[MP3] - Lars Larson vs Paul Helmke (Brady Campaign President)

[tman]

Haven't seen this posted yet. Nice debate:

Paul Helmke President of the Brady Campaign (http://www.larslarson.com/LinksNStuff/LarsAudioFiles/211889.aspx) - Monday, April 16, 2007 by Lars Larson

Interesting how he doesn't like being put on the spot. Especially about magazine capacity and the Assault Weapons Ban. He totally dodges the pistol grip question.

[shark92651]

Lars was on him pretty good. He even corrected his repeated use of the word "clip" :D

Haven't seen this posted yet. Nice debate:

Paul Helmke President of the Brady Campaign (http://www.larslarson.com/LinksNStuff/LarsAudioFiles/211889.aspx) - Monday, April 16, 2007 by Lars Larson

Interesting how he doesn't like being put on the spot. Especially about magazine capacity and the Assault Weapons Ban. He totally dodges the pistol grip question.

[6172crew]

Good find. You wont hear that on 60 minutes.

[jdberger]

I'll give Helmke a little credit for at least appearing on the show (but he sounds like one of my bowtie wearing gradeschool science teachers...).

[Grakken]

I think all people should have a backround check when purchasing any firearm at any place. Now to have to wait 30 days for a handgun is a little long. The govt should make it mandatory that all databases that contain looney bin and felon info be combined into one database. Any reasonable law abiding person should not object to a backround check for a firearm purchase.

Does anyone not think backround checks should be done? If so please let me know your reasons why as I might be missing something.

Bottom Line, The Brady Campaign wants a complete gun ban, to think or hear otherwise is absurd. Once they take the 2nd, the rest will go as well. History always seems to repeat itself... :ban:

[anothergunnut]

Do you need a background check to purchase a printing press? How about a background check before invoking your right against self-incrimination?

[Grakken]

Do you need a background check to purchase a printing press? How about a background check before invoking your right against self-incrimination?

I dont know if your sarcasm was directed towards me or not but IMO it shouldnt be that much of a problem to submit to backround checks when purchasing a firearm. Last time I checked, it is not illegal for a felon/looney to posses a printing press. I can however, be wrong.

[Uberdummy]

Why should I have to "submit" myself before a servant government? Or at least, what is left of it.

[tman]

I think all people should have a backround check when purchasing any firearm at any place. Now to have to wait 30 days for a handgun is a little long. The govt should make it mandatory that all databases that contain looney bin and felon info be combined into one database. Any reasonable law abiding person should not object to a backround check for a firearm purchase.
Well, background checks really do serve little purpose. It's probably actually easier to buy a gun off the street than to go through the hassle of dealing with an FFL.

Plus, I think I should be able to sell a gun to my friend without paying all kinds of outrageous fees to the government and FFL.

[.223]

Why should I have to "submit" myself before a servant government? Or at least, what is left of it.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

The concept of a servant government isn't afforded to you alone. Through a servant government, you're essentially submitting yourself to the rest of society by proxy.

Ideally, anyway. Really, though, I'm not so sure I can swallow that.

[Smokeybehr]

I dont know if your sarcasm was directed towards me or not but IMO it shouldnt be that much of a problem to submit to backround checks when purchasing a firearm. Last time I checked, it is not illegal for a felon/looney to posses a printing press. I can however, be wrong.

You don't quite get it, do you?

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms without infringement is guaranteed to us in the Constitution, just as Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, the Right to be Secure in our Papers, the Right against Self-Incrimination, etc. Any laws which infringe, or limit the ability to Keep and Bear Arms is Unconstitutional, and this includes the NICS system.

What if they were to place a NICS system on your right to purchase a typewriter or computer, simply because you might say something that the government doesn't like? I know that you might pooh-pooh the "slippery slope" argument, but look at what's happened here in CA with handguns: First a 15-day wait, then an instant check with a 10 day wait, magazine restrictions, then the "approved list", and now the push for Microstamping and Ammo Serialization. That sure looks like a "slippery slope" to me...

[Grakken]

You don't quite get it, do you?

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms without infringement is guaranteed to us in the Constitution, just as Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, the Right to be Secure in our Papers, the Right against Self-Incrimination, etc. Any laws which infringe, or limit the ability to Keep and Bear Arms is Unconstitutional, and this includes the NICS system.

What if they were to place a NICS system on your right to purchase a typewriter or computer, simply because you might say something that the government doesn't like? I know that you might pooh-pooh the "slippery slope" argument, but look at what's happened here in CA with handguns: First a 15-day wait, then an instant check with a 10 day wait, magazine restrictions, then the "approved list", and now the push for Microstamping and Ammo Serialization. That sure looks like a "slippery slope" to me...

