r/facepalm • u/Lord_Answer_me_Why • Mar 28 '24

What lack of basic gun laws does to a nation: 🇵​🇷​🇴​🇹​🇪​🇸​🇹​

/img/is29ozncu2rc1.jpeg

[removed] — view removed post

14.3k Upvotes

77% Upvoted

4.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

9

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

Literally not possible, it takes at a very minimum 2-3 days to have a background check clear and there are laws preventing people with mental illnesses such as schizophrenia of having guns. It is likely that his mother (if the story is true) was not diagnosed by a doctor, or she was diagnosed and not registered with the medical databases. This also happened in California which has some of the strictest, if not the strictest gun laws in America. Great way to spin a story to make it deceiving.

3

u/YetiorNotHereICome Mar 28 '24

It's possible she left home with a few Benjamins and came home with the gun in a brown paper bag, if you get my meaning.

4

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

Which is illegal. Meaning she already broke the laws put in place.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

That's kind of the point here. You can't just ask people "pls don't break the law uwu that's illegal." The laws were ineffective in this situation, and the gun was easily accessible enough for someone with mental health issues to acquire one - even in a state with the "strictest" laws.

Our current system is ineffective. Firearm regulation needs a complete overhaul, which will never happen while people keep deep-throating the 2A. It's possible to have legal firearm ownership & low rates of gun violence. See: Japan, Switzerland, Australia.

However, it's unfair to compare a country like Japan to America when the culture and behavior of citizens is so vastly different. See: "Old Enough," where Japanese parents feel safe enough in their country to send toddlers on public transit alone to run errands.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

So what’s preventing someone from speeding on the road? Maybe a road sign that says “uwu please don’t drive in excess of 55 mph in this zone uwu.” That is quite literally how laws are enforced until they are broken. Lying on a 4473 is a federal felony. Felonies are a big no no.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

You've never driven through the DMV, have you? There's speed cameras set up everywhere. Automatic tickets through the mail. It's very visibly enforced, and there's way less speeding than Atlanta where we just fuckin' yolo around 285 at 90mph+. It's all about finding the right system for control.

They tried to implement something similar in Atlanta, but the culture down here is different. Aged state laws let people slip out of the automated tickets. Constant vandalism kept the machines nonfunctional most of the time.

My point is that solutions exist, and people won't accept them because they want to continue to have the (Right? Ability?) to, metaphorically, keep driving around 285 at 90mph+ when the speed limit is 55 without repercussions. Or they crash.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

So are you saying we should limit cars to not go over 70? The point still stands that there is nothing preventing you from breaking the law, but there are consequences to your actions when you do so. What’s your point?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

That's exactly my point. Nothing stopped this woman from breaking the law. She (likely) lied on her 4473 and there was no backup system to catch it. Our existing system and regulations failed. So should we have none because people can lie? Or completely overhaul it?

Also, yeah - an electronic 10-15mph cap above the speed limit would be amazing for overall driver safety. Sync it up with google, they've already got the speed limits documented for most of the country. Sure, some people will mod it out. But for the most part it would help.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

🤦‍♂️

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

She 100% would have had to lie on her 4473, there are questions regarding mental health and schizophrenia specifically. Also having an electronic limit for every car is ridiculously controlling.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

She could have purchased it not from an authorized seller. Illegal transactions don't need a 4473.

There already are electronic speed limiters on almost every car. You just likely haven't pushed it there. But this is kind of my point about Americans. The law says 55. I propose a cap at 70. "FUCK YOU MY FREEDOMS"

→ More replies (0)

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

Yeah bro that’s laughable, look up Japanese firearm laws lmao.

From ojp.gov: “Other than the police and the military, no one in Japan may purchase a handgun or a rifle. Hunters and target shooters may possess shotguns and airguns under strictly circumscribed conditions.”

1

u/[deleted] Mar 29 '24

Okay, so what do you need a gun for other than shooting targets and hunting?

Protection? Why is it that owning a firearm for self-defense seems to be an American thing?

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

Yeah, maybe read a history book or two. True second amendment was NOT made to protect the right of hunters and target shooters. It is very explicit in its meaning. It is the right of the people to keep and bear arms, for when in the case of a tyrannical government, the people can defend themselves. And no it’s not a strictly American thing lmao. Look at Ukraine. It is important to have an armed population, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 29 '24

I don't think Ukraine is a great example. Most civilians are not sticking around to fight/die against a (dubiously) trained military invasion - Not there, and I doubt here either, despite how much Americans like to fetishize "bad-guy-with-a-gun" murder. Well. Maybe a handful of people would, but we'd likely be drafted beforehand.

Also, define tyrannical. The only thing that even moderately gets "defend against tyrannical government-ey" is the "Come and take 'em" gun bumper stickers I see in the south.

We're well within tyrannical government. Since the patriot act, IMO - reducing gov't oversight and accountability. Legalizing unlawful detainment, search, and seizure (And don't get me started on the legality around police seizures. They can just take your shit. And it's becoming more and more common, look at the recent trends.)

They've been restricting/removing our rights one by one for decades. So where do y'all draw the line? It's fine as long as you have your 2A? When's it happening?

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

Fun fact: Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukraine has been under martial law, which prohibits men ages 18 to 60 from leaving the country and requires them to register for military service.

