Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

TexasDem69

(2,317 posts)

8. Thanks for the response.

Reply to AndyS (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 25, 2023, 03:26 PM

Jun 2023

I think we disagree on this. What’s the purpose of putting semiautomatic firearms on the NFA?

What’s the purpose of reviewing social media posts? What are we looking for and how would it impact a purchase? Just because I disagree with someone’s point of view doesn’t mean they can’t own a gun.

Why does an employer need to know that someone is purchasing a gun and what can they offer to the equation?

This all seems very subjective. Let’s just say that a felon can’t own a firearm and someone convicted of domestic violence whether a felony or not cannot own a firearm.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

More time, more discretion: Changes to gun permit law spurred by tragedy in Buffalo [View all] sarisataka Jun 2023 OP

Here in Maine... Easterncedar Jun 2023 #1

I'm on the 'gun enthusiast' (or 'Gun humper') side of things here, but The Mouth Jun 2023 #2

Thank you for at least admitting that some people have no business AndyS Jun 2023 #3

LOL The Mouth Jun 2023 #4

So AndyS Jun 2023 #5

What sort of "prevention" are we talking about? TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #6

I would modify the 'background check' to make it a AndyS Jun 2023 #7

Thanks for the response. TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #8

So, like Mouth you are satisfied with 'law abiding citizens' buying guns which AndyS Jun 2023 #9

I feel like you didn't really read my post TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #10

I did not ignore your point about punishing past deeds. Just followed gun logic to the AndyS Jun 2023 #11

Thanks again for the response TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #12

Look, I've commented on employers and family as much as needed. AndyS Jun 2023 #14

Thanks for responding TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #15

Again, you're not very good at this. AndyS Jun 2023 #16

Thanks sir TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #17

Let me ask this question TexasDem69 Jun 2023 #13

By 'law abiding citizens', do you actually mean "law abiding citizens"? yagotme Jun 2023 #18

If a gun is purchased legally through a FFL then one must assume AndyS Jun 2023 #19

Sure, I'll try to help. yagotme Jun 2023 #20

Okay: AndyS Jun 2023 #21

Well, we agree on the end result. yagotme Jun 2023 #22

Okay, so I guess your position is that the only way to lessen the carnage is AndyS Jun 2023 #24

Nope. My remedy is to lock those up who actually violate the law. yagotme Jul 2023 #39

The discussion can start The Mouth Jun 2023 #23

Keep it up Mouth. You're the best advertising for my movement anyone AndyS Jun 2023 #25

I surely will The Mouth Jun 2023 #26

LOL AndyS Jun 2023 #27

Thanks The Mouth Jun 2023 #28

So how do you feel about this? AndyS Jun 2023 #29

It has exactly nothing to do with whether The Mouth Jun 2023 #30

So, you don't think it is within the responsibility of the state to AndyS Jun 2023 #31

It's the responsibility of the parents. Period The Mouth Jun 2023 #32

If the State has no interest in protecting children from irresponsible parents AndyS Jun 2023 #33

Great questions The Mouth Jun 2023 #34

The question I'm asking doesn't have anything to do with your demands. AndyS Jun 2023 #35

This is a question about *parenting* The Mouth Jun 2023 #36

Just one more question for clarity and I'll stop AndyS Jun 2023 #37

I do not think and did not say "The state has no interest in children's welfare in general" The Mouth Jun 2023 #38