No exemption for Hollywood? How could they be so thoughtless?
How does the law apply (if it does)to guns owned by corporations?, as opposed to private individuals?
If there's no exemption, the folks who supply guns to the movie makers are going to be filling out a lot of paperwork!
Thousands of guns used in films are fully working guns, capable of firing live ammo, and thousands more are modified to only be able to fire blanks, but are still legally firearms, and all laws about firearms should still apply.
The way the law defines firearm, it appears there is no provision exempting guns that were originally functional arms, but have been converted to blank firing only.
While I am in no way in favor of any gun control laws, I do believe that no matter what the law, it should be "sauce for the goose", meaning that ALL gun control laws should apply to EVERYONE. Private individuals, corporations, Hollywood studios, AND THE POLICE!!!!
Since the basic premise is that people owning these things are a threat to public safety, and since corporations and the police are made up of people, how is it ethical to have exemptions or loopholes in the law, just for them?
Why do people (and the law) just blindly assume that because a person holds a particular job they are safe and trustworthy with all kinds of weapons, including machineguns and explosives, when that exact same person, not holding that particular job is under the law, NOT trustworthy or safe?
Got new for you people (ok to a lot of us its not news, we knew it already), Cops, military personnel, even private security guards are humans, like the rest of us. And like the rest of us, individuals sometimes flip out or have meltdowns. And if it happens they turn violent, its as bad, or possibly worse than when it happens with an "ordinary citizen".
What cop or solider carrying an M16 on duty ever went through the same back ground check, Chief LEO approval sign off, paid the $200 transfer tax out of his own pocket, and endured the WAIT (months usually) before being approved to have it, the way an "ordinary citizen" has to for the same exact item? None that I ever heard of.
"Don't be ridiculous," they say. "That's different. They need those guns in their jobs!" To which I reply, with the brilliantly erudite,... "SO?"
Like the t-shirt says about dyslexics, Cops and soldiers are "Teople Poo!"
Wearing a certain set of clothes and carrying issued credentials doesn't make one a saint, or incapable of causing harm. The one thing I thought was good about the Lautenberg law was that (for the first time I know of) a rabid gun control law did NOT exempt police and military personnel. While this law had the effect of taking a lot of cops off the street (because under the law they could no longer carry or own a gun), I thought the fact that it applied to everyone was a good thing.
If it is a good law, it should be applied to everyone, equally and fairly. NO exceptions or exemptions. Period.
If it cannot, will not, or should not be applied to everyone without exception, then its a bad law, and we should not have it. Period.
Seems like, on this farm, some animals are more equal than others.....