I hope you arent impying that I agree with microstamping or any of that other crap. I do understand what you are saying and where you are going with your statement. In light of that, I dont really agree with backround checks either. However, if we didnt have them, than felons wouldnt need to get their guns from the street, they would just get them from a FFL like everyone else. You would agree that Felons shouldnt be able to posses firearms right?

[6172crew]

Im wondering why I have to wait 10 days for my 10th firearm?:confused:

Id like to see a bill that says once you are on the books as a firearm owner you can walk as soon as the loon check is complete...sorry I dont think
5150's or anyone on 5150/antidpressent drugs should have access to firearms.;)

[pnkssbtz]

I hope you arent impying that I agree with microstamping or any of that other crap. I do understand what you are saying and where you are going with your statement.

No. You are linking different statements together and drawing an incorrect conclusion that is not there.

Do you know what a "Slippery Slope" fallacy is?
In debate or rhetoric, the slippery slope is an argument for the likelihood of one event or trend given another. It suggests that an action will initiate a chain of events culminating in an undesirable event later. The argument is sometimes referred to as the thin end of the wedge or the camel's nose. The slippery slope can be valid or fallacious.


Now lets look at Smokeybehr's post:
I know that you might pooh-pooh the "slippery slope" argument, but look at what's happened here in CA with handguns: First a 15-day wait, then an instant check with a 10 day wait, magazine restrictions, then the "approved list", and now the push for Microstamping and Ammo Serialization. That sure looks like a "slippery slope" to me...Smokeybehr here is pointing out that he is using a slippery slope argument. He further illustrates certain key points that support the logical validity of the slippery slope argument. This is where he mentions microstamping and ammo serialization; using them in the context of illustrating key events that could potentionally culiminate into an undesirable negative outcome.

The Slippery Slope argument can be valid or false depending on the argument or evidence provided to support it.

Smokeybehr in no way shape or form was making statements on or about you or your behalf.


In light of that, I dont really agree with backround checks either. However, if we didnt have them, than felons wouldnt need to get their guns from the street, they would just get them from a FFL like everyone else. You would agree that Felons shouldnt be able to posses firearms right?What Smokeybehr was trying to point out that the 2A is a consitutional right. And no other constitutional right requires a "background" check before you can obtain the equipment and tools necessary to excercise that right.

So why is the 2A the exception?

It is clear by demanding a background check, the Government is in effect designating someone wishing to purchase a firearm of being a potential criminal until they prove themselves otherwise.

This is akin to going to Fry's Electronics and them demanding you present your receipt and merchandise for inspection before exiting their premise. They are in effect accusing every single customer of theft without probable cause or reason.

Extending the same logic to law enforcement, it would be akin to arresting every single person and then charging them with crimes and seeing which ones would stick.


This is a bit of a connundrum. On one hand we definately don't want felons with firearms. However passing laws that punish only law abiding citizens is absurd and accusing every single person purchasing a firearm of being a potential fellon is egregious.

[simonov]

Do you need a background check to purchase a printing press? How about a background check before invoking your right against self-incrimination?

How about a background check to vote for the guy who has his finger on the Button?

Restrictions on gun rights are only ever advocated by people who don't trust the common man. If you give Terri Schiavo the vote (which is something I take pretty seriously), how can you possibly deny her the RKBA?

[jdberger]

How about a background check before participating in a political rally? Or giving a speech?

Neither is acceptible to me, either.

So, a background check to dispose of personal property? Why is that different?

Essentially, CA's laws are a tax on the poor. They add $25, at a minimum, to the cost of a gun. In some cases, that's as much as a 50% tax.

That alone should have you up in arms....:mad:

[Grakken]

I understand your obejections and concerns on this issue, I really do. I wasnt sure if it was attack on me by some posts but I apologize for thinking they were when they were not. Now i think the 30 day wait period for handguns is absurd (They should be done in 10 minutes or less). I also tend to agree with your thought process, however IMHO I dont mind submitting to a backround check when it comes to firearms. We'll just kindly agree to disagree on this subject. Thanks for educating me on other ways to look at this issue..

This subject has given me an idea for another thread that I will create later.

:patriot:

[battlehatch]

When I lived in Vegas, the background check was instant and I only had to wait 3 days for the first gun I purchased. After that, I could cash and carry. Makes sense, if you already own a gun, and you can pass a NCIS check, why should you have to wait?

[Otherguy Overby]

There are gun shows here. It's cash and carry EXCEPT if you are purchasing from an FFL at a show.

Now for buying guns from a dealer, there's no wait if you pass NICS. IOW, you get the firearm as soon as the NICS check is approved. Lastly, if you have a CCW permit you don't even need the NICS check.

Long guns are not weapons and can be carried loaded, even in your car. NFA stuff is legal, too.

So yeah, I finally had to move, sorry.