They Used a Tragedy To Push Against The 2nd Amendment, They are failing to keep the Oath

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
There are millions of responsible gun owners in America.

It's the nutjobs who cause the outrage.

Texas Law allowed this kid to get two weapons with little to no oversight, no background checks and no waiting period.

I'm pro 2nd Amendment, but I'm also heavily invested in protocols that don't allow impulse purchases without screening for mentally unstable individuals who just suddenly "need to take care of something".

I don't think forcing law abiding and responsible gun owners to surrender their firearms is the solution.

Once again, they've overreacted with emotion rather than reason and logic.

Pro 2nd means - zero infringement. It is literally written in the Constitution. So one cannot be pro-2nd if they have a list of protocols in order for one to obtain firearms.

a reply to: vNex92

You had made an oath that you would not only protect the US but the the Constitution of the United States not to change or break it.

That is absurdly FALSE.

The 2nd Amendment is an AMENDMENT. It is a CHANGE to the Constitution original text.

The Constitution provides explicit instructions on how to change the Constitution.

There is NO SUCH THING AS AN OATH TO NOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION.

Furthermore, there is no push for an amendment to change the Constitution.

There is, however, a DEMAND by 90% of the American population to FIX the insane, violent state that the USA has descended into.

Here is the REASON the Constitution was established - this is what the oath is for:

(some of you patriots may recognize this text as the Preamble to the Constitution)

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The phrase in red is PARTIALLY addressed by the 2nd amendment which provides for an armed militia.

The 2nd amendment itself is constrained by Article 1 section 1 which defines the militia and gives CONGRESS authority over the militia - and it is NOT defined as any person big enough to hold an AR15.

You really should read the Constitution. You would have a lot more peace in your life.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: vNex92

There hasn't been a Politically motivated or School shooting in the past 20 years that the Left didn't immediately bring up Gun Control.

and Yet we never hear about the constant Murder and Shootings in there Cities , Chicago , LA , Atlanta , New York, New-Orleans , Dallas etc etc etc , They are in charge in all of these cities there laws are well in place.

That is untrue.

Police at all levels and in all size cities are calling for gun reform.

originally posted by: rnaa

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: vNex92

There hasn't been a Politically motivated or School shooting in the past 20 years that the Left didn't immediately bring up Gun Control.

and Yet we never hear about the constant Murder and Shootings in there Cities , Chicago , LA , Atlanta , New York, New-Orleans , Dallas etc etc etc , They are in charge in all of these cities there laws are well in place.

That is untrue.

Police at all levels and in all size cities are calling for gun reform.

are they ?

I'm not hearing any of it , seems someone is ignoring them .

a reply to: vNex92

Biden calls for gun control as people follow his baby boy around
waiting for his crack ass to ditch one some where.

I mean seriously?

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

I'm not hearing any of it , seems someone is ignoring them .

I guess you aren't paying attention then.

International Association of Chiefs of Police: Firearms Policy Position Statement

Body Armor: The IACP supports legislation to prohibit the mail order sale of bulletproof vests and body armor to all individuals except sworn or certified law enforcement officers.


Conceal Carry Reciprocity: The IACP opposes any federal legislative proposals that would either pre-empt and/or mandate the liberalization of individual states’ concealed-carry weapons (CCW) laws pertaining to the carrying of concealed weapons in other states without meeting that state’s requirements.
(i.e. CC permit in one state is not valid in another)

Conceal Carry pre-requisite: The IACP holds that the responsibility of carrying a concealed weapon should include a minimum of familiarization and training with the weapon carried, basic instruction on the fundamentals of carrying a concealed weapon, and understanding of when the use of a concealed weapon is legal and/or advisable.

Criminal Use of Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons: The IACP has been a strong supporter of the assault weapons ban since 1992, and our membership has approved several reauthorizations of support in the years since. The membership took this action because we, as law enforcement executives, understand that the criminal use of semiautomatic assault weapons pose a grave risk to our officers and the communities they are sworn to protect.

Firearms Enforcement: The IACP urges Congress to increase resources to better allow state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies and the Department of Justice to enable greater prosecution of individuals for Brady Act violations. In addition, the IACP supports firearms enforcement programs that involve local, state and federal agencies, such as Project Safe Neighborhoods and Project Exile, which have shown significant reductions in firearms-related violent crime.

