|
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 22, 2019, 01:34 PM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,464
|
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
January 22, 2019, 02:05 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 11, 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,524
|
Kind of a conundrum isn't it.
I have a Right to Qwn a gun. Correct? I have a right to not be murdered by an unstable nut with a gun, Correct? Which Right outweighs the other? |
January 22, 2019, 02:24 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,464
|
Let me suggest that it isn't a conundrum, and that a problem inheres in the analysis implied.
Quote:
Constitutional rights are rights one holds against the government. You have a right against certain government searches and seizures, and a right against government takings without process and compensation. Neither you nor I have any analogous right not to be murdered by an unstable nut with a gun. For us to have that right, the government would need to have a corresponding duty to prevent such a murder. Neither the federal nor state government have that duty. If we wander down he path of balancing tests for the preservation of constitutional rights of individuals against the government, the destination will be that they are gone. At some point, someone is going to identify some purported worthy goal that outweighs the mere right of an individual to be free of state power, and the only remaining issue is whether he will be able to get enough people to agree with him who've passed the rigorous requirement that they are over 18 and still draw breath.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; January 22, 2019 at 04:52 PM. |
|
January 22, 2019, 02:32 PM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,238
|
If someone is ever going to commit murder, have tendencies to murder. They are going to do it regardless of the tool availability.
Almost everyone lives their life without committing murder or assault. We don’t assume (or shouldn’t) a crime will be committed at some point in the future. I don’t think most crimes for which punishment has been completed should be used to take rights away from individuals either. |
January 22, 2019, 03:00 PM | #55 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,871
|
Quote:
because, you don't... Not under our legal system as it exists today..
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
January 22, 2019, 05:24 PM | #56 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now, I couldn't figure out, at least not quickly, what information would go into this mandatory background check, so I went to the Colorado Bureau of Investigations web site and looked at its FAQ: Quote:
Hmmm, . . . . I then took a look at the issue of what records must be kept by the aforementioned FFLs: Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
||||
January 22, 2019, 06:10 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 11, 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,524
|
Seems I read somewhere about Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and Unalienable Rights. Actually believe this is what this Country was founded upon.
|
January 22, 2019, 06:27 PM | #58 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,871
|
Would the book required by Colorado law be a separate book than the "bound book" required by Federal law for FFL dealers??
I'm far from an expert on these matters, seems to me the CO law requires a lot more information be kept than the FFL dealer's 'bound book" of inventory transfers, so I'm thinking they would need to be two physically separate volumes. is that right? I agree, the information required, in a book, open at all times to the inspection of any duly authorized police officer IS a registration. It's just not an efficient mass data sharing one. The investigator in Denver may have to go to Boulder to the dealer's location, but when he gets there, there IS a registration waiting, "open at all times" for his inspection. one would hope that investigators would be considerate enough to visit during normal business hours, but it seems that the law requiring "open at all times" does give them the authority to drag an FFL out of bed in the middle of the night and open their shop to provide access if they so demand.. lovely law...I suppose...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
January 22, 2019, 06:44 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,238
|
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence, not in the constitution. It was written for foreign governments explaining our intentions.
|
January 22, 2019, 08:39 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 2,199
|
KMW, my right (and yours) to own firearms does not infringe on any of our other rights.
If you, criminally assault me with a deadly weapon, you have wronged me by your actions, not your civil rights. |
January 23, 2019, 12:18 AM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 11, 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,524
|
The Right to Continue Living many not be in the US Bill of Rights but in my mind the Right to Life and to Continue Life Trumps all other Rights. In the Bill of Rights or Otherwise. Life is the most sacred right there is.
So you may all quote whatever you want or Belief you have but again this is my belief I also believe that if I need to take your life to preserve mine then so be it just as you all have the same right to preserve yourselves. If someone incurs a brain injury or jumps the mental tracks and suffers a meltdown then just maybe they shouldn't be allowed to have a dangerous weapon of any kind. Right now we do not have a solution to deal with that, that works. |
January 23, 2019, 01:08 AM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,238
|
I say change the constitution. It’s meant to be changed if needed. There’s mechanisms in place to amend the constitution. Others beliefs do not change what the government is allowed to do to individuals.
|
January 23, 2019, 06:00 AM | #63 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
January 23, 2019, 08:00 AM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
I don't argue that there is a record of guns sold and guns transferred at a FFL for online sales or private transactions..MY point is the probability that those records will end up being in a fed data base for confiscation of guns. It's possible, certainly. Give me your name and about 10 minutes and I'll know your SSN, address, phone number too.
