Anti gun(crime) laws - Page 2

NavyLT · July 20, 2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sensai

Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand what's so difficult to fathom about "shall not be infringed" !!

Unfortunately it is because the US Supreme Court does not consider "reasonable regulation" to be equivelant to infringement.

wally626 · July 20, 2010, 07:00 PM

The best law would be to repeal a large number of laws and regulations currently in force.

My county is tonight meeting to determine if they will dump their current shooting laws. The were looking at doing some modifications such as eliminating the ban on shooting air-guns in subdivisions etc. The law has grown to quite a monster as it has to list boundaries for lots of subdivisions that have asked to have shooting bans. The Sheriff sent in a letter saying they had never charged anyone with anything under the current code in 10 years, and the few shooting issues that have come up over the years were handled with State laws, so everyone would be better off if the law was just dumped. Hopefully the council agrees.

It would be very helpful for gun safety if all the elementary schools had gun safety lessons and that at the middle school and high school level basic marksmanship was taught as part of PE. I would not pass a law to require this, but I would encourage it be done.

csmsss · July 20, 2010, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand what's so difficult to fathom about "shall not be infringed" !!

You, sir, would put a great number of attorneys out of jobs. How can you propose such a thing in today's wintry economic climate?

**44 AMP** · July 21, 2010, 12:07 AM

We have had laws for centuries saying it was a serious crime to shoot people for fun and profit. Why have more than that? People willing to break that law are perfectly willing and able to break any number of others.

All the additional laws, while, like all laws, passed with the noblest of motives, have become nothing more than encumberance and hinderance to law abiding citizen, serve as no deterrent to criminals, and it seems (lately at least) provide only something to be plea bargined away before trial, and only affecting, of course, those who get caught.

Basic gun safety training is available all over the country, often free or at minimal cost, provided by volunteers, and under the oversight and coodination of the NRA. Usually called Hunter Safety courses. Indeed, the whole reason the NRA was created nearly 130 years ago was to promote marksmanship, and safety is an integral part of firearms training.

I do not disagree that individuals seeking to carry concealed weapons should have at a minimum basic safety training, and further training, to make them aware of their legal rights and responsibilities is certainly a good idea.

However, a one size fits all government mandated (and worse, govt. run) training program is (IMNSHO) a mistake. Not because training is a bad idea, but because of what the govt bureaucracy is sure to turn it into. Perhaps not at first, but eventually, I'm sure they will try to turn it into something as discouraging to potential gun owners as humanly possible. They have done it before.

In some locations, that required mandatory training before issuance of a license, and in some places before renewal of license, govt bureaucrats, increased the training requirements, including the paperwork needin to be filed by the the trainers, reduced or elimanated places where training could be given, and while increasing fees charged to the public, provided little or no compensation to those actually giving the training.

Faced with a situation like this, fewer and fewer NRA certified instructors were willing to give courses. I assisted my father giving Hunter Safety courses for years in the late 60s and early 1970s and I have seen this happen with my own eyes.

DO NOT TRUST GOVT to work in our best interest! While the people in power today might have no intrest in further restrictions, those who come in with the next election cycle can be completely differnt. And even non elected bureaucrats change with administrations. However, once a policy is in place (for good or ill, and its usually ill) it take a tremendous effort to recind it.

BillCA · July 21, 2010, 01:48 AM

We can't mandate training to exercise what is a right. But we can certainly encourage it. Having the subject taught in elementary through high-school by NRA certified instructors for a basic stipend would save schools money by outsourcing the creation and logistics of class materials.

Of course, getting the liberal academia types to even consider letting the NRA into schools would be an uphill battle.

I fear that 44 AMP is correct. If allowed to set the educational criteria, the government - mostly its bureaucrats - would turn it into something to discourage people from owning or using guns.

maestro pistolero · July 21, 2010, 02:16 AM

Gun safety training is needed more now than ever. We have an entire generation, or two in some locals, some of whom have never held a gun. All many of them know about guns is what they see in the movies.

I would like to see gun safety training become common place again. We need to make it fun, accessible for all, and part of the culture. It could be structured in a way that builds community and is enjoyable.

A community could hold a gun safety festival once or twice a year. Have food, entertainment, guest speakers, safety demonstrations. Make it FUN. Make it family oriented.

This is the kind of thing that will help rebuild the image of gun owners, gun ownership, and help keep people safe. Especially all the newcomers in places like DC and Chicago. They are going to need our help.

housedad · July 21, 2010, 04:43 PM

i guess I'm old enough to remember.

Eliminate the Gun Control act of 1968. That would do it. Pretty much eliminate the Feds from the field.

TexasFats · July 26, 2010, 04:49 PM

The thing to remember is that the history of anti-weapons laws is one of an elite wanting more control over the masses. And, yes, there were anti-weapons laws even before there were gun laws. For instance, in 1600 or so, the Tokagawa Shogunate in Japan outlawed the ownership or wearing of swords by anybody who was not a member of the Samuari or Daimyo class (nobles and their retainers). Farmers, artisans, and merchants were forbidden to own swords. And, the Samuari and nobility had the right to kill any peasant who insulted them on the spot.

In the post-Civil War South, gun laws were passed to ensure that freed slaves would be unarmed when the KKK came to call.

In New York, the infamous Sullivan Law was passed to make sure that only Tammany Hall thugs had guns on election day, the better to intimidate opposition voters.

Get the idea?

