(06-23-2016, 01:57 PM)Minstrel Wrote: It seems that we're talking about a lot of broken systems.
Convicted felons not being reported to a national database...
Convicted felons not diagnosed with mental disorders...or, if diagnosed, not treated adequately.
Convicted felons who may not have become felons, had they been diagnosed and treated prior to their offensive act/s.
Etc...
So, it's just one bad system trying to rely on another bad system, and another bad system and another and another.
Doesn't look very promising...
Kinda goes back to the argument - "You cannot turn bad into good with legislation."
I have worked in a business where two "systems" that were designed & implemented independent of each other were told to work together. The chaos that ensued was a disaster. It finally took a massive effort to entirely rework one of the systems such that it could work with the other.
Who, in their right mind, believes that any bureaucratic agency is (or would be) willing to give up their autonomy, and revamp their system to be subject to another bureaucratic agency's system?
Not a chance.
Yes, exactly!
That is what I got from reading the article/comment.
That there is a whole slew things wrong/broken within the system itself, and no amount of gun legislation will really help until those issues get fixed, which may be never.
I thought it to be a different take than the usual --'ban all guns', 'take them away', 'who needs them' -- mantra
I even thought about why not have different legislation for hand guns vs. semi-automatic rifles/guns (???)
Kinda like drivers license.
To receive a CDL drivers license, one must go through stricter test than a regular DL in order to obtain one.
So why not do the same for handguns (normal requirements)
Then for the more heavy duty semi/automatic weapons, a person would be required to be under more scrutiny, tougher legislation, longer waiting period.
Dunno, just a thought.
I'm not a weapons expert, so I am unsure of the proper classification for weapons that have semi-auto.