Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
There are already plenty of safeguards in place as far as legislation goes. More legislation won't fix anything.
For example, for the priviledge (I can't spell today) of owning a fully automatic weapon, you go through a background check that includes things like phone calls to your neighbors, your employer, your family, your local law enforcement agency and the law enforcement agencies and neighbors in every place you've ever lived. You pay an exorbitant fee to the feds, and essentially sign away your right to privacy; they have the right to require you to produce the weapon for their inspection at any time, night or day. They also don't need a warrant to enter your home to look for it. This is to prevent you from selling it to someone who hasn't jumped through the hoops (or parting it out).
If after all that you still want to rob a liquor store with it, your mindset isn't the type that would've made it through the initial psych eval/background check. It's easier to gain entry to NORAD than it is to legally own a machine gun. Rest easy.
|
That's all very interesting, but it doesn't answer my question.
A line currently exists that says what weapons you can own, and what weapons you can't. Gun control advocates are trying to move that line in one direction. The NRA is trying to move it in the other direction. Your previous post makes it sound like you think there should be no line at all.