Firearms Offender Registry: The reduction of firearms-related violent crime has been and continues to be a major goal of the IACP. Studies have shown that firearm offenders have a higher recidivist rate for committing other firearms-related violent crime with firearms than the rate for sexual offenders. Therefore, the IACP supports creating a federal registry, similar to the sexual offender registry, for offenders who have been previously convicted of a felony firearm violation or a misdemeanor that involved violent or threatening acts with firearms.

Firearm Purchase Waiting Period: The IACP supports a waiting period for the purchase of a handgun.

Gun Show Loophole: The laws we have in place to ensure gun purchasers go through FFLs are undermined by oversights in the law that allow individuals prohibited from owning firearms to obtain weapons at events such as gun shows without undergoing a background check. The IACP calls on Congress to act swiftly to close these loopholes and preserve the effectiveness of the laws in place.

Illegal Firearms Trafficking/Firearms Tracing: The IACP opposes any legislation that would limit or reduce the ability of our nation’s law enforcement agencies to combat the sale of illegal guns.

Juvenile Crime Firearms Disability: The IACP believes that juveniles must be held accountable for their acts of violence. Therefore, the IACP supports the passage of legislation, sometimes referred to as Juvenile Brady, which would permanently prohibit gun ownership by an individual, if that individual, while a juvenile, commits a crime that would have triggered a gun disability if their crime had been committed as an adult.

Possession of and Transfer of Certain Firearm Accessories: The IACP supports legislation that prohibits the possession, import, manufacture, transfer and sale of
trigger cranks, bump-fire devices, and similar attachments/accessories designed to increase or modify
semi-automatic firearms to automatic weapons. also registration of existing such accessories and power to confiscate such devices

Sale of Armor-Piercing and Tracer Ammunition The IACP supports legislation and policies that will prohibit the sale or transfer of armor piercing ammunition. Furthermore, the IACP believes that current U.S. federal law should be modified to establish that the process utilized to determine whether a round of ammunition is armor piercing should include performance based testing conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

Silencers (Suppressors) The IACP opposes any efforts to remove silencers (suppressors) from the purview of the National Firearms Act, in which these devices have been registered under since 1934.

Police Chiefs’ Perceptions of the Regulation of Firearms

Results:
The majority of responding police chiefs supported 11 out of 14 proposed firearm control policies. Most police chiefs (62%) believed that the government should do everything it can to keep handguns out of the hands of criminals, even if it makes it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to purchase handguns. Police chiefs were not likely to participate in the majority of firearm control advocacy activities. The advocacy activities that police chiefs were most likely to participate in were meeting with state legislators (52%) and writing a letter to a legislator in relation to gun control (44%).

Conclusions:
Police chiefs support several potentially important firearm control policies. This suggests the need to evaluate interventions aimed at increasing their role in shaping policy on this important public health issue.

Police pushback doesn’t stop conservative gun law rollback

The latest push to loosen gun laws in states across the U.S. has put police officers at odds with Republican lawmakers who usually trumpet support for law enforcement. In states like Texas, Tennessee and Louisiana, police opposed pushes to drop requirements for people to get background checks and training before carrying handguns in public, plans that came as gun sales continued to shatter records during the coronavirus pandemic.
...
“We feel it was just another opportunity to get our officers hurt,” said Fabian Blache Jr., executive director of the Louisiana Chiefs of Police Association. “It was a danger to law enforcement.”

There, a last-ditch public plea by dozens of Louisiana law enforcement officers helped narrowly avert a push to override the Democratic governor’s veto of legislation dropping concealed-carry permit requirements
...
“Police officers are trained around the country, and they make mistakes,” he said. “So why are we going to give opportunity to people who are not trained to be able to carry a firearm and use it at will?”
...
Police opposition hasn’t stopped a push to drop permitting requirements that’s passed in about 20 states, Spitzer said. While their positions carry authority, they don’t have the ad campaigns and lobbyists that overtly political interests often do.

“Their voices and opinions have been known, but they haven’t been a real megaphone in public political terms because that puts them in a real bad spot. They’re public servants and their job is to enforce the law, no matter what the law is,” he said.