I agree with the first two. Strongly disagree on the limits on purchases.
If gun purchases were limited to 1/month in a world with universal registration and background checks, the cost/benefit for straw purchases and black market funneling would go down the drain.
In order to be a straw purchaser, you have to have a completely clean record. But if purchases are limited to 1/month, then you're pulling a TINY profit each month by engaging. And in since all the guns you purchase are registered to you and you can't move them without a background check, the FIRST time one of your straw purchases is connected to a guy who shouldn't own it, you're catching a felony. So you have to bet that the guys who are selling the guns to are never going to get caught, which is extremely unlikely if you're moving any number of guns.
Very few people are going to risk their clean record with the almost certain assurance of eventually catching a felony for the tiny profit that would come for only profiting off one gun moved a month.
What % of law-abiding Americans would be at all hampered by a law that say they can only buy 12 guns a year? Maybe 1 in 10,000 would be SLIGHTLY hampered by that law? So you're talking about a measure that could totally dry up a significant portion of the illegal gun market and price a lot of the criminal world out of gun ownership, and the only drawback is that the 1 in 10,000 gun fanatics who want to buy 20 guns a year are now limited to no more than 12?
If you can't compromise on THAT for the good of the American public, then it shows why America leads the Western world in gun deaths by a mile.
So you're pretty on board with what most left wing people want for gun control? Cause those first two are more or less the gist of it.
Exactly. If we just agreed on those first two, it would be revolutionary in itself. The third would be the clincher.
The difference between shooting a 30-round clip and shooting 5 6-round clips is less than 2 seconds, verified by the video. Tell me exactly what difference thats going to make in the real world.
That's true for an EXPERT. Obviously, the majority of mass shooters are not experts. The Foot Hood shooter was stopped while he fumbled in-between changing magazines. That's happened in multiple other mass shootings as well. Obviously, small magazines could have an impact on the body count in the worst cases.
I agree it's not the most important legislation. But you're over-exaggerating your defense. And by focusing on a fringe issue (does magazine size really affect any American's life in any meaningful way) you're deflecting from the ACTUAL common-sense gun control that needs to be enacted.
