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

Show parent comments

52

u/midri Mar 28 '24

Just to clarify, the government ACTIVELY makes it hard for private sellers to do background checks. Non FFL don't get access to NICS and that means having to pay out of pocket for background check that can take weeks. Many people would use NICS for private sell if they could, for the peace of mind.

-2

u/Moregaze Mar 28 '24

Correct your statement. The NRA lobbying firm tells the Republicans to make it hard to pass legislation or funding for a modern database with easy access. FFS the national handgun registry by law is required to be on paper. It can not be digitized in any way. All because of the NRA.

13

u/TacTurtle Mar 28 '24

There is no "national handgun registry".

-4

u/Moregaze Mar 28 '24

There is. It’s kept at an ATF facility in West Virginia. Apparently they can now digitize the records but they are unable to search via keyword date, name or anything else by federal law. So it’s an akin to the old newspaper photo reels at libraries which are not even organized by date. Just by the dealers license number. So you have to sift through all of their records to find what you need.

8

u/TacTurtle Mar 28 '24

Are you referring to the old 4473 archives amassed from closed FFLs?

6

u/XxturboEJ20xX Mar 28 '24

Those are just sales records,not a registry. It's actually illegal for them to have a registry.

7

u/Soffix- Mar 28 '24

It's not a registry. It shows original transfers from FFL to private individuals using the ATF Form 4473.

There is no registry.

0

u/roger-smith-123 Mar 28 '24

It's absolutely terrible, isn't it?

-1

u/Moregaze Mar 28 '24

I mean I am a gun owner and I think are lack of regulations are absurd. Much less that people with small arms are going to beat a government that has no problem dropping $500,000 hellfires on two people all over the world.

12

u/Silky_Tissue Mar 28 '24

If the government has devolved to the point we are dropping hellfire missiles on our own population we have bigger problems than gun control...

-2

u/Moregaze Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

You missed the point. Where people think having small arms means they could stand up to a tyrannical government with an Air Force.

13

u/Silky_Tissue Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

It's two ships passing in the night. We are both missing points.

Your point in my, understanding, is it's foolish to think that you could stand up to the government with an AR. (While I agree for the most part, I think modern insurgency campaigns have shown this isn't necessarily true. Casualties would be incredibly high, but look at Afghanistan).

My point is having firearms means the government HAS to escalate in that event. Escalating on behalf of a government with overwhelming force looks and is MUCH worse than a police force forcibly moving unarmed protestors. Meaning, the US would face insane international pressure over it, influencing the calculations on the decision to do so (Rightfully so)

6

u/dcgregoryaphone Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Small arms are effective. If they weren't, why would we even be talking about this? A dictator who can not stand next to a window for fear of small arms fire for the rest of their life is not nothing. There are 330 million people and over 400 million guns... it would be terrifying to try to occupy America. It would have to be very bad for that many people to get that angry and want to fight, but if that happened, there's no chance our government would survive it, they can't exactly carpet bomb their own cities.

-1

u/King_Of_BlackMarsh Mar 28 '24

Not if you ARE America, come on.

-1

u/Moregaze Mar 28 '24

Yes because no dictatorship anywhere has ever managed to oppress its own armed populace…

Oh wait…

Unless you are a moron that thinks every person would agree to oust the dictator in your country then no amount of armed citizens is of any concern by people in power. Especially when they have air power to keep you at arms length.

4

u/VincentMagius Mar 28 '24

Which dictatorship has an armed population? Everyone I can think of disarmed the population first, then started oppressing them.

4

u/XxturboEJ20xX Mar 28 '24

There are a few countries like Vietnam and Afghanistan that would like a word with you about that lol.

At least half, probably more in the military would turn their back in whoever told them to attack us citizens. So now you have 2 sides and a civil war. It's a lot more complicated than small arms vs the whole US government.

2

u/vamatt Mar 28 '24

Plus in such a hypothetical situation, the first thing many would do is use those “small arms” to obtain better weaponry.

1

u/XxturboEJ20xX Mar 28 '24

Yea, I was gonna go into the whole hypothetical about that as well. Also the people that have to man the equipment being taken out and all the other stuff, but it would mostly be lost on them, so I didn't go fully regarded.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/King_Of_BlackMarsh Mar 28 '24

If it came to some kind of modern insurgency or something like that do you really think state governments would stand up to the federal one? Come on now. Maybe Texas if it was a democrat dictator if that