Gun control: How a US liberal learned to love guns

[Blue_Tires]

Freelance writer Dan Baum is a self-described gun guy. But even though he has 15 firearms locked in a cabinet in his garage and loves an outing at the shooting range, he does not exactly fit the stereotype.

"I am a Jewish, liberal Democrat and a gun guy," he says, "which in the US is a very weird hybrid."

The writer, who grew up in New Jersey and now lives in Colorado, says he is representative of millions of ordinary gun-owning Americans.

He wants both sides of the gun control debate - the politicians who want background checks as well as the National Rifle Association, which opposes new regulations - to listen to what these "average gun guys" want.

For his new book Gun Guys: A Road Trip, Mr Baum travelled across the US and met a variety of gun owners, from those blasting automatic weapons in the desert to a school teacher hunting pigs.

He talked to the BBC about his attempt to explain his own and Americans' fascination with firearms.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22018736

[Paul E Ester]

1. The video on YT

[Paul E Ester]

2. His gun cabinet

Is not very strong, it's in the garage, and on camera. All no no's. Otherwise good vid.

[rdharma]

3. I would bet this guy is for background checks and record keeping. nt

[Straw Man]

4. And I'll bet he ISN'T ...

... for an AWB and mag capacity limits.

[rdharma]

5. No bet.

AWB & mag limit laws not needed with universal background checks and record keeping.

[Straw Man]

6. OK.

AWB & mag limit laws not needed with universal background checks and record keeping.

Glad to hear you say that. No, really, I am. Now if we could make sure that the UBC and record-keeping were not and would never be used to enable confiscation ...

The devil is in the details.

[premium]

7. I would support record keeping if there was a clause in the bill

banning the use of such registry for use to confiscate firearms from lawful owners.
I do fully support the UCB, enhanced penalties for straw purchase's and I wouldn't really have a problem with a mag limit much like CO, although I really don't see how that would decrease crime.

[jmg257]

11. This is the problem with trying to reduce this fear...a clause is wonderful

and 1 I thought of too, but then any clause could be overturned by the next bill, and then it is too late.

Who could the information be given to to keep it safe, but still usable, or how could it be secured so IF confiscation was to ever occur it would be useless?

Some new techonology out there somewhere... Maybe a data base delete button that kicks in the moment someone in legislation says "we need to ban..."

Hmmm...

[premium]

12. Some one, some where should be able to come up with a safeguard

to prevent a registry from being used as a confiscation tool.
Certainly not me, as my youngest daughter used to tell me, "Dad, you really are computer stupid!"

[jmg257]

19. Yep...just wait to see how you feel when they start kicking your butt on XBox.

My son takes all the fun out of Halo...almost.

I can still do OK with my daughter though!

[premium]

21. XBox?

What's that?
I'm still playing the old Sega Gensis, that tells you how old I am.

[GreenStormCloud]

36. A solution has been proposed here at DU.

Each drivers license should have an entry on it that shows if a person is qualified to buy a gun.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. That is a variation of the FOID approach. I support it.

[CobblePuller]

60. As long as it doubles as a voter ID, sure.

ID requirement for one Constitutional Right, ID requirement for all of them.

[rdharma]

8. "enable confiscation"

Come on, man! That's rightie conspiracy theory talk.

[premium]

9. It already happened in CA.

Those with assault weapons were required to register them and then the state decided to ban certain ones, guess what they used to determine who had what?
They were all sent letters by Bill Lockyear demanding that they either be turned in, rendered inoperable, or taken out of state.
So, no, it's not a rightie conspiracy, it's a real concern for gun owners.

[rdharma]

13. So which ones were "confiscated"? nt

[premium]

15. The SKS rifles.

I can't find the letter that was sent out to the owners of those rifles, it's been posted here before.
But the CA AG used the registry to find out who had those particular rifles and then sent those letters out.
So, yes, that's why there's deep mistrust of a national registry.

[rdharma]

18. So tell me...... which ones?

[premium]

20. Sorry I wasn't more detailed.

The SKS sporter rifle.

[rdharma]

22. SKS "sporter rifle"?

Who makes that?

I think you aren't sure of your "facts", eh?

[premium]

24. SKS was originally a Soviet designed rifle used in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS.

This confiscation happened a number of years ago. The original from the CA DOJ has been posted here before, I just can't find it right now.
Perhaps someone who has it can post it.
I know that CA tried to pass a law banning the possession of assault weapons just recently, but it died in commitee.

[Straw Man]

26. Yes.

Who makes that?

Norinco. It's a Chinese-made SKS that has a thumbhole stock and takes AK magazines.



California allowed it first, if registered, then banned it, then did a mandatory buyback.

[rdharma]

35. Finally!

But not confiscated?

When did this happen?

How about the Yugos with the grenade launchers? (Zastava)

[Straw Man]

10. Really?

"enable confiscation"

Come on, man! That's rightie conspiracy theory talk.

Interesting. What about when California required registration of any SKS with a detachable magazine, and subsequently used the registration lists to confiscate said firearms upon deciding they should no longer be legal? Was that a figment of our collective imagination?

How about Australia doing the same thing when they banned certain classes of firearms after the Port Arthur massacre? Never happened?

Oh, you mean that couldn't happen here? Or again? Or whatever? OK, call me paranoid, call me skeptical, but indulge me: Reassure me by putting it into writing. Legislate me some guarantees and then we'll talk.

