http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4329
Big Brother's New Target: Tracking Firearms
Friday, January 23, 2009
U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) recently sponsored H.R. 45, also known as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act." The bill is, at its core and as its name implies, a licensing and registration scheme.
The measure calls for all handgun owners to submit to the federal government an application that shall include, among many other things: a photo; an address; a thumbprint; a completed, written firearm safety test; private mental health records; and a fee. And those are only some of the requirements to be licensed!
The bill would further require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America. Moreover, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a "qualifying firearm" -- defined as "any handgun; or any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device…" [emphasis added] without one of the proposed licenses.
Additionally, the bill would make it illegal to transfer ownership of a "qualifying firearm" to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector (with very few exceptions), and would require "qualifying firearm" owners to report all transfers to the attorney general's database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours, or fail to report a change of address within 60 days. Further, if a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the firearm may face a multiple-year jail sentence.
H.R. 45 is essentially a reintroduction of H.R. 2666, which Rush introduced in 2007. H.R. 2666 contained much of the same language as H.R. 45, and was co-sponsored by several well-known anti-gun legislators--including Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors.
Rest assured that NRA-ILA will continue to monitor this bill closely, and will keep you informed of any developments if they materialize.
Full Version: They're Back! HR 45 - fed licensing & registration
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Second Amendment, Gun Safety and Gun Control
hope they take yours away
your hatred of Obama is reason enuf
they should put a chip in each gun, so its known 24/7/365
guns kill
idiots with guns kill
anyone who ever drinks who owns a gun kills and should be monitored
people like to stroke their guns when they can't stroke the real thing
your hatred of Obama is reason enuf
they should put a chip in each gun, so its known 24/7/365
guns kill
idiots with guns kill
anyone who ever drinks who owns a gun kills and should be monitored
people like to stroke their guns when they can't stroke the real thing
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Sep 8 2009, 03:04 PM) 
hope they take yours away
Why wait for "they",
come and get it. For your brousing pleasure.
QUOTE(Indianhead @ Sep 8 2009, 03:47 PM)
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Sep 8 2009, 03:04 PM)
hope they take yours away
Why wait for "they",
come and get it. For your brousing pleasure.
When they come for you Graham....you can expect no help from me....
you say that now, bigtom...LOL
but "THEY" are not coming for me.
and if THEY come for anyone, ten bullets won't save you if you need eleven
a million bullets won't save you if they fire a million and one
but "THEY" are not coming for me.
and if THEY come for anyone, ten bullets won't save you if you need eleven
a million bullets won't save you if they fire a million and one
QUOTE(Indianhead @ Sep 8 2009, 03:55 PM)
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4329
Big Brother's New Target: Tracking Firearms
Friday, January 23, 2009
U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) recently sponsored H.R. 45, also known as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act." The bill is, at its core and as its name implies, a licensing and registration scheme.
The measure calls for all handgun owners to submit to the federal government an application that shall include, among many other things: a photo; an address; a thumbprint; a completed, written firearm safety test; private mental health records; and a fee. And those are only some of the requirements to be licensed!
The bill would further require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America. Moreover, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a "qualifying firearm" -- defined as "any handgun; or any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device…" [emphasis added] without one of the proposed licenses.
Additionally, the bill would make it illegal to transfer ownership of a "qualifying firearm" to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector (with very few exceptions), and would require "qualifying firearm" owners to report all transfers to the attorney general's database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours, or fail to report a change of address within 60 days. Further, if a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the firearm may face a multiple-year jail sentence.
H.R. 45 is essentially a reintroduction of H.R. 2666, which Rush introduced in 2007. H.R. 2666 contained much of the same language as H.R. 45, and was co-sponsored by several well-known anti-gun legislators--including Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors.
Rest assured that NRA-ILA will continue to monitor this bill closely, and will keep you informed of any developments if they materialize.
Big Brother's New Target: Tracking Firearms
Friday, January 23, 2009
U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) recently sponsored H.R. 45, also known as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act." The bill is, at its core and as its name implies, a licensing and registration scheme.
The measure calls for all handgun owners to submit to the federal government an application that shall include, among many other things: a photo; an address; a thumbprint; a completed, written firearm safety test; private mental health records; and a fee. And those are only some of the requirements to be licensed!
