Democratic Candidates call for mandatory gun buy back

[GoldenBoy89]

Yes, certain assault weapons and magazines would be illegal. The government would offer to buy back the illegal weapons.

This makes sense, since the guns cannot be used legally. The gun owners will simply buy more of other, legal, types of guns. Nothing will keep American gun owners from owning half of the world's guns that are in private hands.

There will still be mass killings. This would simply reduce the number of deaths.

Which is a much better deal than most people get for being in possession of illegal things.

 

[eleos1954]

As Trump waffles, some Democrats talk up mandatory gun buybacks, licensing

After the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton earlier this month, Swalwell’s proposal for a mandatory buyback of all assault-style weapons was embraced by the congressman who represented the Texas border city, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke — giving the idea its highest-profile platform yet.​

Robert Francis O'Rourke supports confiscation of certain types of weapons.

That would be confiscation with compensation -

But still confiscation, because it would be mandatory

Our elected representatives are suppose to uphold our Constitutional Rights ... not encroach on them.

2nd amendment
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

in·fringe
/inˈfrinj/
Learn to pronounce
verb
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
"making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright"
synonyms: contravene, violate, transgress, break, breach, commit a breach of, disobey, defy, flout, fly in the face of, ride roughshod over, kick against; More

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
"his legal rights were being infringed"
synonyms: undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, compromise; More

If there are those that want to change the constitution, there is a process to do that ... then fine ... go through that process.

 

[Darkhorse]

They’re not taking them. They’re buying them back.

How can a government buy "back" something that they never owned?

 

[Veritas]

As Trump waffles, some Democrats talk up mandatory gun buybacks, licensing

After the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton earlier this month, Swalwell’s proposal for a mandatory buyback of all assault-style weapons was embraced by the congressman who represented the Texas border city, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke — giving the idea its highest-profile platform yet.​

Robert Francis O'Rourke supports confiscation of certain types of weapons.

That would be confiscation with compensation -

But still confiscation, because it would be mandatory

Maybe they should check out just how successful previous such "buy backs" were.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

How can a government buy "back" something that they never owned?

Same way they take property they don’t own. Ever hear of eminent domain?

 

[renniks]

I don’t see much difference between this and eminent domain laws.

Just be happy they want to pay you. The government took the Native Americans property without even paying them in most cases.

Oh goody, let's be happy that our constitutional rights are being violated!

 

[Paulos23]

Our elected representatives are suppose to uphold our Constitutional Rights ... not encroach on them.

2nd amendment
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

in·fringe
/inˈfrinj/
Learn to pronounce
verb
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
"making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright"
synonyms: contravene, violate, transgress, break, breach, commit a breach of, disobey, defy, flout, fly in the face of, ride roughshod over, kick against; More

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
"his legal rights were being infringed"
synonyms: undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, compromise; More

If there are those that want to change the constitution, there is a process to do that ... then fine ... go through that process.

I think you skipping over the frase "well regulated". There is room for having guns and having them well regulated, either the people with guns or the guns themselves.

 

[SarahsKnight]

Just because you give everyone a gun and basic training on how to operate it doesn't magically turn every 'good guy with a gun' into John Wick.

That's what worries me about gun nuts. They act like in any shooting situation so long as they were in the role of self-defense and not the malicious attacker, then with a gun in their hands they're suddenly some action movie hero who will easily take down the bad guy with no collateral damage. I think the tough-talking (read: irresponsible) gun owners have seen too many movies, really. Definitely describes my former stepmother, who thankfully is out of our lives now; she was downright creepy oftentimes with her love of guns and constant talk of hypothetical situations in which she'd have no problem blowing a guy's head off if he attacked her.

 

[mark46]

Do you have a right to have a grenade launcher, a machine gun, a tank?

Should felons have that right?

Should the mentally ill?

Courts have decided that the 2nd Amendment does not prevent legislators from pass laws regarding weapons.

Our elected representatives are suppose to uphold our Constitutional Rights ... not encroach on them.

2nd amendment
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

in·fringe
/inˈfrinj/
Learn to pronounce
verb
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
"making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright"
synonyms: contravene, violate, transgress, break, breach, commit a breach of, disobey, defy, flout, fly in the face of, ride roughshod over, kick against; More

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
"his legal rights were being infringed"
synonyms: undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, compromise; More

If there are those that want to change the constitution, there is a process to do that ... then fine ... go through that process.

 

[eleos1954]

Do you have a right to have a grenade launcher, a machine gun, a tank?

Should felons have that right?

Should the mentally ill?

Courts have decided that the 2nd Amendment does not prevent legislators from pass laws regarding weapons.

Like I said .... the constitution can be changed ... and there is a process for that .... go through the process to change it .... to ... whatever ... but go through the process.

 

[Darkhorse]

Do you have a right to have a grenade launcher, a machine gun, a tank?

Should felons have that right?

Should the mentally ill?

Courts have decided that the 2nd Amendment does not prevent legislators from pass laws regarding weapons.

Grenade launchers are useless without grenades...but bombs are fairly easy to make.

