Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to jpw's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Monday, July 13, 2015

Benjamin Dixon, Patheos: It amazes me how intellectually nimble people can be with regard to one issue while simultaneously being obtuse with regard to another. The mental gymnastics in which many Evangelicals and Catholics engage in order to convince themselves that they are the real victims of persecution in America are worthy of a gold medal. There is no issue too grim, too new, or too heartbreaking that they will not wholly co-opt for the purposes of convincing themselves that they are, in America, the oppressed minority. Yet they have simultaneously turned off those same cognitive skills with regard to the very real plight of any other group in America because, in their minds, the only persecuted group in America are Christians. read more


I guess you wanted the private parties to have a recordkeeping requirement, but records are only scrutinized on an as-needed basis, say when a gun is recovered from a crime scene?


I mean, you'll still need a database of guns and names to make that work, right? And aren't you opposed to the existence of said database?

No. Paperwork would be provided when a firearm is part of an investigation. Obtaining records from firearms dealers and retailers would require the protective layer of subpoenas or warrants.

I actually just looked this up and this is basically how the current system works. FFL dealers are required to hold sales data indefinitely and only provide it in response to ATF requests.


Seeing as information from every gun sale is already available to law enforcement, extending this to private sales whereby a receipt or proof of sale is kept would maintain the chain of possession.

Your idea doesn't seem like it would be implementable and still meet your own standards.

Yes, it would. The information would be required by law to exist but would be protected so as to not be accessible at will. Again, as noted above this is how the system already works in transactions between FFL dealers and customers.

It seems like you'd want to approach that from both ends.

You mean like fixing a disjointed, underfunded system of having that info available for background checks? Nah that's not approaching it from both ends.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2015 World Readable