The bill would further require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America. Moreover, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a "qualifying firearm" -- defined as "any handgun; or any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device…" [emphasis added] without one of the proposed licenses.
Additionally, the bill would make it illegal to transfer ownership of a "qualifying firearm" to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector (with very few exceptions), and would require "qualifying firearm" owners to report all transfers to the attorney general's database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours, or fail to report a change of address within 60 days. Further, if a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the firearm may face a multiple-year jail sentence.
H.R. 45 is essentially a reintroduction of H.R. 2666, which Rush introduced in 2007. H.R. 2666 contained much of the same language as H.R. 45, and was co-sponsored by several well-known anti-gun legislators--including Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors.
Rest assured that NRA-ILA will continue to monitor this bill closely, and will keep you informed of any developments if they materialize.
I hope it passes.....sounds reasonable to me. If handgun owners don't like the "fee'' because they feel it infringes on their 2nd amendment right to be armed, then maybe the NRA and other weapons groups can pay the fees for those who can't afford it.
maybe they can go on welfare and get "gun fee" stamps if they can't afford it
Yeah, if they can afford the yearly NRA fees, they can afford it
You gotta register your car every single year and you gotta track the liscence plates if you sell your car
Why are gun owners so afraid if they are not doing anything illegal?
When one has e-z-pass in their car, anytime you go anywhere they know you
So, indianhead, what are you afraid of? Are you not suppose to have the guns you have?
You would think, over the years you have indicated you are a law officer?
If so, I don't get it?
What are YOU so afraid of?
Unless...
only ones who are afraid of ID normally are perps...
so what are you afraird of?
Yeah, if they can afford the yearly NRA fees, they can afford it
You gotta register your car every single year and you gotta track the liscence plates if you sell your car
Why are gun owners so afraid if they are not doing anything illegal?
When one has e-z-pass in their car, anytime you go anywhere they know you
So, indianhead, what are you afraid of? Are you not suppose to have the guns you have?
You would think, over the years you have indicated you are a law officer?
If so, I don't get it?
What are YOU so afraid of?
Unless...
only ones who are afraid of ID normally are perps...
so what are you afraird of?
What I really like to know is-
Do you think if a real revolution happened and THEY came for YOUR guns, YOUR puny gun will save you?
THEY can drop a bunker buster bomb over YOUR area and what good is YOUR puny gun?
especially THEY have unmanned DRONES
especially as there is NO right anyhow to an individual owning a gun WITHOUT registration or tracking devices.
Tell me where it says that
and you better look up from your bed...hear that plane above...is it the ceiling fan, or is it an unmanned drone?
and again, what happens when YOUR bullets run out?
In what world did a bullet ever save a day, let alone anyone at all?
Throughout history, a bullet has killed one good person after another, but NEVER EVER EVER EVER has a gun or a bullet saved anyone.
Do you think if a real revolution happened and THEY came for YOUR guns, YOUR puny gun will save you?
THEY can drop a bunker buster bomb over YOUR area and what good is YOUR puny gun?
especially THEY have unmanned DRONES
especially as there is NO right anyhow to an individual owning a gun WITHOUT registration or tracking devices.
Tell me where it says that
and you better look up from your bed...hear that plane above...is it the ceiling fan, or is it an unmanned drone?
and again, what happens when YOUR bullets run out?
In what world did a bullet ever save a day, let alone anyone at all?
Throughout history, a bullet has killed one good person after another, but NEVER EVER EVER EVER has a gun or a bullet saved anyone.
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Sep 9 2009, 04:20 AM)
What I really like to know is-
Do you think if a real revolution happened and THEY came for YOUR guns, YOUR puny gun will save you?
THEY can drop a bunker buster bomb over YOUR area and what good is YOUR puny gun?
especially THEY have unmanned DRONES
especially as there is NO right anyhow to an individual owning a gun WITHOUT registration or tracking devices.
Tell me where it says that
and you better look up from your bed...hear that plane above...is it the ceiling fan, or is it an unmanned drone?
and again, what happens when YOUR bullets run out?
In what world did a bullet ever save a day, let alone anyone at all?
Throughout history, a bullet has killed one good person after another, but NEVER EVER EVER EVER has a gun or a bullet saved anyone.
