Bushmaster1313's Proposed Reasonable and Universal Gun Legislation

[bushmaster1313]

1. Universal background checks, quick, cheap and simple.

2. Universal ability to purchase handgun or long gun for anyone who passes a background check

3. Universal Shall Issue Concealed Carry for anyone who passes background check.

4. Universal ability to ship handguns through the U.S. Mail (not just FFL's)

5. Universal ability to ship ammunition through the U.S. Mail.

6. Universal castle doctrine

7. Universal death penalty to anyone who commits first degree murder

8. Universal stand your ground

9. Universal gun safety course taught as a requirement to graduate from High School.

10. Universal teaching of the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, as a requirement to graduate from High School.

11. Universal prosecution for criminal violation of civil rights of all government employees or politicians who engage in activity that infringes on an individual's Second Amendment rights.

12. Universal impeachment of judges who fail to uphold the Second Amendment in cases presented for their decision.

13. Universal relief from the Lautenberg Amendment for persons not convicted of a violent felony.

14. Universal prohibition against politicians who did not serve in the military or otherwise put there necks on the line to defend the Constitution from voting to restrict the gun rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[M-Cameron]

.....sounds great.....except for #1, 2,3,7,14


if you want to come up with new gun laws, try first applying it to your other rights......if it sounds stupid for them, its equally as stupid for guns.

1. Universal background checks to buy books or practice religion, quick, cheap and simple.

2. Universal ability to purchase books or computer printers for anyone who passes a background check

3. Universal Shall Issue public speaking permits for anyone who passes background check.

4. Universal ability to ship books through the U.S. Mail (not just FFL's)

5. Universal ability to ship toner cartridges through the U.S. Mail.

6. Universal castle doctrine

7. Universal death penalty to anyone who commits first degree murder

8. Universal stand your ground

9. Universal gun safety course taught as a requirement to graduate from High School.

10. Universal teaching of the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, as a requirement to graduate from High School.

11. Universal prosecution for criminal violation of civil rights of all government employees or politicians who engage in activity that infringes on an individual's Second Amendment rights.

12. Universal impeachment of judges who fail to uphold the Second Amendment in cases presented for their decision.

13. Universal relief from the Lautenberg Amendment for persons not convicted of a violent felony.

14. Universal prohibition against politicians who did not serve in the military or otherwise put there necks on the line to defend the Constitution from voting to restrict the gun rights of law abiding citizens.

sounds ridiculous....right

also, #14, does that mean that veterans can vote to take away my rights?......is a veterans opinion somehow more important than anyone elses? did they gain certain rights over 'normal' people?

 

[mljdeckard]

Very idealistic, very broad strokes, very encroaching upon states' rights.

 

[BK]

And it ONLY seems like you are trying to sell your proposition by offering us some liberty in exchange for the security you asked for in the last thread.

 

[ToraBoraBlues]

How does it violate states rights? It's already been established that states cannot violate the other rights, why should they be allowed to violate the second amendment?

 

[bushmaster1313]

very encroaching upon states' rights.

The Constitution has that effect when the states encroach on individual rights

 

[19-3Ben]

A LOT of this stuff interfere's with state's rights and centralizes WAAAYYYYY too much power with the federal government. I would not support many of these on that basis alone.

Numbers 7 and 12 interfere with judiciary independence/discretion. That's a huge no-no.

#11 just makes no sense whatsoever.

I could probably stand behind you on maybe 3-5 of your proposals.

Edit to add: And the more I think about it the more I doubt that I could really get behind those 3-5.

 

[InkEd]

Just like your last post about universal background checks. No thanks!

 

[joeschmoe]

No.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Foolish. Failure. Please stop this nonsense.

You're ideas lose appeal at bullet mark #1. Everything else is just compromise fodder, and it comes across as weak.

 

[mljdeckard]

Your ideas are based on the idea that if we give them a little, they will leave us alone.

 

[wacki]

delete me.

 

[beatledog7]

Beatledog's universal gun legislation:

"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."

 

[19-3Ben]

Beatledog's universal gun legislation:

"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."

Well played sir. Well played indeed.

And for my own state, I'll add CT Constitution Article 1 Section 15:

Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

Not much ambiguity there either.

 

[buckeye8]

bushmaster1313,

I realize that it is very difficult to accept that we are sometimes wrong, but aren't you just about getting to the point that you're ready to admit that this was not one of your better ideas?

 

[Tim the student]

No.

Just no.

 

[2ifbyC]

You are dealing hypothetical solutions and compromise to an issue that has not even entered debate in Congress. If and when back ground checks are proposed in a bill, you can write your representatives and make your suggestions if you do not like the answers provided by THR members.

 

[r1derbike]

You lost me at the title with "reasonable" and "universal".

 

[HorseSoldier]

5. Universal ability to ship ammunition through the U.S. Mail.

I don't pretend to be super up to speed on this issue, but my understanding was that the US Postal Service doesn't ship ammunition because it is a potentially hazardous ORM-D material, not because they don't like gun owners.

 

[jerkface11]

tldnr

 

[Kiln]

Cuomo? Is that you?

 

[wojownik]

In general. No.

In detail:

1. No. Non-interstate transactions between private individuals are just that. Private, and not something for a national government to muck around with.

2. No, per the above.

3. No. That is a state/local issue.

4. Perhaps. Though USPS tends to misplace half my mail in the best of circumstances.

5. Ditto.

6. No. Again, that is a state/local issue.

7. No. Sentence discretion being sometimes a valuable thing.

8. No. Again, a state/local issue/

9. No. A state/local issue, and also not if it takes time from other curricula (which assuredly it would).

10. No. That is once again a state/local issue. Though it would be nice if the US Dept of Ed included this as an encouraging factor in awarding improvement grants and other funding to schools (not just 2A, but a course on US govt and the constitution).

11. No. Cute thought, but in the ever shifting court debates on the limits of the 2A, it would be near impossible to prosecute a bureaucrat for infringing 2A. However, maybe stiffer specific civil and criminal sanctions for any government personnel violating specific regulations on record keeping, FOPA provisions, etc.

12. No. This is what the appellate process is for.

13. Not sure.

14. No. Absolutely not. Silly.

Also, I know of quite a few folks in the the military who are very anti-2A (as far as civilians are concerned), and frankly not too clear on the whole concept of "democracy" in general. A very scary (additional) step towards a praetorian society.

 

[savanahsdad]

sounds great if I want to give up my 4th Amd , and they did teach gun safty in schools at one time , and i'll agree we should bring that back

 

[BSA1]

bushmaster1313,

Well for starters you need to give your definition of “Universal.” Merriam-Webster defines it as including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception. Based on Merriam-Webster definition you have no tolerance of anyone who disagrees with your views.

 

[savanahsdad]

# 14 ?? well I feel if you didn't serve you should not be in charge of are service members but thats all, so all congress, senant and the cheff should all have served , but to late for that