Bipartisan agreements?

It's hard to believe the most hardcore antis- would agree to that. Like Mr. Mayors against Illegal Guns. Their argument has always been that strict gun laws in D.C. and NYC and Chicago don't work because of the guns that come into those cities from the outside. That people drive down to southern states and buy guns using straw buyers and then bring those guns back up. I always thought that was the whole reason I can't walk into a Georgia gun store and buy a handgun just the same as I could back home in Oklahoma.

No, that's not good enough to make me support the bill. Especially since I have serious doubts that it would ever actually work that way. "Somehow" it would turn out that various other laws keep it from actually going into effect.

Gregg
 
It's hard to believe the most hardcore antis- would agree to that. Like Mr. Mayors against Illegal Guns. Their argument has always been that strict gun laws in D.C. and NYC and Chicago don't work because of the guns that come into those cities from the outside. That people drive down to southern states and buy guns using straw buyers and then bring those guns back up. I always thought that was the whole reason I can't walk into a Georgia gun store and buy a handgun just the same as I could back home in Oklahoma.

No, that's not good enough to make me support the bill. Especially since I have serious doubts that it would ever actually work that way. "Somehow" it would turn out that various other laws keep it from actually going into effect.
Click to expand...
Exactly so. All we have, at the moment, is salestalk. And the greater the reluctance of those issuing it to actually put pen to paper, the more skeptical of it we should all be.
 
[Hardcore antis] argument has always been that strict gun laws in D.C. and NYC and Chicago don't work because of the guns that come into those cities from the outside... I always thought that was the whole reason I can't walk into a Georgia gun store and buy a handgun just the same as I could back home in Oklahoma.
Click to expand...
Ironically, the original reason for the restrictions on out-of-state transfers was largely racially motivated, and was meant to operate in the opposite direction. Much of the support for the 1968 GCA came from Dixiecrats who were trying to stop firearms from flowing into the hands of Southern blacks through mail-order and vacation buys in Northern states.

In addition to the handgun restriction, the original GCA included a provision that out-of-state long gun sales were only legal in adjacent states, and then only if the buyer's home state passed a law allowing such transfers; this was blatantly aimed (no pun intended) at preventing long gun buyers from crossing the Mason-Dixon Line.

This provision was repealed by the 1986 FOPA, which was arguably a win for the pro-gun side in almost every way, except for the closing of the transferable machine gun registry.
 
psyfly, file that under "how business is done in D.C."

If not a boat, then at a 19th hole, or at a stripper bar, etc. etc.
 
Ummm... I'm not too sure it has any farther to sail, Glenn.

The question put in the OP has pretty much been answered, to my satisfaction, at least.

Thanks, all. I think, in my naiveté, I didn't understand that a pair (2% of the total) of senators could, in effect, commit/deal for the entire body.

My spouse accuses me of being cynical but I continue to be surprised at the disingenous way they do things up there.

W.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top