Speakeasy forum

General discussion

I don't know why we are arguing about the NRA

by Diana Forum moderator / December 27, 2012 12:35 AM PST

They've already won.

"The bottom line is the gun lobby will oppose any nominee who promises to be a strong and effective director of the A.T.F.," said Dennis Henigan, vice president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Indeed, it was persistent lobbying by the N.R.A. that helped to get the confirmation requirement instated.

But there's more to the ATF's ineffectiveness than a lack of director. A thicket of laws and restrictions keep the bureau from instituting policies that could help it to reduce gun violence.

For instance, the A.T.F. is prohibited from creating a federal registry of gun transactions. So when law enforcement needs to identify a gun-owner, officials at the ATF frequently have to page through boxes in a warehouse basement, or trace the transaction through the manufacturer and wholesaler. As the New York Times points out, TV detectives have it much easier than their real-life counterparts.

There's more—the Firearm Owner's Protection Act of 1986 prohibits the A.T.F. from making more than one unannounced inspection per year of licensed gun dealers. The Tiahrt Amendments keep the bureau from using tracing data in some court cases, and require background checks of gun buyers to be destroyed within 24 hours of approval.

While gun control advocates say measures like a transaction registry could help keep guns out of the wrong hands, pro-gun groups, backed by the N.R.A., say that such a registry could be misused to harm lawful gun owners. While the two sides argue, Congress remains inactive.


Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: I don't know why we are arguing about the NRA
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: I don't know why we are arguing about the NRA
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
When you have ATF agents
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 12:46 AM PST

who weren't able to keep track of the guns they were personally responsible for in Fast & Furious not to mention one agent's own personal weapon showing up at a drug murder two weeks ago, do you blame the NRA for not having a lot of confidence in that agency?

Collapse -
That is like saying, after the Fast and Furious debacle
by Diana Forum moderator / December 27, 2012 12:56 AM PST

means that you shouldn't trust the government to run a country. Although you would probably say that unless there were only Republicans running the government.


Collapse -
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 1:39 AM PST

how well the government has run Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, US Postal Service, FHA, Fannie/Freddie, Student Loans, bailouts, and even their new 'baby' Obamacare...........et al, yeah, I guess you can say they aren't trustworthy with taxpayer money. And that goes for both parties over many years. But at least the Republicans/Conservatives have figured out that we have a spending problem and a government that's too big not to mention arrogant.

Collapse -
They didn't know we had a spending problem
by Diana Forum moderator / December 27, 2012 6:11 AM PST
In reply to: Considering

during the previous Republican administration.


Collapse -
We knew it even if
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 6:57 AM PST

many Reps actually in Congress during the first 4 years didn't......but a good majority of the spending increased during the second half when Dems ran both Houses, please don't forget, so it just continued on and got worse. Plus, the last two years of the first four were getting the war in Afghanistan under way and then Iraq.........and then Katrina hit........

Collapse -
More revisionism, Toni
by Josh K / December 27, 2012 10:50 PM PST
In reply to: We knew it even if

The Dems only controlled Congress for two years; spending was out of control for way longer than that. Remember how the Bush Administration tried to hide all the Iraq expenses by keeping them out of the budget and then requesting "emergency funding" for the war every year?

If we didn't have the money to wage war in Iraq, we had the option not to do it.

Collapse -
And we had the option to
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 10:56 PM PST
In reply to: More revisionism, Toni

not have stimulus money we couldn't afford to the tune of nearly $1T, Josh. You can't have it both ways. That stimulus money was a joke and didn't need to be spent at all; no more than having the Feds continue after four years to print money like it has been which has devalued our dollar so much that it's only worth about 65 cents now, and if fact, Bernake announced he was doing it again just a month ago. When Bush spent on wars, he was been vilified for it.....when BO spends trillions on idiotic companies that fold after a few months (some never even opened up or sold a thing) and joked on camera that 'shovel ready jobs weren't shovel ready after all, you can't praise his decisions enough.

Collapse -
Bush set that up and Obama just followed through
by Diana Forum moderator / December 28, 2012 2:34 AM PST

He did set up the bailout of the auto industry and we got paid back for that.


Collapse -
If you think we got paid back
by TONI H / December 28, 2012 3:59 AM PST

you're dreaming.........GM still owes about $40B........and the stock 'we' own is being (if not already) sold off at a loss.

As for the stimulus, I didn't mention the auto bailout.......even though Bush 'set it up' as you said, it was for far less than what the Union loving BO actually shelled out.

Collapse -
And what DID get shelled out by BO
by TONI H / December 28, 2012 4:00 AM PST

for the auto bailout wound up costing easily more than 20,000 jobs (all NON-Union jobs)......I don't think that was part of any Bush plan.

Collapse -
It was better than all of them
by Diana Forum moderator / December 28, 2012 5:54 AM PST

Where do you get the 20000 jobs? I know a lot of dealerships closed and the number of models were reduced (which would have meant some union jobs lost).


Collapse -
In addition to those you mentioned
by TONI H / December 28, 2012 6:23 AM PST
Collapse -
Like I said.
by Diana Forum moderator / December 28, 2012 8:01 AM PST

How many would have been out of work without the bailout with two of the big three closing down?


