Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

We have already covered the issue with licenses.

[Max White]

Yet you need to make another background check again..?
The licenses should be a background check in itself. You should not have a valid licence unless you would pass a background check. Nobody should ever walk into a gun store with a licence that isn't voided, and then fail a background check. As such, a license itself should be enough...

This might be my inner programmer talking, because building information systems is what we do, and this is an information system (Fuck I could draw a use case for this) but your data is not normalised. It is all convoluted and silly.

[Nadaka]

Gun control advocates also like the idea of time consuming background checks every time, because it justifies the waiting period that is mandatory before most firearms purchases. Sales at gun shows and personal sales are exempt from that waiting period though.

[Tellemurius]

Ah, so it takes a long wait... Well wouldn't it be better if they could do the check before you even decided you wanted to buy a gun? If that was already taken care of?

Nope, gun shop sellers cannot ask for background check just for information, it has to be the moment the customer is purchasing the gun. Also depending on the state government it can take a half an hour for a answer (5-8 days is insane holy shit dude O_o) but it also depends on how much requests are put in through the system.

Yet you need to make another background check again..?
The licenses should be a background check in itself. You should not have a valid licence unless you would pass a background check. Nobody should ever walk into a gun store with a licence that isn't voided, and then fail a background check. As such, a license itself should be enough...

This might be my inner programmer talking, because building information systems is what we do, and this is an information system (Fuck I could draw a use case for this) but your data is not normalised. It is all convoluted and silly.

Max its just better to call and ask the government for the final answer, i rather would than have some guy just showing me a card. Its not efficient but i rather trust that method than anything else.

[Montague]

Yet you need to make another background check again..?
The licenses should be a background check in itself. You should not have a valid licence unless you would pass a background check. Nobody should ever walk into a gun store with a licence that isn't voided, and then fail a background check. As such, a license itself should be enough...

This might be my inner programmer talking, because building information systems is what we do, and this is an information system (Fuck I could draw a use case for this) but your data is not normalised. It is all convoluted and silly.

Again, you're idea of a gun owner's license isn't completely without merit or anything, the problem lies with exactly how such a thing would be implimented and excerised. We've already established that purchasing a firearm requires vetting and consent by the government. How would a licensing scheme differ from what is already is place? What conditions would exisit with such a license? Who would be eligible? Who is ineligible? What fees are required? What privileges are granted by such a license and how are they restricted or expanded?

The thing is, the USA already has an established system toward acheving the same sort of goals I imagine your licensing idea would hold, but exactly what benefit would a licensing scheme accomplish better then the system already in place?

The central government is consulted every time a firearm is purchased! How is that insufficient?

[Max White]

Max its just better to call and ask the government for the final answer, i rather would than have some guy just showing me a card. Its not efficient but i rather trust that method than anything else.

But it wouldn't be just some guy showing you a card, they would show you a card, and you would scan it, or worst case type in the number on it manually into your computer, it would access a database of license owners, and you would be able to see the license owners name and photo, and if their license is still valid. It would be just as secure, but faster and using less human resources.
As long as that record is kept up to date, your background check is instantaneous, and if the customer failed a mental health check, or was convicted of a crime, you can void the license instantly, and best of all it maintains their right to privacy because people who had nothing to do with why the license was voided wouldn't have to know why.

The government is still deciding if it is ok to sell a gun or not, but they decide in advance when you get a gun license, and can change their mind if you do anything that would fail a background check.


I'm wondering, what merit does a gun license say in the US of A? If it isn't a declaration that you are sane with a clear criminal history, what is it for?

The thing is, the USA already has an established system toward acheving the same sort of goals I imagine your licensing idea would hold, but exactly what benefit would a licensing scheme accomplish better then the system already in place?

It would be faster and use less human resources. Less tax payer dollars going to people spending their time doing background check after background check. The exact same people would be able to buy a firearm, just with less bureaucracy.

[Frumple]

I'm wondering, what merit does a gun license say in the US of A? If it isn't a declaration that you are sane with a clear criminal history, what is it for?

Varies by state, Max. Florida, ferex, doesn't even have one. Need a concealed carry license, sure, but no gun license.

To... to be honest, I don't even know how heirloom stuff is handled in this state, or to the extent paperwork is needed per gun if you own one. E: Apparently none at all. Whee! All I know is that if you own a gun while on probation (or are a felon), you're in fairly sizable trouble, heh.

But anyway, here. Questions answered

[Montague]

It would be faster and use less human resources. Less tax payer dollars going to people spending their time doing background check after background check. The exact same people would be able to buy a firearm, just with less bureaucracy.