Do you think if a real revolution happened and THEY came for YOUR guns, YOUR puny gun will save you?
THEY can drop a bunker buster bomb over YOUR area and what good is YOUR puny gun?
especially THEY have unmanned DRONES
especially as there is NO right anyhow to an individual owning a gun WITHOUT registration or tracking devices.
Tell me where it says that
and you better look up from your bed...hear that plane above...is it the ceiling fan, or is it an unmanned drone?
and again, what happens when YOUR bullets run out?
In what world did a bullet ever save a day, let alone anyone at all?
Throughout history, a bullet has killed one good person after another, but NEVER EVER EVER EVER has a gun or a bullet saved anyone.
\
G you keep spouting the same crap like a broken record..
At least Amy can explain why she feels a certain way and disagree like a human being...
What I would like to know is this...
How many Democrats would get elected if this gets passed?
Only the ones who vote against it...
Yesterday over 67 million gun owners didn't kill anyone, but they will vote when the time comes...
well bigtom
your post says it all
How many?
ZERO
it's political
now that we got that out in the open, we can all honestly agree with it
the NRA holds people hostage, so to say, as does the church, and its all to the republican/
Bush favor, we can all agree to it
I 100% agree with your statement.
ZERO democrats will get elected if the NRA says NO
because the NRA is too rigid
now we can argue the non-political point
do you bigtom, want someone you sold the gun too, to kill an innocent person, and they blame you because your fingerprints are on the gun
If your re-sold gun was tracked as being sold, you would be innocent.
btw-a personal note-
you bigtom and I, are on my side, I consider you an Obama fan, so as anything I say about Obama hater do not apply to you.
You and I are on the same side.
your post says it all
How many?
ZERO
it's political
now that we got that out in the open, we can all honestly agree with it
the NRA holds people hostage, so to say, as does the church, and its all to the republican/
Bush favor, we can all agree to it
I 100% agree with your statement.
ZERO democrats will get elected if the NRA says NO
because the NRA is too rigid
now we can argue the non-political point
do you bigtom, want someone you sold the gun too, to kill an innocent person, and they blame you because your fingerprints are on the gun
If your re-sold gun was tracked as being sold, you would be innocent.
btw-a personal note-
you bigtom and I, are on my side, I consider you an Obama fan, so as anything I say about Obama hater do not apply to you.
You and I are on the same side.
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 08:06 AM)
Yesterday over 67 million gun owners didn't kill anyone, but they will vote when the time comes...
bigtom,
The proposed legislation's intent is to :
1. keep track of who owns handguns
2. make sure handgun owners are knowledgeable about firearm safety
3. keep guns out the hands of the mentally ill
Why would anyone object to those standards?
And the age old argument that the "bad guys" won't abide by the laws is pretty lame. Should we have no laws that put restrictions on people's behavior because the "bad guys" won't abide by those laws?
bigtom-
I don't consider you a loon
you have said you are middle area
blue dog democratic is okay with you
so why are you arguing a libertarian view point? an almost zealot view point on this one issue?
that is what I don't understand
why is this issue different than any of the others?
I don't see anyone asking for repeal of driving liscenes
I don't consider you a loon
you have said you are middle area
blue dog democratic is okay with you
so why are you arguing a libertarian view point? an almost zealot view point on this one issue?
that is what I don't understand
why is this issue different than any of the others?
I don't see anyone asking for repeal of driving liscenes
G4 of course we are on the same side!
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
it shows
ALL lobbyist groups are too powerful, no matter which ones
and that power gets to frame any issue, so that they distort what it really means
at end of day, more legislation wouldn't hurt you personally
may cost you ten bucks a year more, but won't mean a hill of beans to you either way
and maybe it would save some lives
couldn't make it any worse
but it wouldn't take your guns for hunting or protection away either
and Obama knows it
and Obama has done NOTHING to infringe your rights either, and you know it
ALL lobbyist groups are too powerful, no matter which ones
and that power gets to frame any issue, so that they distort what it really means
at end of day, more legislation wouldn't hurt you personally
may cost you ten bucks a year more, but won't mean a hill of beans to you either way
and maybe it would save some lives
couldn't make it any worse
but it wouldn't take your guns for hunting or protection away either
and Obama knows it
and Obama has done NOTHING to infringe your rights either, and you know it
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 01:48 PM)
G4 of course we are on the same side!
