ATF Reccomends Gun Legislation

Ref: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41257218

So a lot of the guns being used by the Mexican cartels come from the United States. People buy the weapons ostensibly for person use, then resell them to gun runners. This is called "straw buying," and while illegal, the BATF recommends new measures be put into place to combat this:

Officials of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said the arrests point to the urgent need for White House approval of a federal rule they proposed last month that would require firearms dealers in four southwest border states to report multiple sales of long guns. Currently, firearms dealers must report to the ATF when a customer buys two or more handguns, but no such requirement exists for long guns such as AK-47s.

MSN

The NRA opposes this. I don't see why this is a problem. This doesn't restrict the ability of persons legally aquiring guns to do so. Help me out here. What's the rationale for opposing something like this?

Hardly any genuine assault rifles are being sold in the US alone. Now, there are a BUNCH of semi-automatic rifles that look like their fully-automatic counterparts being sold on a regular basis, but those are hardly the weapons being used by cartels. Even then, having firearm dealers in states like Texas (where I am), Arizona etc. report on multiple long-rifle sales to one client isn't that big of a deal...it's yet another useless, illogical attempt at countering illegal weapons trafficking. There's really no reason to support OR oppose this, as it accomplishes nothing.

Also, can anyone explain why I forget how to spell "recommend" on Tuesdays and Thursdays?

The NRA would oppose a law prohibiting the personal ownership of a doomsday weapon if it looked enough like a gun. No sense trying to see logic in their motives beyond "derp derp guns guns"Ace6301

It's good when you disagree with something to not try and understand it at all, and just assume the people who have that view are stupid or crazy.

As a multiple assault rifle/long gun owner myself, I have no problem with the proposed legislation. However, the NRA will fight any legislation that is viewed as infringing on gun owner's rights, no matter how trivial.

As a multiple assault rifle/long gun owner myself, I have no problem with the proposed legislation. However, the NRA will fight any legislation that is viewed as infringing on gun owner's rights, no matter how trivial.

luamhtrad

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to the law. It doesn't prevent anyone from buying guns, just that they will report it if you walk out of the store with a shopping cart full of them.

However, the NRA will fight any legislation that is viewed as infringing on gun owner's rights, no matter how trivial.

luamhtrad

Why? I understand there are groups that will fight for any legislation that limits gun owners' rights, so what, is this some sort of cosmic balancing act? In retrospect, it occurs to me that I'd probably have had more luck getting this question answered by just writing the NRA an E-mail than asking the forum.

[QUOTE="luamhtrad"]

However, the NRA will fight any legislation that is viewed as infringing on gun owner's rights, no matter how trivial.

Palantas

Why? I understand there are groups that will fight for any legislation that limits gun owners' rights, so what, is this some sort of cosmic balancing act? In retrospect, it occurs to me that I'd probably have had more luck getting this question answered by just writing the NRA an E-mail than asking the forum.

I'm very pro-gun, and don't think this infringes on gun owner rights really. I also don't imagine it helping any at all, since most gun runners are into actual assault rifles not bushmaster semi'sPenguinchow

Also, can anyone explain why I forget how to spell "recommend" on Tuesdays and Thursdays?

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]The NRA would oppose a law prohibiting the personal ownership of a doomsday weapon if it looked enough like a gun. No sense trying to see logic in their motives beyond "derp derp guns guns"Palantas

It's good when you disagree with something to not try and understand it at all, and just assume the people who have that view are stupid or crazy.

No I am sorry but the NRA is basically that.. They oppose any and all gun laws by and large..

No I am sorry but the NRA is basically that.. They oppose any and all gun laws by and large..

sSubZerOo

So it is your opinion that when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane?

EDIT: Let me reword my post as a question; maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

I was criticizing the ideathat when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane? Which part of this were you disgreeing with?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No I am sorry but the NRA is basically that.. They oppose any and all gun laws by and large..

Palantas

So it is your opinion that when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane?

Wow, I've never heard it put so eloquently. Bravo ol' chap, bravo.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No I am sorry but the NRA is basically that.. They oppose any and all gun laws by and large..

Palantas

So it is your opinion that when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane?

Every ATF agent I have ever known has always been pro gun with limited regulations. So Whatever some people withinthe ATF are recommending doesn't reflect the ATF as a whole. Many ATF agents are gun dealers.

I fear my own federal government more than I'll ever fear any gangs or cartels. I'm pro-gun not only to protect myself from criminals but also to give the government a reason to remember who the country belongs to.

Why do you think gun sales are alwaysso high? Because of patriots. People always buy and stockpile guns, gunpartsand ammuntion to make sure billions remain in circulation at all times.

When someone suggests ban that only increases sales. Dealers order as many as they can becausepeople run out to buy as many as they can before the restriction orban goes through. These people will kill you if you try to take their guns. They and the millions just like them will die before they give them up. So is it a battle worth fighting? People have and will kill for less.

No I have no problem with people for gun rights.. The NRA is on a completely different level though.. I don't think guns should be banned.. But NRA is the extreme in this regard... To me they are nearly as bad as PETA.

sSubZerOo

My Internet's running slow. I posted an edit:

I was criticizing the idea that when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane? Which part of this were you disgreeing with?

I

What do the NRA or PETA have to do with this?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No I have no problem with people for gun rights.. The NRA is on a completely different level though.. I don't think guns should be banned.. But NRA is the extreme in this regard... To me they are nearly as bad as PETA.

Palantas

My Internet's running slow. I posted an edit:

I was criticizing the idea that when you disagree with someone, you should A.) Not attempt to understand the basis of their argument, and B.) Simply assume they're insane? Which part of this were you disgreeing with?

I

What do the NRA or PETA have to do with this?

That they are both extreme in their views.. That is my point... That is why I was cementing that the NRA will be against anything when it comes to any kind of gun control.

I'm still confused at to how that's connected to what I said. I'm going to chalk this one up to a misunderstanding and move on.

I still don't see what that has to do with what I said. I'm going to chalk this one up to a misunderstanding and move on.