July 21, 2010, 12:07 AM	#29
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,818	We have had laws for centuries saying it was a serious crime to shoot people for fun and profit. Why have more than that? People willing to break that law are perfectly willing and able to break any number of others. All the additional laws, while, like all laws, passed with the noblest of motives, have become nothing more than encumberance and hinderance to law abiding citizen, serve as no deterrent to criminals, and it seems (lately at least) provide only something to be plea bargined away before trial, and only affecting, of course, those who get caught. Basic gun safety training is available all over the country, often free or at minimal cost, provided by volunteers, and under the oversight and coodination of the NRA. Usually called Hunter Safety courses. Indeed, the whole reason the NRA was created nearly 130 years ago was to promote marksmanship, and safety is an integral part of firearms training. I do not disagree that individuals seeking to carry concealed weapons should have at a minimum basic safety training, and further training, to make them aware of their legal rights and responsibilities is certainly a good idea. However, a one size fits all government mandated (and worse, govt. run) training program is (IMNSHO) a mistake. Not because training is a bad idea, but because of what the govt bureaucracy is sure to turn it into. Perhaps not at first, but eventually, I'm sure they will try to turn it into something as discouraging to potential gun owners as humanly possible. They have done it before. In some locations, that required mandatory training before issuance of a license, and in some places before renewal of license, govt bureaucrats, increased the training requirements, including the paperwork needin to be filed by the the trainers, reduced or elimanated places where training could be given, and while increasing fees charged to the public, provided little or no compensation to those actually giving the training. Faced with a situation like this, fewer and fewer NRA certified instructors were willing to give courses. I assisted my father giving Hunter Safety courses for years in the late 60s and early 1970s and I have seen this happen with my own eyes. DO NOT TRUST GOVT to work in our best interest! While the people in power today might have no intrest in further restrictions, those who come in with the next election cycle can be completely differnt. And even non elected bureaucrats change with administrations. However, once a policy is in place (for good or ill, and its usually ill) it take a tremendous effort to recind it. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

July 21, 2010, 01:48 AM	#30
BillCA Senior Member Join Date: November 28, 2004 Location: Silicon Valley, Ca Posts: 7,117	We can't mandate training to exercise what is a right. But we can certainly encourage it. Having the subject taught in elementary through high-school by NRA certified instructors for a basic stipend would save schools money by outsourcing the creation and logistics of class materials. Of course, getting the liberal academia types to even consider letting the NRA into schools would be an uphill battle. I fear that 44 AMP is correct. If allowed to set the educational criteria, the government - mostly its bureaucrats - would turn it into something to discourage people from owning or using guns. __________________ BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)

July 26, 2010, 04:49 PM	#33
TexasFats Senior Member Join Date: June 12, 2007 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 130	The thing to remember is that the history of anti-weapons laws is one of an elite wanting more control over the masses. And, yes, there were anti-weapons laws even before there were gun laws. For instance, in 1600 or so, the Tokagawa Shogunate in Japan outlawed the ownership or wearing of swords by anybody who was not a member of the Samuari or Daimyo class (nobles and their retainers). Farmers, artisans, and merchants were forbidden to own swords. And, the Samuari and nobility had the right to kill any peasant who insulted them on the spot. In the post-Civil War South, gun laws were passed to ensure that freed slaves would be unarmed when the KKK came to call. In New York, the infamous Sullivan Law was passed to make sure that only Tammany Hall thugs had guns on election day, the better to intimidate opposition voters. Get the idea? __________________ Gun laws are designed to extend and solidify the power of an elite over a peasantry. Sauron lives, and his orc minions are on the march.

July 20, 2010, 07:00 PM	#27
wally626 Senior Member Join Date: July 31, 2009 Posts: 642	The best law would be to repeal a large number of laws and regulations currently in force. My county is tonight meeting to determine if they will dump their current shooting laws. The were looking at doing some modifications such as eliminating the ban on shooting air-guns in subdivisions etc. The law has grown to quite a monster as it has to list boundaries for lots of subdivisions that have asked to have shooting bans. The Sheriff sent in a letter saying they had never charged anyone with anything under the current code in 10 years, and the few shooting issues that have come up over the years were handled with State laws, so everyone would be better off if the law was just dumped. Hopefully the council agrees. It would be very helpful for gun safety if all the elementary schools had gun safety lessons and that at the middle school and high school level basic marksmanship was taught as part of PE. I would not pass a law to require this, but I would encourage it be done.

July 21, 2010, 02:16 AM	#31
maestro pistolero Senior Member Join Date: August 16, 2007 Posts: 2,153	Gun safety training is needed more now than ever. We have an entire generation, or two in some locals, some of whom have never held a gun. All many of them know about guns is what they see in the movies. I would like to see gun safety training become common place again. We need to make it fun, accessible for all, and part of the culture. It could be structured in a way that builds community and is enjoyable. A community could hold a gun safety festival once or twice a year. Have food, entertainment, guest speakers, safety demonstrations. Make it FUN. Make it family oriented. This is the kind of thing that will help rebuild the image of gun owners, gun ownership, and help keep people safe. Especially all the newcomers in places like DC and Chicago. They are going to need our help.

July 21, 2010, 04:43 PM	#32
housedad Member Join Date: February 6, 2009 Location: Southern NJ Posts: 27	i guess I'm old enough to remember. Eliminate the Gun Control act of 1968. That would do it. Pretty much eliminate the Feds from the field.