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
Well said.
[/quote]
Well said.
[/quote]
Agreed. I see G4 is going to be a project on this topic.
Well said.
[/quote]
Agreed. I see G4 is going to be a project on this topic.
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 02:48 PM)
G4 of course we are on the same side!
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
Sanity does exist on this forum
QUOTE(amy @ Sep 9 2009, 04:18 AM)
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 08:06 AM)
Yesterday over 67 million gun owners didn't kill anyone, but they will vote when the time comes...
bigtom,
The proposed legislation's intent is to :
1. keep track of who owns handguns
2. make sure handgun owners are knowledgeable about firearm safety
3. keep guns out the hands of the mentally ill
Why would anyone object to those standards?
And the age old argument that the "bad guys" won't abide by the laws is pretty lame. Should we have no laws that put restrictions on people's behavior because the "bad guys" won't abide by those laws?
Amy,
1. They already know who owns the guns legally. It's all a part of the background check. Those who have the guns illegally broke a law by not having a background check. Another law to try and ensure they know who has what isn't going to dissuade a person who shouldn't legally have a gun from getting one.
2. I agree gun owners should be knowledgeable. I can gaurantee that 99% of gun owners do have a good knowledge base in terms of safety and legalities. Why mandate more restrictions by way of additional laws on the people who are already doing things the right way in terms of safety, etc? More laws will affect the 99% while the 1% who any laws should affect will continue on being idiots with guns. You can't legislate stupidity out of people any more than you can legislate to reduce accidents. They will still happen.
3. How do you propose keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill over and above what is already done but still not infringe or restrict the rights of everyone else?
As to your last question ... I don't have a problem with laws on behavior. What I have a problem with is passing more and more laws that will only affect law abiding people and do nothing in terms of those who are going to ignore any and all laws on guns. How does further restriction on my rights make you safer when it is the guys who don't abide by the law that are the problem?
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 21 2009, 09:35 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Sep 9 2009, 04:18 AM)
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 08:06 AM)
Yesterday over 67 million gun owners didn't kill anyone, but they will vote when the time comes...
bigtom,
The proposed legislation's intent is to :
1. keep track of who owns handguns
2. make sure handgun owners are knowledgeable about firearm safety
3. keep guns out the hands of the mentally ill
Why would anyone object to those standards?
And the age old argument that the "bad guys" won't abide by the laws is pretty lame. Should we have no laws that put restrictions on people's behavior because the "bad guys" won't abide by those laws?
Amy,
1. They already know who owns the guns legally. It's all a part of the background check. Those who have the guns illegally broke a law by not having a background check. Another law to try and ensure they know who has what isn't going to dissuade a person who shouldn't legally have a gun from getting one.
2. I agree gun owners should be knowledgeable. I can gaurantee that 99% of gun owners do have a good knowledge base in terms of safety and legalities. Why mandate more restrictions by way of additional laws on the people who are already doing things the right way in terms of safety, etc? More laws will affect the 99% while the 1% who any laws should affect will continue on being idiots with guns. You can't legislate stupidity out of people any more than you can legislate to reduce accidents. They will still happen.
3. How do you propose keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill over and above what is already done but still not infringe or restrict the rights of everyone else?
As to your last question ... I don't have a problem with laws on behavior. What I have a problem with is passing more and more laws that will only affect law abiding people and do nothing in terms of those who are going to ignore any and all laws on guns. How does further restriction on my rights make you safer when it is the guys who don't abide by the law that are the problem?
Kev,
Maybe additional laws will help to keep more guns out of the hands of criminals? People can pass background checks and can then sell guns to criminals.....I imagine there's lot of that going on....I imagine it's a thriving business.
"require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America." If i owned a gun, I would welcome these laws........if I was shot I would want to know the "gun's" history......including the name of the person who might have sold or given the gun to the person who shot me....or threatned to shoot me.....
QUOTE(bigtom @ Sep 9 2009, 03:48 PM)
G4 of course we are on the same side!
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
I am disappointed In Obama so far, but the alternative would have been WORSE...
To answer both of Y'all..
I do not want the government tracking me or my guns...
I do not trust them to do that.
