# Gun Safety Bill



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

The Senate voted 64-34 to advance the bill, so 14 Republicans voted in favor. Mitt Romney voted for, Mike Lee voted against. 

The bill includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check system. It also makes significant changes to the process when someone ages 18 to 21 goes to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole. 

Doesn't do everything I'd like, but sounds okay to me. Thoughts?


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

lol


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Please don’t let this thread go sideways again


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Just lock it now. There's no point to it.

-DallanC


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

DallanC said:


> Just lock it now. There's no point to it.
> 
> -DallanC


Man I wonder some days.

Hopefully the faith that civility can govern will sustain the topic.

Time will tell 🍿


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

In my first reading, I like it. It checks most of the boxes I advocated a few threads back when things weren't so crazy train here and seems balanced with features advocated by both "D"s and "R"s.

Out and IBT🔐


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

How does any part of this have anything to do with hunting or wildlife at all? I get off topic discussion when it has at least some connection to the main topics of this board, or when it's something neutral without deep political and moral implications. Why is 100% political allowed? Other political topics are shut down immediately, and other posters are also shut down immediately. Why does one guy get to try to use a wildlife forum to propagandize?


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

I have asked the very same question before.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Yeehaw - another ride down the drain!! In before the lock!! 🔒


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

I think gun safety legislation is a legitimate topic for discussion for gun owners, hunters, etc. The last thread went off the rails because people violated forum rules, went way off topic, called people names, etc. I agree that civility is important and promotes the exchange of ideas. Careful review of the previous thread will show that the lock had nothing to do with anything I said.

The vote on this bill was interesting in that our Senators voted opposite. I wonder if forum members will be more or less inclined to vote for either as a result.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

There's no point to this thread. You already know where people stand from the other thread. You are just trolling people at this point.

Lock it.

-DallanC


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

DallanC said:


> There's no point to this thread. You already know where people stand from the other thread. You are just trolling people at this point.
> 
> Lock it.
> 
> -DallanC


Guy doesn't hunt. Just posts pictures and propaganda. Why's this a thing?


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

Not AGAIN!!! 😩 🙄 Have you ever seen a plain going down in spiraling flames?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

This is my favorite thread.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Good grief. I thought I posted a lot... over 11,000 posts. I just noticed Goobs post count, just shy of 22,000. 

-DallanC


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Good grief. I thought I posted a lot... over 11,000 posts. I just noticed Goobs post count, just shy of 22,000.
> 
> -DallanC


Ha....get a life Goob!


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Jedidiah said:


> How does any part of this have anything to do with hunting or wildlife at all? I get off topic discussion when it has at least some connection to the main topics of this board, or when it's something neutral without deep political and moral implications. Why is 100% political allowed? Other political topics are shut down immediately, and other posters are also shut down immediately. Why does one guy get to try to use a wildlife forum to propagandize?


Good question. Gun control issues are important to gun owners and most UWN members. The UWN has a long history of gun control discussions, a lot of which turned sour from members' "passionate responses but much of it is a healthy exchange of different viewpoints. I hope the trend will continue.

As always, its not so much WHAT you talk about, but HOW you talk about it. Please respect different points of view, and good grief, don't call hypocritical moderators "hypocrites". Thanks


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

The supreme court just voted to expand gun rights.



Supreme Court expands gun rights in major Second Amendment ruling





> The decision to invalidate New York’s law throws into question the legality of similar restrictions in more than a half dozen other states that give licensing officials wide discretion over concealed carry permitting.
> 
> The ruling comes after recent mass shootings reignited a wrenching debate over how to balance a constitutional right to bear arms with Americans’ concerns for personal safety in a country with more than 390 million privately owned firearms.
> 
> The opinion builds on the court’s last major gun rights decision more than a decade ago. In a 2008 case called District of Columbia v. Heller, a 5-4 court ruled that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to keep a gun in the home for self-defense. The court in Heller noted that the Second Amendment is “not unlimited,” but left unanswered what restrictions are constitutionally allowed


-DallanC


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

SCOTUS just struck down New York's CC law. Nice.

I have noticed that there seems to be some inconsistency in which posts are edited, deleted or allowed. I don't think saying things like, "You're communists and fascists, and I'm ashamed to share my home with you." promote the civil sharing of ideas.


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

Nah, I'm sure when the commies started being commies and everyone started calling them commies, they were like "Oh man, that's hurtful, why would you say that, let's have a nosh and talk it out." I'll look it up and make sure....oh...wait...it uh....it was not like that, no.


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

The central problem I have with your whole discussion is the idea that media reports on the plans are trustworthy, trustworthy enough to move on past the impressions people have of the subject. The media in this country is a joke, it's completely unaccountable on all sides to the point of basically just being a poor form of entertainment. Lack of accountability and factual reporting aside, left leaning media organizations commonly frame the questions in their polls in order to shade the end result toward the answers they want. The lack of trust we have in the media is really just about what you can see in countries that have had fascist or dictator takeovers, it's really at that point. Do you think all these other countries' populations saw and understood the change in media and were like, "Whoops, like communism is coming..." and everyone agreed and thought it was bad but couldn't help it? No, it couldn't have happened unless a significant portion of the population was bamboozled. My wording may have been pretty strong but I'll tell you what, the media bias in this country is reaching the point where we probably won't even be allowed to see polls that show it.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

In before the inevitable....


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Off topic, Jed. Again.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Let's us keep this on the discussion of the current bill that passed out of the Senate and not get sidetracked.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

My opinion is that, like most legislation, the bill is comprised of some good stuff with some really bad stuff mixed in that makes in unpalatable to me. Red flag laws are a slippery slope and I think that most are doomed to get stricken down when weighed against the Constitution. Probably a bad idea to take someone's guns away without due process. Proposed individually, there are a few ideas that I could get behind. Too many turds in the punch bowl as written. How's that for some meaningful discourse?--------SS


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

It passed both the House and Senate. A first step but by no means adequate.


----------

