates that seemed to be spaced about two months apart.  The gun owners were only allowed on the premises one at a time.  The Guardia Civil had several officers providing security for the line and roped off the area on the street in front of the building and where the line extended down the sidewalk.  The security measures were probably due to ETA's being very active at the time.  Spain has nowhere near the number of gun owners as the US does.  I also see this as akin to having to register your valuables because you would be letting it be known that you have firearms in your house potentially making you a mark for thieves.

              •  I was being ironic (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                duckhunter, KVoimakas

                or something, it would be ridiculous, a huge unknowing pile of bored uninterested civil servants listening to us grumpy old farts all day long is not how I want my tax money spent, your story illustrates that exactly..and that's in a country where shotguns are probably a lot higher % than here, for hunting, not home defense, certainly not very concealable.

                Responsible people leave neither loaded guns nor paranoid, eliminationist ideologies laying around for the mentally ill to play with.

                by KenBee on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:56:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  And when I get home, I'll drop a round file... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas

              lightly through the barrel, skim the firing pin with emery cloth, go back to the range to re-zero it, and PRESTO, no match.  

              Now what?

            •  Oops, missed the snarkasm. Sorry... 8>) n/t (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KVoimakas
        •  There are ways to enfore this for guns that have (0+ / 0-)

          a history on them meaning bought through and FFL and incentivize parties to a sale to have a check performed where there is no history.  For guns that do not have a history you can incentivize sellers and buyers to have a NICS check conducted by creating an affirmative statutory defense against negligence. It is already illegal to sell a known criminal or disturbed person a firearm but this will almost almost always come down to the sellers' personal knowledge of the buyer.  If a seller sells a gun to a person that an NICS check would have identified as a criminal, mentally disturbed or a drug addict the various states could create their own criminal penalties for sellers who did not conduct a check though they were able to have done so and the buyer uses the firearm in a crime.  The standard for negligence is "what would have a reasonably prudent person done in a similar situation."  Negligence could be easilly be established in a civil case amd justification for the states' to enact their own criminal penalties if the government were to create a system that was readilly accessible to the parties, easy to use,did not impose record keeping requirements on the buyer or seller, and was free or of very little cost that would allow them to conduct an NICS check without having to go through an FFL. If such a system was available and a check was not conducted then the seller would open him or herself to third party claims of negligence if they sold a firearm to an individual that would have been identified as a criminal, mentally disturbed, a drug addict or other person the NICS check would have prohibited from buying a gun at the time of sale.  If for nothing else there would be incentive for law abiding sellers and buyers to have the check conducted for the peace of mind that comes with knowing that they have taken steps to ensure the gun is not being sold to a criminal or disturbed individual and as far as it can be known the gun is not stolen and has not been used in a crime.  In all cases the identity of the seller would have to be established.

    •  Actually, let me link today's RKBA diary: (5+ / 0-)

      link

      I did suggest other things to help cut back on violent crime and firearm related crime.

      (RKBA) Right to Keep and Bear Arms: interested in a DKos RKBA group? Email in profile. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:12:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site