I do think that if someone is stupid enough to bring a gun to a town hall meeting they should go to jail.
I follow the existing laws, but a crimanal does not. He or she should be punished under existing law.
New regulations serve to only punish the law abiding gun owners.
If the police were at my door I would not even think about pulling a gun.
And yes it does have a political side. IMO it would be political suicide to pass
a handgun ban in the USA...
Obama is smarter than that.
BT,
Whydon't you trust the govt. tracking your guns? How does that infringe upon your right to own a gun?
what about the rightwing terrorist who killed the kind meek doctor in a CHURCH of all places?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 10:05 AM)
what about the rightwing terrorist who killed the kind meek doctor in a CHURCH of all places?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
Because the right to own a car is not included in the BOR. If it were, we would be having the same arguments about licensing and all laws that govern the owning and operating of a vehicle.
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 10:16 AM)
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 10:05 AM)
what about the rightwing terrorist who killed the kind meek doctor in a CHURCH of all places?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
Because the right to own a car is not included in the BOR. If it were, we would be having the same arguments about licensing and all laws that govern the owning and operating of a vehicle.
who was the first one who made the "arms" argument as being a regular person?
when was the meaning hijacked?
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 10:18 AM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 10:16 AM)
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 10:05 AM)
what about the rightwing terrorist who killed the kind meek doctor in a CHURCH of all places?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
everybody's car is registered and all
why no outrage on that?
Because the right to own a car is not included in the BOR. If it were, we would be having the same arguments about licensing and all laws that govern the owning and operating of a vehicle.
who was the first one who made the "arms" argument as being a regular person?
when was the meaning hijacked?
Good question......I'm sure the answer is just a google away......I'll take a look when I have some time......
I used to say that I had changed my mind because of what Frenchy said
that "gun kooks" (my word) would end up being the ones to save America from the Bush's when they came to have martial law and all
but then there was the killing of that doctor,
no, those people with guns would kill me to protect their word, and will have no effect against any gov't takeover (which doesn't exist anyhow...
I believe in some conspiracies, but that is just nutsy...no one is looking to take anyones away, though they should.
that "gun kooks" (my word) would end up being the ones to save America from the Bush's when they came to have martial law and all
but then there was the killing of that doctor,
no, those people with guns would kill me to protect their word, and will have no effect against any gov't takeover (which doesn't exist anyhow...
I believe in some conspiracies, but that is just nutsy...no one is looking to take anyones away, though they should.
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 06:59 AM)
Kev,
Maybe additional laws will help to keep more guns out of the hands of criminals? People can pass background checks and can then sell guns to criminals.....I imagine there's lot of that going on....I imagine it's a thriving business.
"require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America." If i owned a gun, I would welcome these laws........if I was shot I would want to know the "gun's" history......including the name of the person who might have sold or given the gun to the person who shot me....or threatned to shoot me.....
Maybe additional laws will help to keep more guns out of the hands of criminals? People can pass background checks and can then sell guns to criminals.....I imagine there's lot of that going on....I imagine it's a thriving business.
"require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America." If i owned a gun, I would welcome these laws........if I was shot I would want to know the "gun's" history......including the name of the person who might have sold or given the gun to the person who shot me....or threatned to shoot me.....
The key word here is your first: maybe. Maybe more laws will do absolutely nothing to make the general public safer from the idiots who don't care about the laws to begin with. Maybe more laws just make it more restrictive for those who are already following the laws. You keep avoiding this point: those who posess and use guns illegally don't care about any more gun laws. 0+0=0.
Yes, straw man purchases are an issue but again, you're asking for more restriction on those who already follow the law. Now, if you advocated for tougher sanctions on those found doing straw man purchases then I would be hard pressed to argue against you. Here is a link to a short piece on Straw Man purchasing: http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opin...n-purchase-hype
As to your bolded comments: what's going to keep this database from expanding to rifles, shotguns, items in a garage sale .... etc, etc? You are arguing for more of what we already have. Why a private citizen must register a sale of a private item sold to another private citizen is allowing more government to intrude into private citizens private lives and dealings. The government gets my tax money. They don't need to be anymore involved in my personal life than that.
uhh, that's what i live in
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
QUOTE(gabriellemy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:22 PM)
uhh, that's what i live in
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
your country today is alot freer than the US is since 2001.