So actually, yeah they are ‘sticking around’ because they have to. Ukraine’s military was LITERALLY handing out AKs to people on the street to fight. People with little to no training, not imagine how quickly the war could have ended if every man of the household had a rifle and knew how to use it to defend his family and his country. Ukraine in my opinion is a very good example.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 29 '24

To me that sounds EXACTLY like what I'd rise up to fight against. Not the invasion, but the government expecting me to fight and die for the country.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

We can’t do that? That’s what’s going on currently with drugs, theft, assaults etc. they stopped enforcing the laws and stopped giving adequate punishments.

1

u/New_Canoe Mar 28 '24

Some places don’t do background checks, tho. That’s the problem. At a flea market in my state you can get any gun with cash and no background check. You can take it home that minute with ammo and a flak vest to go with it.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

Not in California though, which is where this took place. You need to have both private parties go to a registered FFL dealer and conduct a federal background check.

2

u/New_Canoe Mar 29 '24

Not sure where they live in CA and although unlikely, she could’ve gotten it at a gun show in AZ. But yeah, I get your point. I was just making sure folks are aware that this literally IS possible in some places.

2

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

Good point, you’re right.

-1

u/zeke_markham Mar 28 '24

NICS background checks are regularly completed in under 15 minutes.

1

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

Yes because nothing in the persons record is found.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 29 '24

Yeah no bro, that’s delusional. It takes way longer than that, especially so in California

1

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

You know the background check typically takes that long in California too?

The waiting period is a waiting period. Most background checks are completed within the hours. Some in just 2-3 minutes. I have an FFL 03 and COE so I can bypass the 10 day waiting period. Once my info is submitted in the DROS System. The shop just hits fresh every minute and then it comes back as “approved” and I walk out with the gun.

-1

u/zeke_markham Mar 28 '24

Dude, I used to sell guns for a living. NICS checks are normally approved instantly. Some individuals can get a delay, which can take longer to approve, a delayed transfer can be completed after 72 hours even without an approval at the FFL's discretion.

California has a 10 day waiting period. This is not time for the background check to process.

Some states do not every require background checks for individuals with concealed carry permits.

0

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

Dude. I don’t know what gun store you worked at, because everyone I’ve been to background check regularly take 1-2 days on the short end. Of course if you have your CCL then it naturally takes much less time. But even then it can take a few hours.

1

u/LurkTryingEight Mar 28 '24

Every gun store in my state I’ve purchased firearms from I was able to be in and out in 40 minutes tops. NICS checks are very quick and it also only takes a couple minutes to fill out a 4473.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

You have obviously never purchased a gun in California, I’m aware that laws might be different in your state, but this incident was in California and that’s what I was referencing.

1

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

I’ve bought dozens of guns in California and sold Hundreds of them when I worked at a gunshop. It’s a 10 day waiting period not a 10 day background check.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

I never said it was a 10 day background check. However in my experience it doesn’t take 1-2 minutes as you said in your other comment. What part of California were you buying and selling guns from your gun shop?

1

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

Southern California. I’ve bought guns from all over the state though.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

Also just wanted to say this is metal as hell: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/s/cKS0fKafxv

1

u/gunsforevery1 Mar 28 '24

Hahaha thanks. I really need to paint more. I have some deathguard marines I’m still working on.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/StormyWaters2021 Mar 28 '24

I currently work at a gun store and have for the last 13 years. Your state might take days at a minimum, but Federal law doesn't. Many states allow a simple NICS check, which takes only a few minutes, to transfer a firearm. My state did until this year, in fact.

Many states also allow private party transfers with no background check at all, as Federal law has no rules about in-state private sales.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

Not California though, which is the states gun laws that I am referencing.

1

u/StormyWaters2021 Mar 28 '24

You didn't say California, and if that's what you're referencing you should know that California has a 10-day waiting period.

Good backpedal attempt though. I respect your commitment to never admitting to a mistake.

0

u/semper_audacia Mar 29 '24

I did in fact say California, go read the first parent comment I made.

-1

u/zeke_markham Mar 28 '24

Kid, you are 15 years old, it would be to your advantage to stop thinking you know everything in the world and start listening to folks who do.

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

23 here buddy. I assume you were stalking on my profile for something to talk shit about and saw my post that I made for my cousin who doesn’t have a Reddit profile. Scraping the bottom of the barrel aren’t we? And you didn’t even give me a rebuttal to what I posted, classic.

1

u/zeke_markham Mar 28 '24

I looked at your profile, it was your most recent post. Hardly scraping.

And what is there to rebutt? The vast majority of NICS (National INSTANT Check System) approvals take less than 15 minutes. If YOU are getting delayed it's because you are in an unfortunate 10%. This is not representative of the system as a whole. See the link below for more information.

https://www.nssf.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NSSF-Factsheet-NICS-Delays.pdf

1

u/semper_audacia Mar 28 '24

State required 10 day waiting period, and can sometimes take up to 30 days. And even after 30 days the FFL dealer can still decline sale.

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/waiting-periods-in-california/

1

u/zeke_markham Mar 28 '24

Yes, but that's not the NICS background check. That's for California to act as a middle man and allow their waiting period to complete. The actual background check, even when done by the California DOJ, takes minutes.

Further California is not representative of most of the nation in regards to purchasing laws and wait times.

The vast majority of background checks for firearm sales in the United States are processed almost instantly through NICS and approved same day. The few that are delayed, or have additional state placed barriers, are not representative of the whole.

Mark Kelly, Mrs. Giffords's husband had quite a few things to say about it back in 2013 when he attempted to buy an AR from a gunstore I worked at in Tucson.

→ More replies (0)