January 10, 2013, 02:32 PM | #26 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Quote:
I will support no further expansion of Federal powers. None. I am so NOT interested in what the .gov wants to DO. Tell me about what it that they are UNDOING. |
|
January 10, 2013, 07:47 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
|
Absolutely NOT! It serves no function except to impede the lawful tranfer of firearms and increase the cost. Another Jim Crow firearms suggestion.
Criminals do not care what the law is...if they cannot obtain what they want legally, they will obtain them illegally...the only people you will burden with such a law is those that would follow the law. |
January 10, 2013, 08:18 PM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
If all NICS checks were made free, and no state could tax/charge it, would people be more willing to make them mandatory?
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
January 10, 2013, 08:40 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
|
No, it is completely unnecessary...like I said, if a criminal wants a gun, he will get a gun...illegally is necessary.
The check is not "free", even if they do not charge for it.. |
January 10, 2013, 08:40 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
|
To make all the background checks free would require a rewrite of the brady bill to disallow states acting as a middleman, or changes to prohibit states from charging while they act as middleman, and subsequently a rewrite of those states laws to keep up with the change. The charges only come into play when the state acts as a middleman(although not all states that middleman charge) instead of allowing FFLs to contact NICS directly.
And no I still would not support it. |
January 10, 2013, 09:23 PM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 1, 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 284
|
DonP
Quote:
I was a parole officer for 30 years. Every criminal I ever dealt with, who used or possessed a firearm, had either stolen it, or purchased it from another criminal who had stolen it. They didn't go to gun shows or buy them at their LGS. Newsflash...criminals don't obey laws. They don't care what new laws Joe Biden, Gov. Cuomo or Mayor Bloomberg may come up with. If every gun in America is banned and confiscated, there will simply be a lucrative black market of firearms sales. Remember Prohibition anyone? Criminals will be heavily armed and law abiding citizens will be stripped of their ability to defend themselves. |
|
January 10, 2013, 10:25 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
No.
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy |
January 10, 2013, 10:26 PM | #33 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Quote:
Anything new the .gov does is going to be added to the debt our kids will have to pay back..... provided this whole financial house of cards does not come tumbling down ...... |
|
January 10, 2013, 11:12 PM | #34 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
NICS was an unpleasant compromise we accepted back in the 1990's, and I see absolutely no reason to expand its reach. Ask someone who's been wrongfully denied what the appeal process is like. Oh, and as far as guns "stolen" from FFL's: most of those are book-keeping errors, sometimes on the dealer's side, sometimes on the distributor's side. Any time there's some question as to acquisition/disposition and a trace request is issued, the gun is a crime gun. There is no other classification in the system.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
January 11, 2013, 06:52 AM | #35 |
Member
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: Central South Carolina
Posts: 89
|
If I currently own a gun I bought from someone down the street, the Feds don't know about it. Now if mandatory NICS check is required and I sell my gun to another person on the next block, how will the Feds know? In order for it to work, all guns would have to be registered in advance so they would know what you owned when the law went into effect.
Rick
__________________
NRA Training Counselor NRA Advanced Pistol Instructor NRA RTBAV Regional Counselor Member IALEFI, SCLEOA |
January 11, 2013, 05:52 PM | #36 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
Very VERY few are purchased legally through face-to-face transactions (unless you count street-corner sales where a gun that's already "hot" gets bartered for a quantity of some regulated chemical compound). |
|
January 11, 2013, 08:15 PM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 4, 1999
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,889
|
Absolutely not.
Jerry
__________________
Ecclesiastes 12:13 ¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. |
January 11, 2013, 08:36 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 236
|
No Way.
Over a period when the number of guns have increased in the US, the number of violent crimes was halved. None of these 'reasonable controls' are about being reasonable; they are about control. Those who push the un-Constitutional anti 2A agenda want to disarm the American people. Theyd prefer to do it quickly, but use the strategy of doing it slowly because it works. They are the same tactics used by Fabian Socialists, whose shield depicts a wolf in sheeps clothing. |
January 14, 2013, 01:51 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2007
Location: Lago Vista TX
Posts: 2,425
|
I'm not in favor of any new laws regarding guns, because they are useless and uninforceable ... hicap mag bans, AWB, all transfers through FFLs; everything requires the cooperation of law-abiding citizens ... well, that's me, but in this case, not so much ... I read somewhere that there are some 20,000 laws regulating firearms on the books in this country .. that seems like plenty, how about enforcing them?
__________________
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants." Albert Camus |
January 14, 2013, 03:18 PM | #40 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
I would if worded right . Here is one of many issues I have with this
Quote:
Will the AG be able to refuse registration ? The AG can make the registration cost so high that no one would be able to afford the registration . In short I like the idea of back ground checks but I can see many ways for them to be abused .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
|
January 14, 2013, 03:27 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,185
|
How can you trust a government that wants to deny its law-abiding citizens the right to the same firearms that it supplies to Mexican drug cartels? I am not in favor of any government infringement of my God given rights. I believe "government involvement" and "botched" to be nearly synonymous terms. Rant over.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine. I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC! Last edited by KMAX; January 15, 2013 at 01:09 AM. |
January 14, 2013, 04:08 PM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
-Extend and enhance definition of “continuous travel” to provide real protection for interstate travel by land, sea, and air -Repeal bans for trains and buses. -Repeal bans in post office, VA facilities, park buildings, and all other similar federal facilities and grounds -Repeal Gun Free School Zones Act -Allow concealed carry in any establishment that is tax-exempt or receives federal funding (and that is a BUNCH of places). -Complete protection from law suits after a legal use of a weapon. -National reciprocity -Blanket pardon for anyone convicted on a charge coming out of the above repealed laws That would be a worthwhile net gain. |
|
January 14, 2013, 04:36 PM | #43 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
The net result for us would be a loss, and we'd be worse off than before.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
January 14, 2013, 06:38 PM | #44 |
Member
Join Date: October 2, 2012
Posts: 42
|
NO!!!!NEVER WAKE UP PEOPLE Think Camel in the tent
|
January 14, 2013, 06:49 PM | #45 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 14, 2013, 06:58 PM | #46 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Posts: 4
|
Absolutely not, not the Fed's business what we buy and sell. Registration = eventual confiscation.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|