Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Gun Control

It seems that support for gun control is at an all-time low in the U.S. This does not prevent certain people from engaging in some wishful thinking:
This finding is confirmed by other recent polling that shows that Americans support measures to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals. According to one poll, 89 percent of respondents support requiring all gun buyers to pass a background check at gun shows, 94 percent support requiring gun owners to alert police if their guns are lost or stolen, and 69 percent support requiring those buying ammunition to pass a criminal background check. Another poll showed 86 percent of respondents supported background checks for every gun buyer
"Other recent polling" appears to have been done around the water cooler at the Brady H.Q.

How would you like to pay $10 for a Brady Check before buying a $12 box of ammo? I think this would make bulk purchases vastly more popular. Of course if you buy 1000 rounds of pistol ammo you run the risk of being identified as a terrorist, even after the background check.

1 comment:

Brad K. said...

Since background checks seem to have been so useless, except for the Feds to gather information about citizen activities without a warrant, perhaps they should be extended.

1) Have TSA administer every background check.
2) Require background checks for some of those other venues that kill people -- to see a family doctor, to board a plane, to buy a new or used car, whether privately, commercially, or at retail.

Hey, you could stop the next Times Square bomber before she/he starts loading the delivery vehicle. Unless the ingrate swipes one. Or borrows it. Or uses a trailer. Oops.

3) Buy a trailer, a cargo rack, a truck, or a backpack, you would need to pass a background check.

4) Maybe even need to pass a background check to buy groceries, or go to school. Or buy underwear or swim suits, or a TV, or a computer, or sign up with an ISP -- some degenerate might intend to violate some corporation's lawyer's copyright bundle.

5) What likely should be done is require a background check with full disclosure for buying a political ad or making a political contribution, or accepting such an ad or contribution. And dontating to or accepting donations to a non-profit organization. Except Girl Scout cookies.

Why, if it doesn't work, just repeating it and using it more just makes US Government sense. Look at the marvelous stimulus record to date. Something like 16 million unemployed don't bother our Vice President Biden as badly as 100,000 no-longer-contributing public sector union employees.

And why does it look like Obama is *forcing* Biden to make himself look so lame an inappropriate? Remember the scuttlebutt at the time of the campaign and election that choosing Biden was *insurance* that no one would want to see Obama leave the office of President unexpectedly? With questions about Obama's isolation and otherwise deteriorating mental condition, politically the Obama team (Valerie Jarrett, Chicago slum lord and Obama intimate) may have decided they needed to brush up Biden's image as "We *really* don't want that one" to counter suggestions Obama step down.

Anyway, how could any law-abiding citizen object to another background check . . for the neighbors.