Comments on: More NICS stuff http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:48:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Boyd http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/comment-page-1/#comment-174632 Boyd Fri, 29 Jun 2007 21:39:42 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/#comment-174632 First off, the statement that there are 21 million records (not people, records) which should be in the NICS database and aren't comes from the bill itself, with absolutely no substantiation for that number. It kinda stinks, and it surprises me that the figure hasn't been refuted or substantiated by anyone. Further, these are existing records of reasons why people who are already prohibited from own guns, but these records supporting that prohibition are not available in NICS. These aren't newly prohibited people, they're already prohibited people. Lastly, as I alluded in the first paragraph above, these are records, not people. Considering the recidivism of criminals, it would be reasonable to speculate that many of the people addressed by these records have multiple reasons why they should be prohibited (IOW, they've committed multiple disqualifying crimes). I <em>am</em> suspicious of the way they're pushing this through the Senate. That part's got me stumped. First off, the statement that there are 21 million records (not people, records) which should be in the NICS database and aren’t comes from the bill itself, with absolutely no substantiation for that number. It kinda stinks, and it surprises me that the figure hasn’t been refuted or substantiated by anyone.

Further, these are existing records of reasons why people who are already prohibited from own guns, but these records supporting that prohibition are not available in NICS. These aren’t newly prohibited people, they’re already prohibited people.

Lastly, as I alluded in the first paragraph above, these are records, not people. Considering the recidivism of criminals, it would be reasonable to speculate that many of the people addressed by these records have multiple reasons why they should be prohibited (IOW, they’ve committed multiple disqualifying crimes).

I am suspicious of the way they’re pushing this through the Senate. That part’s got me stumped.

]]> By: Gov_ff http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/comment-page-1/#comment-174572 Gov_ff Fri, 29 Jun 2007 07:13:33 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/#comment-174572 What is the NRA doing! I cant believe that they didnt insist on safeguards so innocent people dont get hammered. And NO accountability to officials that dont properly review records before deciding to ban people from gun ownership! I expected better from the NRA. What is the NRA doing! I cant believe that they didnt insist on safeguards so innocent people dont get hammered. And NO accountability to officials that dont properly review records before deciding to ban people from gun ownership!
I expected better from the NRA.

]]> By: Snowflakes in Hell » Yet More NICS Stuff http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/comment-page-1/#comment-174530 Snowflakes in Hell » Yet More NICS Stuff Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:09:50 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/06/28/more_nics_stuff/#comment-174530 [...] getting tiring posting about this, but it’s important, so I’ll keep doing it.  Via SayUncle, I found a pretty good article opposing HR2640: No one knows how many of the 21 million records [...] [...] getting tiring posting about this, but it’s important, so I’ll keep doing it.  Via SayUncle, I found a pretty good article opposing HR2640: No one knows how many of the 21 million records [...]

]]>