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 23 2009, 01:29 AM)
QUOTE(gabriellemy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:22 PM)
uhh, that's what i live in
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
they do require a practical test in addition to the written one?
who needs rainforests when you can have documents in triplicate?
your country today is alot freer than the US is since 2001.
can't say, haven't been to states
not in this one, though
you'll catch up
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 22 2009, 03:59 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 06:59 AM)
Kev,
Maybe additional laws will help to keep more guns out of the hands of criminals? People can pass background checks and can then sell guns to criminals.....I imagine there's lot of that going on....I imagine it's a thriving business.
"require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America." If i owned a gun, I would welcome these laws........if I was shot I would want to know the "gun's" history......including the name of the person who might have sold or given the gun to the person who shot me....or threatned to shoot me.....
Maybe additional laws will help to keep more guns out of the hands of criminals? People can pass background checks and can then sell guns to criminals.....I imagine there's lot of that going on....I imagine it's a thriving business.
"require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner's address in America." If i owned a gun, I would welcome these laws........if I was shot I would want to know the "gun's" history......including the name of the person who might have sold or given the gun to the person who shot me....or threatned to shoot me.....
The key word here is your first: maybe. Maybe more laws will do absolutely nothing to make the general public safer from the idiots who don't care about the laws to begin with. Maybe more laws just make it more restrictive for those who are already following the laws. You keep avoiding this point: those who posess and use guns illegally don't care about any more gun laws. 0+0=0.
Yes, straw man purchases are an issue but again, you're asking for more restriction on those who already follow the law. Now, if you advocated for tougher sanctions on those found doing straw man purchases then I would be hard pressed to argue against you. Here is a link to a short piece on Straw Man purchasing: http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opin...n-purchase-hype
As to your bolded comments: what's going to keep this database from expanding to rifles, shotguns, items in a garage sale .... etc, etc? You are arguing for more of what we already have. Why a private citizen must register a sale of a private item sold to another private citizen is allowing more government to intrude into private citizens private lives and dealings. The government gets my tax money. They don't need to be anymore involved in my personal life than that.
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
can I answer?
Getting cops to stop killing innocent black people.
the amount of dead people in the US by guns would decrease by what? 1000 a year? 10,000 a year?
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 02:36 PM)
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Amy,
Not trying to pick on you but seriously girl ... get your facts straight. Did you know that when you buy a handgun a background check is done including finger printing? Don't you think that with all the info you have to give to buy a handgun (any gun for that matter) that there isn't a database of original owners?????
As to the training aspect of things ... how much? What is going to satisfy you in terms training?
Why can't i sell my property to who I choose to sell it to? What if you sold your car to a guy who went out and promptly got shitfaced drunk and then killed a family in the process? Are you responsible for his behavior?
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
There is no one law that will bring down the homicide rate in this nation...other than banning handguns...that might wqrk over time but that's not going to happen...the SC said so.....
I believe all gun owners should have to be licensed...licensing should be contingent upon weapons' training.....all gun owners should have their personal stats in a national data base so that weapons used in crimes can be traced....no selling of weapons other than through a licensed dealer...if a gun is stolen it should be law that it has to be reported....the purpose of some gun laws is to keep track of who owns them..how many are owned by an individual.....who sells them and to whom they are sold....if a gun owner is on the "up and Up" then laws should be considered nothing more than an inconvenience.
That's my view.....if I were a gun(s)owner I would welcome these laws....but that's me.....obviously many disagree with me....
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:22 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
There is no one law that will bring down the homicide rate in this nation...other than banning handguns...that might wqrk over time but that's not going to happen...the SC said so.....
I believe all gun owners should have to be licensed...licensing should be contingent upon weapons' training.....all gun owners should have their personal stats in a national data base so that weapons used in crimes can be traced....no selling of weapons other than through a licensed dealer...if a gun is stolen it should be law that it has to be reported....the purpose of some gun laws is to keep track of who owns them..how many are owned by an individual.....who sells them and to whom they are sold....if a gun owner is on the "up and Up" then laws should be considered nothing more than an inconvenience.
That's my view.....if I were a gun(s)owner I would welcome these laws....but that's me.....obviously many disagree with me....
