(November 1, 2020 at 7:10 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 4:32 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I'm not sure I understand the questions. It isn't about repeatedly quizzing someone, it's about someone's actions and situations. Suppose Joe has been a law abiding gun owner for, I dunno, 20 years, and is then convicted of rape with violence.  I think that should disqualify him from being a gun owner. Or say he's never convicted of anything, but develops severe dementia to the point where he can't recognize his own family members.  He probably shouldn't be armed. Or imagine he leaves children alone with a loaded pistol and one child kills the other (much like what happened in Georgia fairly recently) - at the very least, Joe shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

How would standards like these damage YOUR gun ownership rights, or the rights of millions and millions of firearms owners who DON'T commit serious crimes, who are NOT a danger to other people, or who DO properly secure their weapons?

Boru

Sigh.....

Why should a law abiding gun owner have to go through the same rigamarole every time they buy a gun? Why all the goofy rules about barrel length, magazine capacity, and folding stocks? Why the restrictions on sound supressors? (That's a courtesy issue) 

If a person isn't the problem - what is the point of restricting them?

Aren't the bad guys the problem?

But no one is being restricted. Your objection sounds like an objection to retesting people periodically for driving licenses.

Why SHOULDN’T checks be run for every gun purchase? Suppose you buy a gun and you sail through the process. Five years later, you want to buy another gun, but in the interim you’ve racked up two convictions for domestic abuse. What is the issue with being rechecked? Simply because you’re a law abiding citizen today doesn’t preclude you from being a bad guy tomorrow.

How is this a burden to you? How does it infringe on your rights?

Boru

(November 1, 2020 at 7:29 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:10 am)onlinebiker Wrote: Sigh.....

Why should a law abiding gun owner have to go through the same rigamarole every time they buy a gun? Why all the goofy rules about barrel length, magazine capacity, and folding stocks? Why the restrictions on sound supressors? (That's a courtesy issue) 

If a person isn't the problem - what is the point of restricting them?

Aren't the bad guys the problem?

But no one is being restricted. Your objection sounds like an objection to retesting people periodically for driving licenses.

Why SHOULDN’T checks be run for every gun purchase? Suppose you buy a gun and you sail through the process. Five years later, you want to buy another gun, but in the interim you’ve racked up two convictions for domestic abuse. What is the issue with being rechecked? Simply because you’re a law abiding citizen today doesn’t preclude you from being a bad guy tomorrow.

How is this a burden to you? How does it infringe on your rights?

Boru

If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:29 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But no one is being restricted. Your objection sounds like an objection to retesting people periodically for driving licenses.

Why SHOULDN’T checks be run for every gun purchase? Suppose you buy a gun and you sail through the process. Five years later, you want to buy another gun, but in the interim you’ve racked up two convictions for domestic abuse. What is the issue with being rechecked? Simply because you’re a law abiding citizen today doesn’t preclude you from being a bad guy tomorrow.

How is this a burden to you? How does it infringe on your rights?

Boru

If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

You're equating having a piss to buying a firearm. When 30 000 of your fellow citizen die from micturating every year, get back to me.

Boru

(November 1, 2020 at 7:47 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

You're equating having a piss to buying a firearm. When 30 000 of your fellow citizen die from micturating every year, get back to me.

Boru

No I am not equating.

I am showing you a perspective.

You don't buy guns - so you have no understanding of that situation.

You do however take a piss from time to time - I assume.

Now - quit playing false equivalence and ask yourself - would you find it restrictive to play the "Mother may I?" game each time you did ANY legal ordinary action?

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:29 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But no one is being restricted. Your objection sounds like an objection to retesting people periodically for driving licenses.

Why SHOULDN’T checks be run for every gun purchase? Suppose you buy a gun and you sail through the process. Five years later, you want to buy another gun, but in the interim you’ve racked up two convictions for domestic abuse. What is the issue with being rechecked? Simply because you’re a law abiding citizen today doesn’t preclude you from being a bad guy tomorrow.

How is this a burden to you? How does it infringe on your rights?

Boru

If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

As someone who’s had restricted access to restrooms for medical reasons on several occasions I can put it to you quite simply it’s annoying yes, and occasionally inconvenient yes, but truthfully not hugely life altering. Sorry try again.

I am a huge fan of all guns being taken.

(November 1, 2020 at 10:07 am)BrokenQuill92 Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

As someone who’s had restricted access to restrooms for medical reasons on several occasions I can put it to you quite simply it’s annoying yes, and occasionally inconvenient yes, but truthfully not hugely life altering. Sorry try again.

As a fellow gimp - I can relate.

But that was just given as an example and not meant to be a comparison or a tangental subject.

---

(November 1, 2020 at 10:11 am)Eleven Wrote: I am a huge fan of all guns being taken.

I am a huge fan of everyone living long, happy lives.

But no amount of legislation is going to make that happen either.

Quote:No I am not equating.

Yes you are 

Quote:I am showing you a perspective.

No, you're equating and doing it poorly 

Quote:You don't buy guns - so you have no understanding of that situation.

You don't need to buy guns to have an informed opinion on laws 

Quote:You do however take a piss from time to time - I assume.

No equal 

Quote:Now - quit playing false equivalence and ask yourself - would you find it restrictive to play the "Mother may I?" game each time you did ANY legal ordinary action?

Those two things not remotely alike. Thus this question is stupid

---

(November 1, 2020 at 10:07 am)BrokenQuill92 Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

As someone who’s had restricted access to restrooms for medical reasons on several occasions I can put it to you quite simply it’s annoying yes, and occasionally inconvenient yes, but truthfully not hugely life altering. Sorry try again.

Last I checked buying a gun was an option. Expelling waste from your body was a biological imperative.

---

(November 1, 2020 at 7:47 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: If you were required to get permission every time you took a leak - it wouldn't really be restricting you from doing so - or would it?

You're equating having a piss to buying a firearm. When 30 000 of your fellow citizen die from micturating every year, get back to me.

Boru

Indeed tell me the tale golden shower massacre 

(November 1, 2020 at 7:54 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(November 1, 2020 at 7:47 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: You're equating having a piss to buying a firearm. When 30 000 of your fellow citizen die from micturating every year, get back to me.

Boru

No I am not equating.

I am showing you a perspective.

You don't buy guns - so you have no understanding of that situation.

You do however take a piss from time to time - I assume.

Now - quit playing false equivalence and ask yourself - would you find it restrictive to play the "Mother may I?" game each time you did ANY legal ordinary action?

I’m not getting across, so I’ll try again. 

Let’s say that once you pass whatever vetting process is in place to buy your first gun, all vetting for future gun purchases should be waived. In other words, once someone is determined to be a law abiding citizen, we can presume that they are ALWAYS going to be a law abiding citizen (please correct me if that’s not what you’re saying).

Sorry to be blunt, but that’s just flat out one of the stupidest positions I’ve ever heard. 

Boru

Depending on where you live, you have to renew your driver's license. There are also various things checked at that time such as your vision.

Issue a license for gun possession. Make it something that has to be renewed at certain intervals and with certain requirements being met to include a criminal check of the time since the last renewal.

Is it perfect? No, but it's somewhere to start.