[centurion316]

This guy makes the best argument that can possibly be made. It fails on a number of accounts, but here are two that stand out:

He admits that criminals can obtain guns without going through a background check, but contends that it’s worth it to make it “harder” for them. Silence about the imposition on law abiding citizens.

Since keeping guns out of the handguns of real criminals seems to be out of reach, he argues that we need to do it to keep guns away from “felons” and “mental cases”. We all know what a criminal is, but what about a felon? Are the terms synonymous? No, felons are so defined by government and we are all probably guilty of one felony or anther. Likewise mental illness is largely defined by government and in many cases can be determined by government entites without judicial due process.

The gist of his argument, therefore is, we can’t stop real criminals from getting guns, so let’s do the next best thing and prevent as many non criminal citizens from doing the same thing. Our safety and security depends on being able to keep firearms out of the hands of the likes of Martha Stewart.

[rktman]

Well, martha has been known to “shoot” off her mouth on occasion.

[PapaBear3625]

The gist of his argument, therefore is, we can’t stop real criminals from getting guns, so let’s do the next best thing and prevent as many non criminal citizens from doing the same thing. Our safety and security depends on being able to keep firearms out of the hands of the likes of Martha Stewart.

You want to reduce the amount of gun crime (actually all crime)? Order prosecutors to not plea bargain with chronic violent criminals, and do their utmost to put them in jail for as long as possible.