Decent article, but this part bothers me:
The gun control bill, one of the administration’s most significant policy achievements, has provided the government with several tools to combat a flood of illegal firearms.
According to the article, the purpose of the bill is to stop the purchase of firearms by people who can’t pass background checks. Someone illegally purchasing a firearm doesn’t make the firearm itself illegal, it makes the transition illegal. The same firearm could be sold to someone who can pass a background check without issue. An illegal firearm is one that any person can’t legally own, such a 50 caliber machine gun without the proper permits. There’s a major difference between buying an illegal gun, and illegally buying a legal gun.
Anyways, pendantics aside, background checks seem like a common sense step towards responsible firearms sales. You need to pass a background check to purchase a gun at Big 5. Why wouldn’t you need to pass one to purchase it anywhere else? I was under the impression that if someone sold a gun to another person, they had to go down to an FFL and do a background check before swapping ownership. I know that’s how it works if you buy one from an auction site like guns.com. Have gun shows really always had exclusion from this law?
FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 7 months ago
Having to give the feds your prints to get a gun is bad, actually.
The people you need to be worried about will be able to jump through whatever hoops the government sets up because they're aligned with the oppressive power structures a person may need to protect themself from.
Rittenhouse had no problem getting an instrument of murder nor do any other fash.
All this will do is keep marginalized people from protecting themselves.