The 'registration' that was completed at the Tanner gun show for that Glock 43 I bought was done by the seller..the BGC was done by the nice lady who was doing them for 3-4 different sellers in a little 4 table enclave. She didn't know what I was buying.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
January 23, 2019, 08:01 AM | #65 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Why would it have to be in a federal database for confiscation to happen? Colorado is registering guns at the state level, according to its own statute.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
January 23, 2019, 08:05 AM | #66 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Quote:
Besides, 'it is what it is'...short of storming onto the streets, we follow the law and support candidates who coincide(as much as possible) with our beliefs and principals. Last midterm turnout was 47%..2016 turnout was about 62%...VOTE...or forever hold your tongue.. As I said somewhere else..Pro Gun people and organizations are losing the messaging 'war'..yelling and screaming while displaying a AR type weapon on Pearl St mall might get 'some' riled up but it riles those who want to see them gone, much more vigorously.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; January 23, 2019 at 08:17 AM. |
||
January 23, 2019, 08:32 AM | #67 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
January 23, 2019, 09:43 AM | #68 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Yes, there are some very vocal congress-people who yell this from time to time but generally speaking, short of a 28th amendment, repealing the 2nd..isn't going to happen anytime soon, IMHO.. Heller, with all it's warts, said, Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
||
January 23, 2019, 10:27 AM | #69 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Quote:
I've read Heller a time or two . . . .
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
January 23, 2019, 10:51 AM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
When I did my CCW class, a solid hour was about red states and 'commie blue states'..with comments about various government reps. ...Gee, I wonder why Feinstein doesn't like the progun crowd..why are pro-gun people referred to as 'gun freaks'..messaging. NOT saying you are ignorant of anything but the precedent has been set in stone, at the SCOTUS level..so considering that----> confiscation is a LONG and bumpy road. Even the last AR type ban was for anything manufactured after that date..anybody who had one, could keep it.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” Last edited by USNRet93; January 23, 2019 at 10:58 AM. |
|
January 23, 2019, 11:04 AM | #71 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
I don't disagree with you over the pro-gun side's PR problems. That's why I haven't been arguing about those.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
January 23, 2019, 11:25 AM | #72 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
Both sides talk at each other, don't talk TO each other and until they do, this emotional conflict will continue with NO solution possible. Anything that is passed by any 'side' will result in people yelling at each other. Sign of the times.
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
|
January 23, 2019, 11:27 AM | #73 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 2011
Posts: 1,768
|
Registration is not required to do a UBC but registration would be needed in an attempt to force compliance of using UBC, which is what I believe Breitbart and others are getting at. No registration and UBC are for the most part optional with little chance of being caught for not doing such unless gun sold was used in crime and recovered. I have read that states that require FFL transfer between private parties also are not havine a very high compliance rate though I am not sure how that is determined.
If all firearms were registered with strict and stiff penalties for non compliance then when Joe sells a gun to Bob, Bob will make dang sure he updates his registration info to show he now owns another firearm with make/model/serial number info he bought from Joe with Joe's UBC validation code and if Joe does not update his record within the designated time window he will have a stranger with a badge at his front door wanting to know why not and demanding to inventory his firearms and God help Joe if it does match the government record. At least that is how gun control folks would expect it to work. Gosh I hope it never comes to that but I believe that is exactly what a lot of politicians want. Here in Illinois we firearms owners are registered and have a Firearms Owners Identification Card to buy guns and ammo but our firearms are not registered, at least not with any direct owner supplied information. If I want to legally sell a firearm to a private person I need to see their FOID card to get their ID number and DOB to enter it into the Illinois State Police FOID verification website and I would get an approval number if the FOID is still valid good for thirty days. The complete FOID database is updated daily to reflect any FOIDs that have been invalidated due to info obtained about the FOID holder such as criminal convictions. When I then sell the firearm I need to document some info about the sale and keep that for ten years and info needed is FOID approval code, date of sale, name and address of buyer, and make/model/serial number of firearm. Though I am not fond of having to do that I would find such a system far preferable to having to register every firearm I own with specifics and serial number. However Illinois politicians are currently trying to make it so that when a private sale is made that it will be required to include specifics about the firearm including make/model/serial number to Illinois State Police in an attempt for back door registration. https://www.ispfsb.com/Public/Firear...mTransfer.aspx https://www.gunrights4illinois.com/b...n-in-illinois/
__________________
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.” ― Benjamin Franklin Last edited by sigarms228; January 23, 2019 at 12:12 PM. |
January 23, 2019, 11:54 AM | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,475
|
Quote:
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer "Tools not Trophies” |
|
January 23, 2019, 12:20 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 2011
Posts: 1,768
|
Quote:
In a way it is kind of like speeding and running stoplights. It is against the law to do both but speeding is frequently done and running stop lights is not unusual. So what did states to further enforce the law? They installed cameras and radars to catch those that were speeding and running stop lights. They then used registration information of the vehicle to issue citations and fines to the owner in the registration record. Let's say UBC is law of the land and everyone is supposed to used it for any firearm sale or transfer. Then a big school shooting happens and it is found out the shooter bought a rifle from a guy in the neighborhood not using UBC. What do you think gun control politicians will be demanding next?
__________________
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.” ― Benjamin Franklin Last edited by sigarms228; January 23, 2019 at 12:39 PM. |
|
|
|