Cory Booker Proposes National Gun-Licensing Program

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who recently promised to “bring a fight to the NRA like they have never ever seen before,” on Monday morning introduced a sweeping gun-violence prevention plan that centers around a national gun-licensing program, the most comprehensive and far-reaching of any candidate in the Democratic presidential field.

“My plan to address gun violence is simple—we will make it harder for people who should not have a gun to get one,” Booker said in a statement, pledging to take executive action on the first day of his desired presidency.

“As president, we will make commonsense changes to our gun laws such as requiring a license to purchase a gun that includes universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and closing the loopholes that allow domestic abusers and people on terrorist watch lists to get their hands on a gun,” he continued. “I am sick and tired of hearing thoughts and prayers for the communities that have been shattered by gun violence—it is time for bold action.”

In introducing the plan, his campaign pointed to states like Massachusetts which has a gun-licensing program, as an example of the potential for the policy’s success at the national level, noting that data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows the state had significantly lower gun deaths per capita in 2016 than neighboring New Hampshire, which did not have as stringent gun laws.


https://www.thedailybeast.com/cory-booker-proposes-national-gun-licensing-program?ref=home

Probably should have a free speech license. Maybe a license to practice your religion too.

Maddog wrote:Probably should have a free speech license. Maybe a license to practice your religion too.  

Whataboutism

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:Probably should have a free speech license. Maybe a license to practice your religion too.  

Whataboutism

Hardly. Speech, religion and the right to arms are constitutionally protected.  

If someone brought up the right to drive requiring a license, that would be whataboutism. It's not constitutionally protected.

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Whataboutism

Hardly. Speech, religion and the right to arms are constitutionally protected.  

If someone brought up the right to drive requiring a license, that would be whataboutism. It's not conditionally protected.  

Is there a call to license religion and free speech?

No

Hence utterly irrelevant

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Hardly. Speech, religion and the right to arms are constitutionally protected.  

If someone brought up the right to drive requiring a license, that would be whataboutism. It's not conditionally protected.  

Is there a call to license religion and free speech?

No

Hence utterly irrelevant

Doesn't matter. Just overturn the second amendment if you don't want to follow it. But politicians know that's political suicide. So they try to make laws that ignore it. Thankfully, the courts continue to shoot them down. Pun intended.

By the way, in regards to your article. Massachusetts has a higher murder rate than New Hampshire, and NH has probably the least restrictive gun laws in the country.

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Is there a call to license religion and free speech?

No

Hence utterly irrelevant

Doesn't matter. Just overturn the second amendment if you don't want to follow it. But politicians know that's political suicide.  So they try to make laws that ignore it.  Thankfully, the courts continue to shoot them down.  Pun intended.  

I dont see the second ammendment even being overturned but ammended

I think its crazy that society has a law, that allows them to carry without proper safeguarding checks. Such powerful dangereous weapons. Even more so when, there is so many gund deaths each year.

You would think people would see stricter license laws a positive step in helping fight gun crime

So if the majority of people are law abiding, this is in no way going to effect them owning a gun

Its a no brainer to have stricter gun laws

Switzerland does and even Israel does. The later under actual constant threat

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Is there a call to license religion and free speech?

No

Hence utterly irrelevant

Doesn't matter. Just overturn the second amendment if you don't want to follow it. But politicians know that's political suicide.  So they try to make laws that ignore it.  Thankfully, the courts continue to shoot them down.  Pun intended.  

Do you want me to post up the link of studies again that show there is more crimes, where more people own guns?

In fact, New Hampshire has a lower murder rate than the UK.

And people can open carry without any licence there.

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Doesn't matter. Just overturn the second amendment if you don't want to follow it. But politicians know that's political suicide.  So they try to make laws that ignore it.  Thankfully, the courts continue to shoot them down.  Pun intended.  

Do you want me to post up the link of studies again that show there is more crimes, where more people own guns?

I don't care what you do. You do you boo. I'm going for a walk and then going to work.

I'm done for now. Maybe Quill will be up soon and want to play.

Maddog wrote:In fact, New Hampshire has a lower murder rate than the UK.  

And people can open carry without any licence there.  

Since when was a state equivilent to a country?

Most of this research—and there have been several dozen peer-reviewed studies—punctures the idea that guns stop violence. In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least. Also in 2015 a combined analysis of 15 different studies found that people who had access to firearms at home were nearly twice as likely to be murdered as people who did not.

This evidence has been slow to accumulate because of restrictions placed by Congress on one of the country's biggest injury research funders, the CDC. Since the mid-1990s the agency has been effectively blocked from supporting gun violence research. And the NRA and many gun owners have emphasized a small handful of studies that point the other way.







 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Do you want me to post up the link of studies again that show there is more crimes, where more people own guns?

I don't care what you do. You do you boo.  I'm going for a walk and then going to work.  

I'm done for now. Maybe Quill will be up soon and want to play.  

Enjoy your walk

Did anyone read all that waffle ?

Maddog wrote:
Probably should have a free speech license. Maybe a license to practice your religion too.  

We all know by now that you don't believe it shooters' licenses and registration, Maddawg -- maybe you don't believe in licencing car and truck drivers, either ?

You're just fortunate that you don't require a license for stupidity in your neck of the woods..

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:Probably should have a free speech license. Maybe a license to practice your religion too.  

Whataboutism

Yes, it is. Shifting the subject to speech or religion is classic tu quoque argument. You could even couch Redneck's argument as, what about speech; what about religion...to wit: whataboutism.

Maddog wrote:By the way, in regards to your article. Massachusetts has a higher murder rate than New Hampshire, and NH has probably the least restrictive gun laws in the country.  

Massachusetts also has one of the country's great metropolitan areas in Boston. What kind of equivalency is that?

Apples and oranges.

I say....the guy makes sense! Good for him.