Not really. Such laws don't regulate behavior, they define procedures and penalties for violations. Regulating or restricting behavior to prevent a possible violation can fall in the category of "prior restraint" and it's generally not allowed.

They have a shooting range there. Kind of difficult to use without guns.

There were a few academic studies that focused specifically on the evaluation of CDC/public health research in this area. The NRC report dissects a few, including some that are often cited by gun control proponents. But not all CDC/public health research in this area is bad, and not all research that reaches…

Where in the U.S. is there no violent crime or home invasions to be concerned about? You might not be cracking lame jokes should someone decide to come into your home uninvited, which happens millions of times a year, about a million times per year when somebody is home, and resulting in violent confrontations…

First, let me recommend a review by the National Research Council entitled "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" that looks at the research on this topic up to 2004. The free PDF can be found here:

Where has the NRA advocated on health care, abortion, religious freedom? I've never seen this.

The AR-15 platform makes for a great all-around rifle. Good for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. Because it is light-weight, easily adjustable to fit the shooter, has low recoil, is very accurate, and is very reliable, it is an excellent choice for many people and for many uses, including self-defense. It's…

Obama's demagoguing for more gun control after significant shooting events, using victims' relatives as stage props, is sensitive and reasonable? The policies he pushes usually have no logical connection to the exploited events, and existing gun controls (like gun-free zones) arguably made the situations worse, so…

Yeah, gun control advocates are much more careful about their rhetoric these days. And I'm not talking about overturning the 2nd amendment; my more immediate concern is with other restrictions, regulations, fees, mandates, etc.

I get that, but I correctly said that you did not respond, not that you favored the policies I cited. My point is that there are laws and proposed policies that many who support some gun control measures would agree are not sensible. Let's also talk about getting rid of those, and avoid enacting new senseless control…

I appreciate the response, but I'm referring to the types of laws and proposals that only impose restrictions and fees on law-abiding gun owners, like the ones I've cited elsewhere in this thread, not something like a universal background check requirement that is an attempt to prevent guns from getting into the wrong…

And on the other side, those seeking to protect their rights are not simply being unreasonable and insensitive. That's one of my main points. They are simply insisting that their rights be protected against intentional or unintentional infringements. What's needed is mutual respect and a constructive dialog, but that…

Perhaps I'm just more attuned to the issue, but many politicians have proposed overturning the second amendment or severely limiting second amendment rights, usually after paying lip-service to respecting this right.

Yeah, sometimes things are so nonsensical they defy even an attempt at explanation.

But what if their proposals, because they care so little about rights, do not strike anything like a balance between those rights and safety? Shouldn't we expect those proposing to legislate at the nexus between rights and government power to be respectful and careful about the proper balance instead of arguing that…

So you don't know what arguments the NRA has made against the specific universal background check legislation that was introduced. As I recall, the NRA was heavily involved in the discussion of that and other legislation. Maybe if you knew what the NRA's concerns were you might help find a way to accomplish the shared…

Thank you. I keep bring them up because you wouldn't simply answer the point. Now, finally, you did. Don't you think the debate would be more productive if such laws and proposed policies were taken off the table? Don't you think that those seeking to advance a blatant anti-gun agenda deserve some of the blame for the…

OK, I see what you're referring to now, but I was referring to my post directly above your previous post. You named but a few examples, which doesn't prove your point even if you include the debatable ones. We would have to do an inventory of the many thousands of gun control laws to settle that question.

The problem I'm having is you won't come out and say you don't support laws solely intended to infringe upon gun rights, you simply dismiss the point or ignore it. If you would acknowledge and condemn those seeking to take advantage of the debate to enact an anti-gun agenda, people like me would be more willing to…

It's not a strawman argument. It's a simple question trying to illicit what legislation you find sensible, and another question to see if you find some actual gun control proposals and laws to be sensible.