Courtesty of Jeffrey Nugent -
Jeffrey Nugent, left, and Ted Nugent with a wild boar they killed in 2006.Washington Post
And I agree with Ted that our constitutional right to bear arms should not be undermined. I want all those who are qualified to purchase a gun to be able to do so. But — and here is where I part ways with my brother — not everyone is qualified to own a gun, so expanded background checks should be a legislative priority.
I believe strongly that expanding and improving mandatory background checks will keep a lot of people who aren’t entitled to Second Amendment rights from having easy access to guns. As of today, a convicted felon can find a gun show or a private seller and buy a firearm without a background check. That loophole should be closed. Every gun transaction must include a thorough background check. Why would responsible gun owners want to protect people who threaten not only our safety but our gun rights?
The NRA has it wrong: Irresponsible gun owners are bad for everyone. If you shouldn’t have access to a gun, then there should be no way for you to access a gun! Can anyone argue with that?
No, of course no one could argue with that, not and maintain any credibility.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
I've offered a kind of background check system that would make sense, while at the same time not posing an opportunity for a national registry, and you refuse to entertain that idea. What loses you credibility is your refusal to accept a solution that doesn't get you everything you want. It's the stubborn refusal of gun control freaks to make compromises that both sides can agree to that prevents something like a sensible background check system from passing.
ReplyDeleteWhy compromise when we have force?
DeleteDid the Chinese feel compelled to "compromise" with the insubordinate rabble in Tienanmen Square? The U.S. needs to implement a Chinese solution.