Democrat buys semiautomatic rifle at Va. gun show in under 10 minutes - Polidicks

Your political capital is as much as you're willing to fight for it and refuse to be talked over about it. If you're going in already defeated, thinking you won't get most of what you like: you will walk out with nothing that you wanted. @MR-X All you are saying is basically private sales could be contribution to the problem, but we do not know for sure. Just for the sake of the argument, lets say it is a problem and we need the background check system. How do you implement that system and enforce it? You don't implement that system. You get people to do a criminal background check on each person. They pay the money to do the check. They wait for the report to come back. They look at the report to see if they're a criminal. If they're not a criminal, it's fine for them to sell them the weapon.

Registration is a completely different system and issue...most states do not require a registration. See my point? You want to implement a system which is already fundamentally flawed and a logistical nightmare then throw in registration into the mix. If a system like what is being suggested wants to be effective it needs to have concrete systems in place which support the ultimate goal. Otherwise its just another feel good measure. Also gun shows are not a loophole, so stop calling it that. Just because you do not like it does not mean it is a loophole. It is just how private sales function at this current time. Guess what, I can buy a car off of someone and not register it too. What is the point?

It'd be enforced the same way many laws are enforced: By citizens reporting violations of the law. We can't prosecute people who don't speak up about private affairs; luckily, people do speak up - if they know that something is wrong and that somebody is doing something wrong. That's the world you've put in your head. The current state of affairs is what we make it.

The populous can be made to care. You and everyone else can bring it to that point. It will stay the way it is for as long as you think that nothing can be done.

I think you're really missing ilikecorn's point. The overwhelming majority of people are too busy or apathetic to care and nobody is going to convince them otherwise. The only thing that might is them being directly affected by the issue at hand and even then it'll only be until it's no longer an issue for them.

You're only describing ammunition you can use to get people out on the streets. Identifying and transforming people's anger to action is how Trump won despite having lost the popular vote. Are you talking out both mouths when you say 'how can we do anything when Trump was elected' when what Trump did to become elected is a tool you can harness and use yourself for better ends? Apathy is caused by people thinking they have no options or that the status quo shouldn't be disrupted - nothing else. People who are suffering? They can be convinced to miss a day of work to protest. They can be convinced to burn the bridges of every single one of their family members to support something. They can be convinced that right is left and left is right -- so long as you drag them out of their apathy and shove their face into the options that they do have, despite what they've told themselves.

They were already pissed enough to miss that day of work and be OK with being fired. If you give them a bed to sleep on, food to eat, and water to drink they're now a soldier in your movement - willing and able to fight for the thing that has sucked them dry all their life, a lack of a real cause to champion. This isn't hyperbole. People have chosen to starve to protest - people have chosen to be beaten, to be jailed, to be branded and possibly murdered in support of a just cause. They have chosen to be exiled from their families, to be thrown out of their communities, to have their possessions stolen from them.

the car and gun comparison is the dumbest defense to use

The part you seem to be missing is that those people are not the majority like you seem to think they are.

The part y'all seem to be missing is that people are more desperate and angry than you believe they are.

You are so out of touch with reality that it completely invalidates any of your previous points. If you think this is how the world works, and this is how you accomplish anything, then you are insane. The state of whatever your disdain is with is no where near what the civil rights movement was, or anything else you just listed.

I'm 100% sure .50 BMG would do both of those. Though who the fuck is running around with an anti-truck rifle

Sooooooo you make it so you have to register every firearm sale, and have fines/jailtime if you don't, just like majority of cars, properties, even pets. Its not a nightmare if you enforce a blanket law over it considering we pull it off with the things listed above that are as numerous. It shouldn't even harm your personal freedoms to get said firearms if you're allowed to have them. Also it is a loophole, you have to normally register the sale and transfer of the gun in a gunstore, but don't have to in a private sale. That is a loophole to get around the federal law. Its not whether i like it or not, its by definition a loophole because its a way to circumvent an law that is standard procedure. Guess what, I can buy a car off of someone and not register it too. What is the point? Uh no you can't. To get your tags you have to register the vehicle in your name and on the deed of the car. I mean you CAN drive it on the road, but then you get pulled over and fined for not registering it. Almost sounds exactly like a system guns can have bar the annual tax for renewal.

"Doing everything they can to hold onto what they have" includes ensuring that nobody shoots them. So you're saying both that you have no idea what I'm talking about and that you know exactly what state the thing I'm talking about is. That sounds more insane to me. People will fight for their children if you show them they're in danger and they are in danger. So are they.

You only need to register the vehicle if you intend to drive it on public roads. If you are just using it around the farm or whatever and it sticks to private property - only going on public roads on a trailer - no you don't have to register it nor does it need a title. The system then is exactly the same as firearms in most states: you can't carry a firearm ready to use unless it's registered and you have a license to do so.

Unless that law is repealed and another introduced where those are used to create a registry. Nothing is written in stone.

How can you say there is no slippery slope?

I just demonstrated how there wasn't one: Nothing is written in stone.

What?

That makes it a slippery slope. If you're willing to pass a law to gain the confidence of gun owners then take your compromise back to further fuck them over, this is the slippery slope. What you're describing is a slippery slope.

Oh, OK. So when nothing is passed and everyone's too afraid to pass anything - is that not a slippery slope? Is refusing to do anything about it not a slippery slope because you've shown that you don't care to fight for it; doesn't that make it harder to pass any law at all since you've shown you're not willing to even make a mistake regarding it? I didn't argue that a registry should be created. I demonstrated that a registry could be created, despite your claim that 'it was impossible'. It's not impossible.

Oh got the two mixed up with part of California and NY. Still idiotic we don't have a registry system to begin with considering what i said before with any other property being registered to the owner.

There's governmental assistance if you starve or lose your home. If you're shot, you're either dead or so deep in debt you might as well be starving and homeless.

What????

And there's a difference between 'impossible' and 'likely'. Which I demonstrated.

All the more of an argument to ensure that anything that would put them into such a situation are minimized.

I genuinely doubt that anyone is living day to day with the fear of being shot. If they are, they are likely the same people afraid of flying because of terrorist attacks. Completely unfounded and more likely to die on the way to the airport or to school/work than otherwise. You also mention you have to convince people to join your ideology. How much more do you think people need to make up their minds? I've made up my mind, and you've made up yours. Barring some godly circumstance, I doubt that either of us will change. Why would the remainder of the population be any more or less clueless than you or I? No, I know exactly what you are talking about, and ilikecorn and myself have been going through that with you this last page of the thread. I explicitly said that if you think the world works like how you have described it, then you are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about. This falls under what I said about people not living in fear like you seem to think they are. If I told you that I wanted to campaign for people to boycott airlines because they could die in 9/11 v2.0, I would hope you would tell me I'm crazy. I say that because the whole premise of the idea is silly and unfounded, just like how you wanting to garner support through people's fear of being shot in some high-powered assault rifle mass shooting is unfounded.

What? It's nothing at all like saying 'if gravity wasn't a thing it'd be easier to get into space'. It's "Making a rocket that can get to Mars is impossible". It's not impossible. We can get to Mars. We could go in six months if we got a fire lit under our ass about it. It wouldn't be safe. It would be frought with possible dangers. But it sure as hell isn't 'impossible'. You're taking about 'what we can and can't do with federal laws' while ignoring the foundation of those laws - which is that they can get repealed or amended.

Firgof are you sober at the moment?

I've never had a drink in my life and I've never done any drugs. Implying I'm drunk is pretty damn insulting.