Collapse -
(NT) so what would you call it in this administration?
by James Denison / December 27, 2012 10:12 AM PST
Collapse -
after Ruby Ridge
by James Denison / December 27, 2012 3:42 AM PST

maybe the motto of gun owners when ATF shows up is "shoot first".

Collapse -
it isn't the NRA's place to have "confidence" the ATF
by grimgraphix / December 27, 2012 3:42 AM PST

It is the US Voter the organization should answer to.

See, this just illuminates the difference between conservatives and so called liberals.

Liberals believe the government is there to serve the people. Conservatives have come to believe the government is there to answer to special interests. Why do I say this? Well, because when it comes to the NRA... the take more money from the gun industry than they do from membership fees. Let the NRA divest itself from the gun industry and I might start believing that it exists to serve the gun owners of the US, rather than special interests.

Collapse -
And the ATF
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 3:55 AM PST

doesn't have to answer to the USA Voter because it has administrative immunity which is even more powerful than the NRA's lobbyists?

Collapse -
And the Congress won't even let a director's
by Diana Forum moderator / December 27, 2012 6:13 AM PST
In reply to: And the ATF

name come up to a vote so there can be a leader there that is answerable to the voter or the Congress.


Collapse -
A Director's name?
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 7:01 AM PST

Are you talking about the vote for Kerry as Sec of State? I know they won't let him come up for a vote until after Hillary testifies as the CURRENT Sec of State over Benghazi. As for the Director of the ATF.......nobody has been held accountable (they all still have their jobs, they just got shuffled around......like what happened with the four who supposedly 'resigned' over Benghazi......and the AG, even though he's been held in contempt of Congress, there is NO resolution to F&F because of the Administration. Much like what might end up happening with Benghazi. If there is no accountability in the ATF, they don't need a director, do they?

Collapse -
I'm talking about a Director of the ATF.
by Diana Forum moderator / December 27, 2012 8:32 AM PST
In reply to: A Director's name?

Even Bush couldn't get one through the Senate. The NRA opposed all the candidates.


Collapse -
So many crimes
by James Denison / December 27, 2012 10:15 AM PST
In reply to: A Director's name?

that will need charging and prosecution when we get an administration in there which will actually uphold justice.

Collapse -
Not entirely alone on the NRA issue.
by Ziks511 / December 27, 2012 7:56 PM PST
Collapse -
I can't think of a single piece of legislation
by Steven Haninger / December 27, 2012 8:07 PM PST

that could, by itself, have prevented a single death in any of these recent massacres. Laws only work when they are enforceable and people adhere to them. Crimes will cease when people don't wish to commit them.

Collapse -
guy at work yesterday was basically
by Roger NC / December 27, 2012 8:11 PM PST

urging death penality for every gun crime.

I admit that would stop repeats.

But there have been too many cases in the last decade where someone had been in jail years has been exonerated. I believe in the death penality as far as an optioin, but it can't be used recklessly.

Collapse -
I'm hopeful.....
by Josh K / December 27, 2012 10:51 PM PST

.....that recent events will create a strong enough backlash against the NRA to finally see something done about all this. Gun registration, at the very least, would be a big step.

Collapse -
Hand guns are already required
by TONI H / December 27, 2012 10:57 PM PST
In reply to: I'm hopeful.....

to be registered. Remind the bad guys, ok?

Collapse -
They get reminded....
by Josh K / December 27, 2012 11:58 PM PST

.....every time they get arrested for possessing an illegal gun.

Registration provides a database of every legal gun and who owns it. I fail to see the problem with that, or how a registered gun is any less protection than an unregistered one. And don't give me that "registration is infringement" or "I don't want the government knowing what I have" BS.

Collapse -
Have you read any of
by TONI H / December 28, 2012 12:10 AM PST
In reply to: They get reminded....

my previous posts about this, Josh? If you had, you would know that I DO advocate registration of all guns/rifles including antiques or ones handed down, including person to person sales and gun shows, longer wait times before possession, better background checks including mental health histories, and required training by police/sheriffs/vets, etc. at a shooting range.

Collapse -
Yes, and I'm sorry if you thought....
by Josh K / December 28, 2012 12:30 AM PST
In reply to: Have you read any of

.....that was directed at you personally. The NRA just reiterated its position that registration and background checks are not OK with them. Their paranoia about the evil government coming to take all their precious guns away should not be everyone else's problem. The loopholes that allowed the kids at Columbine to get their weapons have STILL not been closed in most states, and the NRA has even tried to claim those loopholes don't exist, in an effort to prevent further action on them.

I remember one SE member (you can guess who) once taking the position that if there wasn't a gun store within walking distance of his house, his 2nd Amendment rights were being infringed upon. I asked him if it isn't an infringement if someone wants a gun but can't afford one. Should the government be required to make sure nobody's "right" is denied just on account of insufficient funds? You can guess what the answer was.

Collapse -
perhaps there should be an increase in the penality
by Roger NC / December 29, 2012 2:11 AM PST

of those selling guns without reporting it?

Not just the black market suppliers, but shouldn't everyone selling a gun, hand or long, reported it to some tracking? And that would be more effective on a national level than a state one, accessible to all LEO's.

Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions


Free trip to the Grand Prix

Don't miss your chance to win a trip to the Formula 1 Grand Prix in Monaco for you and a plus-one.