Yarddawg wrote:
Please define "reasonable gun control". Reasonable to who? Obviously, what you may feel is "reasonable", I, or others on here, may find to be unreasonable.
I never mentioned anything about liberalizing drunken driving laws or sex offender laws. I am referring to a Constitutionally guaranteed right. There are no Constitutional protections for drunken drivers or sex offenders, so please, let's stay on topic and compare apples to apples.
I am glad to see that you admit that even these so called "reasonable gun control" measures will not stop crime. I could not agree with you more! Where we differ is that I do not believe that it will/has any effect on crime. In fact, I have seen too many articles and interviews with violent criminals who stated that they do not go through FFL's to obtain their weapons. Instead, they go through their "homies" to obtain their weapons. No amount of laws will stop the black market.
As far as permits are concerned, I agree with your statement about the "false comfort" to a degree. The problem is, will the individual(s) give me/you/us an opportunity to state that I/you/we have a permit? Will I need to present it upon demand by John Q. Public?
The problem, as I see it, is that we gun owners have already given up far too much in the name of "reasonable gun control".
As of today, The Supreme Court has said there is a Constitutional right to self defense with a firearm, but that Federal, State and Local Governments have a right to reasonable regulation. What is "reasonable" is, of course, different based on the individual, but has to be a matter for mutual agreement or compromise based on the political process. When someone thinks a law is unreasonable, they are free to use the political process to change the law, or sue, and appeal, and appeal until a court makes a decision as to what is reasonable. Courts make judgements as to what is "reasonable" thousands of time a day. You may not agree, but that is the process, and it works pretty good because judges tend to reflect the values of the community in which they live.
I brought up drunk driving and sex offenders as an analogy to show you that your argument doesn't hold up against well-established methods to control undesireable behavior and incentivise desireable behavior. It is the foundation of our civil society.
I agree with you about the black market, but there has to be an appropriate balance between barriers to access and it being too cumbersome for ordinary citizens. I find the current background check acceptable.
If someone asks me for my permit, I will gladly and proudly provide it for inspection. It is a part of making carry an accepted norm in public. It reassures them.
I agree that gun regulation has gone to far, but that is no reason to argue that it should be totally unregulated. Let's focus on gaining the confidence of John Q Public, and lobbying for reasonable liberalization.
For instance, we should ask Virginia to amend the law that firearms may be stored in vehicles if they are parked on any commercially or industrially zoned property. That way I can drive and park at work or at the Walmart without violating some private property rules.
And, change the State law that supports the use of a firearm to prevent anyone from death or serious injury (as the Fairfax law states.)
And, reduce the penalties for violation of a firearm law unrelated to an incident/discharge.
Dems4Guns
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...
