do you support more gun laws even though we don't enforce the ones we already have?
do you want tough sentencing to discourage the breaking of are already existent gun laws even if it will disproportionately lock up minorities?
I donāt think gun regulations are the answer alone. I think improving our background check system would do some good so Iād support that, I think better counseling and education in schools is good and Iād support those efforts, Iād have to learn more about whatās happening in our criminal justice system in regards to how thatās going.
Improvided how? the system we have in place works its those that screw up that allows those that pass a background check that shouldn't
it's not a problem with the system the problem is with those running it
How well do you know the current system? Can you explain why you support it but not universal BG checks? What are the differentiators?
the current system allows states to either use the FBI provided check or use its own system or a combination of both
the problem with universal checks is first the FBI has proven incompetent
second, states they will have to provide the FBI with all its crime records giving the FBI to much power because then the FBI could use that information more than a data bank for background checks but for other nefarious reasons the FBI has proven they can't be trusted
third, it will give the federal government the information to be able to create a gun registry which would be used for gun confiscation
Thanks for explaining that. Would I be correct to assume itās your last two points that bring the real concern?
Iād think that if you support background checks, which it sounds like you do because they indeed are effective... youād want the most comprehensive database and widespread access to info.
Iād also think that your security concerns could be addressed through encryption. Tech can do great things now a days. One thing the gov needs to catch up on
That makes no sense because background checks have been proven to be totally ineffective.
Most mass murders, for example, were committed by people who passed background checks with not problem.
In fact, one of the worst mass murders was Paddock, who actually had a federal firearms license.
I personally believe in privacy, so I have only once bought a firearm through a background check.
No one who wants to commit a crime ever has to go through a background check because like illegal drugs, there are lots of people willing to sell illegal guns as well.
So all universal background checks do is provide the BATF with a list of all legal gun purchases, and none of the illegal ones. Totally useless unless you intend to illegally start confiscating firearms from legal owners.
And your suggestion of encryption makes no sense. The only people we do not want to know who the gun owners are, are the BATF. And obviously if you encrypt the database run by the BATF, that is not going to prevent BATF access because they will have to be the ones to create the encryption scheme.
But you also have it backwards, in that the government, through DOD funded projects, has created almost all the computer technology. The DOD created the internet for example, originally called DARPANET. Encryption and decryption is what the DOD originally created computers for, in the 1940s.