Understood. So how is it with Guns being banned in other countries...there are still criminals running around with guns there? Just wondering?
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 04:42 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
can I answer?
Getting cops to stop killing innocent black people.
the amount of dead people in the US by guns would decrease by what? 1000 a year? 10,000 a year?
Just in case you are interested in the facts...here ya go, http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive...n_control.shtml
I do agree, I too hope to never see an innocent person shot to death by a police officer...but I just don't think your statement is compelling to take away my right to bare arms to protect my innocent family against a black, blue, green or purple black guy.
Are you thinking we should pull weapons from the Police as well?
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 22 2009, 07:17 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 02:36 PM)
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Amy,
Not trying to pick on you but seriously girl ... get your facts straight. Did you know that when you buy a handgun a background check is done including finger printing? Don't you think that with all the info you have to give to buy a handgun (any gun for that matter) that there isn't a database of original owners?????
As to the training aspect of things ... how much? What is going to satisfy you in terms training?
Why can't i sell my property to who I choose to sell it to? What if you sold your car to a guy who went out and promptly got shitfaced drunk and then killed a family in the process? Are you responsible for his behavior?
Kev
I can't find any info that tells me fingerprinting is part of an instant background check in PA.....got something on that for me? Thanks!
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 08:42 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:22 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
There is no one law that will bring down the homicide rate in this nation...other than banning handguns...that might wqrk over time but that's not going to happen...the SC said so.....
I believe all gun owners should have to be licensed...licensing should be contingent upon weapons' training.....all gun owners should have their personal stats in a national data base so that weapons used in crimes can be traced....no selling of weapons other than through a licensed dealer...if a gun is stolen it should be law that it has to be reported....the purpose of some gun laws is to keep track of who owns them..how many are owned by an individual.....who sells them and to whom they are sold....if a gun owner is on the "up and Up" then laws should be considered nothing more than an inconvenience.
That's my view.....if I were a gun(s)owner I would welcome these laws....but that's me.....obviously many disagree with me....
Understood. So how is it with Guns being banned in other countries...there are still criminals running around with guns there? Just wondering?
Of course...there will alway be criminals running around with guns.....the objective is to significantly decrease the number of homicides....I've been looking up stats about homicide rates in nations that have banned handguns....I'm still gathering info....
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:00 PM)
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 22 2009, 07:17 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 02:36 PM)
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Amy,
Not trying to pick on you but seriously girl ... get your facts straight. Did you know that when you buy a handgun a background check is done including finger printing? Don't you think that with all the info you have to give to buy a handgun (any gun for that matter) that there isn't a database of original owners?????
As to the training aspect of things ... how much? What is going to satisfy you in terms training?
Why can't i sell my property to who I choose to sell it to? What if you sold your car to a guy who went out and promptly got shitfaced drunk and then killed a family in the process? Are you responsible for his behavior?
Kev
I can't find any info that tells me fingerprinting is part of an instant background check in PA.....got something on that for me? Thanks!
Fingerprints are not required for purchase...however, definitely required for concealed carry in most if not all states. Fingerprint checks will only hit on previous felons if they were printed in the first place and the prints were sent through IAFIS into the federal NCIC database...otherwise...you can print all day and get nothing. Name based checks coupled with prints is the most sound procedure.
As a side note, most criminal don't bother with the formalities...they just obtain the weapons from other bad guys.
That reminds me, isn't cocaine and marijuana illegal for general consumption....and how'd that prohibition on alcohol work out for us?
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Nov 22 2009, 04:42 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 04:03 PM)
QUOTE(Frenchy @ Nov 22 2009, 05:55 PM)
Show me amy, how your new restrictions will change anything, where the last 20,000 laws haven't!
Well Frenchy,
They're not "my laws".
.....but, maybe we need more info in a federal database to counteract all the laws that are not being rigorously enforced......if ya keep piling on new laws maybe something, eventually will work, bringing down the homocide rates in this nation. Of course I know you will completely disagree with my views.....but my views are harmless...the laws are harmless....people who should not have guns, having guns, can be lethal....a fact proven over and over again....Amy,
Interesting opinions. So if you were Queen for the day, please tell me what 1 law or maybe you need 2,000, that would need to be created and enforced which would immediately decline homocides?
can I answer?