[rdharma]

14. Which SKSs "confiscated" in CA? nt

[premium]

16. What do you mean which ones?

All those that were registered in CA.

[rdharma]

17. Evidently you don't know. nt

[Straw Man]

28. Not quite.

All those that were registered in CA.

Only the ones that took detachable mags.

[premium]

31. You're correct.

the ones with the fixed mags were still legal.

[Straw Man]

23. These.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117290897#post84

[premium]

25. That's the letter I was looking for.

Thanks for posting it.

[rdharma]

27. So....... you don't know, eh?

Thought so!

[Straw Man]

29. What?

So....... you don't know, eh?

Thought so!

SKS models that take detachable mags. I just showed you. What are you babbling about now?

[rdharma]

32. Oh, you did? Where was that stated?

And confiscated?

[Straw Man]

34. Here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172118626#post26

Mandatory buyback. And the linked letter above refers to a mandatory surrender (no compensation) of all AWs (not only SKS) that were registered beyond a certain date, even though the error was the DOJ's and not the gunowners'.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172118626#post14

[premium]

33. Sole purpose here is to disrupt.

Pretty obvious at this point.

[sylvi]

37. You got that right.

Nothing but trolling.

[rdharma]

39. Confiscation claim...... not verified!

I've seen the "scare talk"...... but it never happened!

[Straw Man]

42. So when you get a letter ...

... saying "Turn in this rifle or face criminal charges," what do you call that?

[rdharma]

43. Did you get that letter?

Thought not!

[Straw Man]

44. I linked it above.

Are you denying its existence? Or just blowing smoke?

[rdharma]

50. So you didn't get the letter..... and you don't know of any confiscations! nt

[Straw Man]

54. And you didn't land on the moon.

Are you telling me that nobody else did either?

[rdharma]

55. Oh, do tell..... ONE EXAMPLE?

It should be documented.... if it ever happened!

[Straw Man]

56. Oh FFS. How about the LA Times?

Airline pilot Bill Doss actually wrote to the California Justice Department to confirm that his SKS rifle was legal to bring into the state. The department told Doss--and hundreds of others--that the law only applied to one type of SKS rifle and that his was legal. Then a court read the law more broadly and made thousands of people accidental felons because they had relied on the department's position. An unprecedented retroactive immunity law, which included a multimillion-dollar SKS buy-back program, was passed in 1998.

Then there are problems with registrations. The law requires "assault weapons" to be registered and establishes grace periods. Preferring to know where these guns are and believing the law allowed it, former Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren continued to encourage and accept grace period registrations through 1998. Handgun Control Inc. sued him. When Bill Lockyer was elected attorney general, he dropped the opposition to the Handgun Control lawsuit. As a result, thousands of registrations were invalidated and owners were "dispossessed" of their guns without any payment. So in California, registration indeed did lead to confiscation.

-- http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jul/23/local/me-25465

Surely they fact-check their op-eds. Or do you require a notarized eyewitness statement?

[derby378]

57. FTW!

Then again, California walked away from the Second Amendment a long time ago. And they still have nasty problems with homicide and gang violence.

California's a lovely state, but I just want to tell its legislators...

[rdharma]

58. Chuck Michel - His clients include the National Rifle Assn. ......... nt

[Straw Man]

59. And the LA Times doesn't fact-check?

They let NRA mouthpieces spread disinformation in their august pages? Oh no! Shock! Horror! Why -- they're as bad as Fox!

[CokeMachine]

45. Good God Man --

you could have just posted what you meant 15 posts ago. I believe (and it's only a belief) that your purpose here is simply to disrupt. There is something very familiar about your posting style. Do you have a brother or another relative that posts/posted here?

Just curious is all.

[Eleanors38]

69. I think it's the notary seal. It doesn't impress on his screen like paper.

[BeyondGeography]

30. Average Gun Guys

The new perpetually-coddled soccer Moms. Walk with pride, lads.

[spin]

41. We do. Thanks. (n/t)

[Eleanors38]

64. Thanks! But there are a lot of lasses, too.

[GreenStormCloud]

38. I finished reading his book a couple of days ago.

It is a good read. He uses a good bit of wit and humor and meets some interesting people in his travels. One of them is a black gun activist in Detroit who is trying to sell black people on the idea of owning guns and getting carry permits.

[rdharma]

40. So.... is MR. Baum for UBC and record keeping? nt

[CokeMachine]

46. Did you watch the video? eom

[rdharma]

47. Yes. Did you? nt

[CokeMachine]

48. Yep -- he's all for background checks -- did I miss something? eom

[rdharma]

49. he's all for background checks

Me too! And record requirements........

[CokeMachine]

52. Then why did you ask it ten times?

You knew the answer but just kept asking . What were you trying to accomplish?

[rdharma]

53. "What were you trying to accomplish?"

A better question would be...... What was the OP trying to accomplish?

Get my point?

[CobblePuller]

61. The day I see you have a point here...

I'll drown myself in beer.

Nimbus... what a way to go!

[premium]

62. It's pretty obvious at this point

that his sole purpose for being here is to disrupt, nothing more.

[Eleanors38]

63. Cut the disruption & hijacking. nt

[rdharma]

65. Truth? You can't stand the truth!

I was just trying to see if Mr. Baum was against REASONABLE gun control.

Any harm in that?

[Jenoch]

67. If you are going to attempt to post a quote from a movie,

at least get the line correct.

[Blue_Tires]

66. I don't get your point

What AM I trying to accomplish??

[ileus]

68. great point.