|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 25, 2009, 04:21 PM | #201 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; January 25, 2009 at 04:52 PM. |
||
January 25, 2009, 04:42 PM | #202 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 1, 2008
Posts: 320
|
If you go to the Official White House website: www.whitehouse.gov then to agenda then Urban Policy and scroll down to Crime and Law Enforcement, you will see where it says that "They (Obama & Biden) support closing the Gun Show Loophole". It's just a matter of when it comes up on the agenda. orchidhunter
Last edited by orchidhunter; January 25, 2009 at 04:53 PM. |
January 25, 2009, 04:59 PM | #203 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
They can't sign anything that both houses of congress don't first approve. I hope to help make sure that doesn't happen.
Curiously, Orchid Hunter, What is it about this site that appeals to you? I'm glad you're here, but your ideas of what will make us safer are at odds with most gun owners. Have you read the law review recently posted here? http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=333419 It (comprehensively, I think) outlines the utter futility of the supply side approach to gun control, which the misnamed, 'gun show loophole', IS. What they are really talking about is face to face sales of any weapon, whether legal or not. No criminal, who is by definition outside of the law, is going to give a whit about such legislation. As such, any face to face restriction is impotent to prevent gun crime. Once again, the only group affected will be the law abiding, and valuable time, energy and political capitol will have been squandered on a futile effort. As is typical of gun control schemes, like the 'assault weapon ban', it is described in a misleading fashion, because it depends on an uniformed public to be passed. Having to mislead the public about proposed legislation is almost always a clue that it shouldn't be passed in the first place. Another example would be the so-called Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, which in fact, was a gun ban. Last edited by maestro pistolero; January 25, 2009 at 05:05 PM. |
January 25, 2009, 05:41 PM | #204 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,031
|
Quote:
It's perfectly relevant. I hope you can see the different between someone who at 40 murdered three people and then another two after he was incarcerated and 40 year old accountant who cheated on his taxes. There are thousands of felons convicted of non-violent crimes who are prohibited from owning guns. Why are they not prohibited from free speech, going to a church of their choosing, etc? Quote:
Other than the 2A what other individual right is restricted or regulated? Everything that I can think of involves your right interfering the the rights of another person. There is no NCIC to write a paper, go to church, speak your individual mind. While I respect your opinion, I refuse to be apologetic for exercising my individual rights. |
||
January 25, 2009, 06:08 PM | #205 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, a nut or a crook with a gun can certainly violate my rights as a law-abiding citizen and he/she has no right to a firearm. Quote:
Quote:
What I don't understand is how that takes any right away from us.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; January 25, 2009 at 06:08 PM. Reason: spelling |
|||||
January 25, 2009, 06:12 PM | #206 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
January 25, 2009, 06:18 PM | #207 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,031
|
Quote:
As for being tough on criminals. If they are dangerous enough that they can't own a gun; they should still be incarcerated or dead. IMHO, if they have paid their debt in full i.e served full sentence, parole etc. They should have the same rights as any other citizen. I didn't always feel this way, but after watching the sham that is taking place in DC over the last two years and what is on the White House agenda web page I said screw it. If every other degenerate can get special treatment, released felons should get at least the minimum that every other citizen gets. |
|
January 25, 2009, 06:35 PM | #208 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,457
|
Quote:
Quote:
To require government approval before one can purchase from anyone (not just a federal licensee) effectively translates into the requirement of a government license to obtain and own an arm. This is inconsistent with describing it as a right.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
||
January 25, 2009, 06:49 PM | #209 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
|
Quote:
I've went through the NFA process a half dozen times now, and some people say it is no great hassle if I want to own machineguns. So, why don't we equal the playing field and require all firearm transfers on a Form 4? You might say that is a little overkill for a normal transfer. That is the same thing I say about NCIC checks for all FTF transfers. |
|
January 25, 2009, 07:40 PM | #210 | |
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
Quote:
Take it one step further...what about a National Firearms ID card...no registration, no list of guns, show your card and "poof" buy what you want. You apply for it when you turn 18, posession of a firearm is unlawful without one, they take it away when you get indicted or convicted..... call it a Militia Eligibility card WildwouldntthatbetheanswerAlaska TM |
|
January 25, 2009, 08:06 PM | #211 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,031
|
Dang Ken, you disappoint me. I figured you would be all over that giving felons guns stuff like a hobo on a ham samich.
|
January 25, 2009, 08:27 PM | #212 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO.
Posts: 580
|
Quote:
I don't like it. You shouldn't have to prove you are eligible. The Government should have to prove that you aren't. If the Government would provide a convenient way for a person to "instantly" do a background check on FTF transfers, I suspect that most gun owners would use it. It wouldn't have to be mandatory to be effective.
__________________
NRA Benefactor MSSA Life Member Last edited by HuntAndFish; January 25, 2009 at 08:37 PM. |
|
January 25, 2009, 08:58 PM | #213 | |||
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
Quote:
All the card does is say you have no impendiment to buy or own Quote:
Quote:
Wildcodsintheoven!Alaska TM Last edited by Wildalaska; January 25, 2009 at 09:06 PM. |
|||
January 25, 2009, 09:22 PM | #214 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
Quote:
This system would essential make you guilty until proven innocent. I don't like it. |
|
January 25, 2009, 09:33 PM | #215 |
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
So does NICs.....
You are stuck with it, constituion wise. Now make it better. WilditsnottheifitsthewhenAlaska TM |
January 25, 2009, 09:42 PM | #216 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
January 25, 2009, 09:53 PM | #217 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
As to the technology I agree it can and should be better. I think it could be and easily so. They would just need the funds. Again I ask, why should FTF sales be any different than FFL ones regarding the NICS check? Please don't say the NICs is unconstitutional because it isn't but just tell me what makes the FTF sales so much more sacrosanct than FFL sales.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
||
January 25, 2009, 09:55 PM | #218 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,031
|
Quote:
You have also shown that compromising your rights leads to too much govt intervention. i.e. 1934 and 1968. It's obvious we will never agree on this one. We're at polar ends of the spectrum on the issue. Quote:
By assuming you're guilty until you prove otherwise. How convenient for the government. |
||
January 25, 2009, 09:57 PM | #219 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
However, I don't think that using some form of NICS for sales to persons unknown to you is a bad idea. If I am to sell a firearm to someone I don't know, which I can do here in Nevada, I like to call local LE and just ask, is this guy a felon? Is this person prohibited from legally owning a firearm? LE here in Nevada is cooperative with such requests. It is voluntary, but it feels like the responsible thing to do. And it doesn't create a gun registration or a record of any sale. If the buyer has a problem with that due diligence on my part, then maybe I don't need to make the sale. |
|
January 25, 2009, 10:01 PM | #220 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|||
January 25, 2009, 10:03 PM | #221 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
January 25, 2009, 10:04 PM | #222 | |
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
Quote:
WildimwatchingmendocinoweedAlaska TM |
|
January 25, 2009, 10:10 PM | #223 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,031
|
Quote:
Nahhh, I'm just gonna fence off the front of my property, secede from the union and no longer accept U.S. passports. When I need stuff I'll just jump across the border. |
|
January 25, 2009, 10:16 PM | #224 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
If it creates a registration, I've got a problem. We know what that can enable down the road. |
|
January 26, 2009, 05:53 PM | #225 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
No!!! Any legal product should be able to be sold by it legal owner with jumping through government hoops. |
|
|
|