Actually, in most states, you do have the right to own a machine gun, as long as it was manufactured before 1986, you can pass the extensive background check, you register it with the federal government, and pay a $200 fee. Very few people do (collectors primarily).
(google National Firearms Act of 1934)

How many people could afford a tank?

Before 1969, felons could own guns. If they misused it, they were subject to prison (again) or execution.

Mentally ill? Certainly not the dangerous ones.
However, we're told that "most mentally-ill people pose no danger to others or themselves"

 

[mark46]

Arte you suggesting that the constitution be changed to bar the mentally from owning machine guns.
Or are you suggesting your won personal interpretation of the constitution (rather than relying on the decisions of the courts).

The 1994 legislation banning assault weapons (among other things) was tested in the courts.

Like I said .... the constitution can be changed ... and there is a process for that .... go through the process to change it .... to ... whatever ... but go through the process.

 

[Allandavid]

I think you skipping over the frase "well regulated". There is room for having guns and having them well regulated, either the people with guns or the guns themselves.

He’s also skipping over the “being necessary” part. Citizen militias are necessary in 2019...?

 

[eleos1954]

Arte you suggesting that the constitution be changed to bar the mentally from owning machine guns.
Or are you suggesting your won personal interpretation of the constitution (rather than relying on the decisions of the courts).

The 1994 legislation banning assault weapons (among other things) was tested in the courts.

I'm not "suggesting" anything ... what I am STATING ... is there are constitutional rights ... and there is a process to change the constitution ... and go through that process.

To amend the constitution ...

Step 1: Two-thirds of both houses of Congress pass a proposed constitutional amendment. This sends the proposed amendment to the states for ratification. Step 2: Three-fourths of the states (38 states) ratify the proposed amendment, either by their legislatures or special ratifying conventions.

Many "courts" would be involved in the process.

The role of the judicial branch is to interpret the law, while the ability to enact and enforce those laws is left to the legislative and executive branches.

 

[mark46]

Thank you for clarifying.

Since the courts have interpreted the Constitution on this issue, I'm fine. No constitutional change is necessary. Legislatures are currently free to pass laws restricting the ownership and use of gone.

I'm not "suggesting" anything ... what I am STATING ... is there are constitutional rights ... and there is a process to change the constitution ... and go through that process.

To amend the constitution ...

Step 1: Two-thirds of both houses of Congress pass a proposed constitutional amendment. This sends the proposed amendment to the states for ratification. Step 2: Three-fourths of the states (38 states) ratify the proposed amendment, either by their legislatures or special ratifying conventions.

Many "courts" would be involved in the process.

The role of the judicial branch is to interpret the law, while the ability to enact and enforce those laws is left to the legislative and executive branches.

 

[eleos1954]

Thank you for clarifying.

Since the courts have interpreted the Constitution on this issue, I'm fine. No constitutional change is necessary. Legislatures are currently free to pass laws restricting the ownership and use of gone.

This has to happen first

To amend the constitution ...

Step 1: Two-thirds of both houses of Congress pass a proposed constitutional amendment. This sends the proposed amendment to the states for ratification. Step 2: Three-fourths of the states (38 states) ratify the proposed amendment, either by their legislatures or special ratifying conventions.

And through this process state courts are involved and then it would go on up the line eventually to the supreme court.

 

[hislegacy]

No, I’m saying I thought you already had the solution to this problem.

What problem? The one you don’t see?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

What problem? The one you don’t see?

Yes. That one.

 

[Acts2:38]

I highly doubt the Las Vegas shooter would have been able to kill 58 people and injure 422 people with a kitchen knive.

Now try to flip this around. What if casinos allowed citizens to bring weapons onto the premises? Maybe someone in the hotel at that time it happened could have done something?

The Latest: Hotel guest reported hearing Vegas shots nearby

Pretty sad. If that hotel guest was able to have weapons, they could have stopped the shooter. I'm sure that wasnt the only person to hear the gunfire either in a large hotel as that one.

Interesting thought right?

Imagine you're in a supermarket and you hear gun shots. You pull out your gun because you are one of these 'good guys'. Now you carefully look for the shooter and when you turn a corner you see a guy with a gun walking towards you. You aim and shoot.

I suppose anything is possible, but frankly, that is a ridiculous scenario. Usually someone would use that "corner" as cover and relay warnings/ get information from the "unknown" person with a gun.

Furthermore, crowds run away from the perpetrator. I don't think it would be that hard to find the right guy to mark. Especially after you can hear where its coming from.

In any case, the article I had provided previously shows that the uptick in gun ownership decreased the criminal activities/etc. So with that said, if a criminal knows a certain area is full of, how do you people usually state it? "gun toting" people. Then the criminal is less likely to attack that area.

Example:
Your area does not have a gun

My area does have a gun

Criminal understands that my area has a gun

Criminal goes to victimize your area instead

That's pretty much how it will work. And why not? It would be easier for them with less risk.

 

[Aldebaran]

He’s also skipping over the “being necessary” part. Citizen militias are necessary in 2019...?

Maybe not in 2019. But let's see who gets elected in 2020 and what they end up doing.