Nope, it would use more government money and more government waste. The USA isn't quite the same as where you hail from. It works fine the way it is here now. The government office used for background checks is enough beurocracy for the task. There doesn't need to be a centralized licensing appratatus for this.

[Max White]

Nope, it would use more government money and more government waste. The USA isn't quite the same as where you hail from. It works fine the way it is here now. The government office used for background checks is enough beurocracy for the task. There doesn't need to be a centralized licensing appratatus for this.

You sound like you are objecting for the same of objecting. On what basis do you say this?

[Nadaka]

It would be faster and use less human resources. Less tax payer dollars going to people spending their time doing background check after background check. The exact same people would be able to buy a firearm, just with less bureaucracy.

Nope, it would use more government money and more government waste. The USA isn't quite the same as where you hail from. It works fine the way it is here now. The government office used for background checks is enough beurocracy for the task. There doesn't need to be a centralized licensing appratatus for this.

Running a database like that actually would save a huge amount of money and effort. But like I pointed out earlier, the existing system is a compromise that satisfies both the NRA and the gun control advocates. The NRA people get to feel like they are not being watched, and the gun controllers get to justify waiting periods.

[Montague]

It would be faster and use less human resources. Less tax payer dollars going to people spending their time doing background check after background check. The exact same people would be able to buy a firearm, just with less bureaucracy.

Nope, it would use more government money and more government waste. The USA isn't quite the same as where you hail from. It works fine the way it is here now. The government office used for background checks is enough beurocracy for the task. There doesn't need to be a centralized licensing appratatus for this.

Running a database like that actually would save a huge amount of money and effort. But like I pointed out earlier, the existing system is a compromise that satisfies both the NRA and the gun control advocates. The NRA people get to feel like they are not being watched, and the gun controllers get to justify waiting periods.

[Max White]

So like I said, it is a lot easier, cheaper and faster, but you have paranoid gun nutters... Sorry, but nothing you can do about that unless you want to use the wall, like I proposed before.

We still could do the wall. I'm sure the nutters would help out, with that sort of man power we could make it out of compressed earth, so it would be inexpensive and environmentally friendly. Shall I get a construction expert to make some estimates?

[Nadaka]

Could you explain your empty quote Montague?

There is no financial reason to object to central digital registration, unless your financial objection stems from the economic stimulus of hiring people to do repetitive, pointless manual background checks.

[Montague]

It would be faster and use less human resources. Less tax payer dollars going to people spending their time doing background check after background check. The exact same people would be able to buy a firearm, just with less bureaucracy.

Nope, it would use more government money and more government waste. The USA isn't quite the same as where you hail from. It works fine the way it is here now. The government office used for background checks is enough beurocracy for the task. There doesn't need to be a centralized licensing appratatus for this.

Running a database like that actually would save a huge amount of money and effort. But like I pointed out earlier, the existing system is a compromise that satisfies both the NRA and the gun control advocates. The NRA people get to feel like they are not being watched, and the gun controllers get to justify waiting periods.

Eh, well no, because I think it's clear that it would cost more money and generate more effort. If you don't understand the way it works now, I don't think you can quite understand why an alternative might be better.

The system, for the USA, works fine the way it is. I do think there should be better vetting for gun owners, better education/training and whatnot. That might warrant something like the issuance of a permanent gun license as a requirement for purchasing a firearm. I don't think that the licensing schemes developed in other countries are a good model for the US to follow because frankly, those systems suck. They don't improve a damn thing and the overhead and expense for such systems do not justify the value they aimed at providing, while maintaining the second amendment rights in the US Constitution.

Could you explain your empty quote Montague?

There is no financial reason to object to central digital registration, unless your financial objection stems from the economic stimulus of hiring people to do repetitive, pointless manual background checks.

Believe it or not, there are not millions of gun purchases done in a day in the US. If it takes the government office 4 hours to approve a gun sale, then so be it. That guy will just have to stand there and wait until he can walk off with his newly purchased rifle or whatever. In practice, it is never that bad, the background check takes very little time and is very good at restricting sales to unsavory individuals.

Creating a licensing system would be more costly and be less reliable then the system in place.

[Max White]

Eh, well no, because I think it's clear that it would cost more money and generate more effort. If you don't understand the way it works now, I don't think you can quite understand why an alternative might be better.

So that is your reasoning, I clearly don't understand the current system, despite the fact that it has just been described, therefore there is no way it can be improved.
Conservative logic at it's worst. It has worked in the past, so don't ever change it to make it better!

Creating a licensing system would be more costly and be less reliable then the system in place.

Umm, no. Having nobody have to make a manual search and getting instant results is less costly and more reliable. Computers make less errors than people as far as data is involved.