Getting cops to stop killing innocent black people.
the amount of dead people in the US by guns would decrease by what? 1000 a year? 10,000 a year?
Graham,
There have been 11,000 plus alcohol/driving related fatalities this year...so in your opinion...what do we ban...the booze or the cars? Or both? http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html
A recent study by Healthgrades found that an average of 195,000 hospital deaths in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002 in the U.S. were due to potentially preventable medical errors. So...ban the Doctors?
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 09:08 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:00 PM)
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 22 2009, 07:17 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 02:36 PM)
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Amy,
Not trying to pick on you but seriously girl ... get your facts straight. Did you know that when you buy a handgun a background check is done including finger printing? Don't you think that with all the info you have to give to buy a handgun (any gun for that matter) that there isn't a database of original owners?????
As to the training aspect of things ... how much? What is going to satisfy you in terms training?
Why can't i sell my property to who I choose to sell it to? What if you sold your car to a guy who went out and promptly got shitfaced drunk and then killed a family in the process? Are you responsible for his behavior?
Kev
I can't find any info that tells me fingerprinting is part of an instant background check in PA.....got something on that for me? Thanks!
Fingerprints are not required for purchase...however, definitely required for concealed carry in most if not all states. Fingerprint checks will only hit on previous felons if they were printed in the first place and the prints were sent through IAFIS into the federal NCIC database...otherwise...you can print all day and get nothing. Name based checks coupled with prints is the most sound procedure.
As a side note, most criminal don't bother with the formalities...they just obtain the weapons from other bad guys.
That reminds me, isn't cocaine and marijuana illegal for general consumption....and how'd that prohibition on alcohol work out for us?
Alcohol prohibition was folly.....and bound to be repealed.....but there are still restrictions on alcohol purchase and consumption...age....drinking and driving, etc....
Because people can become the victims of drunken drivers every state has seen the common sense in enacting laws that punish drivers who drink and drive....can the laws prevent all alcohol related vehicular homicides? No. But the laws, along with public education can and have made a difference.
Because the laws do not eliminate crime does not mean they are not doing something to decrease handgun related deaths. When laws are strictly enforced concerning alcohol and driving, deaths have decreased. Laws are useless or ineffective if they're not enforced.
Cocaine really messes people up...marijuana....I wouldn't have a problem if it were made legal.....then it could be regulated....more laws, yes!
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 09:08 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:00 PM)
QUOTE(Kevwyo @ Nov 22 2009, 07:17 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 02:36 PM)
Well, I believe if people are following the law, then they have nothing to worry about. I don't see how these additional laws would restrict your right to own a handgun....you might be more inconvenienced.....fingerprinting, etc.
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
I don't believe anyone should be selling any type of gun at a garage sale......only through a licensed dealer....I also believe all gun owners should be licensed to own any type of gun and training should be a part of receiving that license....
Kev, I think it''s a good thing to have as much information as possible about who owns guns...records of transactions....I think that info should be in a federal data base......if a gun owner is law abiding then what's the concern?
Amy,
Not trying to pick on you but seriously girl ... get your facts straight. Did you know that when you buy a handgun a background check is done including finger printing? Don't you think that with all the info you have to give to buy a handgun (any gun for that matter) that there isn't a database of original owners?????
As to the training aspect of things ... how much? What is going to satisfy you in terms training?
Why can't i sell my property to who I choose to sell it to? What if you sold your car to a guy who went out and promptly got shitfaced drunk and then killed a family in the process? Are you responsible for his behavior?
Kev
I can't find any info that tells me fingerprinting is part of an instant background check in PA.....got something on that for me? Thanks!
Fingerprints are not required for purchase...however, definitely required for concealed carry in most if not all states. Fingerprint checks will only hit on previous felons if they were printed in the first place and the prints were sent through IAFIS into the federal NCIC database...otherwise...you can print all day and get nothing. Name based checks coupled with prints is the most sound procedure.
As a side note, most criminal don't bother with the formalities...they just obtain the weapons from other bad guys.
That reminds me, isn't cocaine and marijuana illegal for general consumption....and how'd that prohibition on alcohol work out for us?
Well of course felons don't "follow the rules"! But, cutting off some of their suppliers might make a difference....stats don't mean much if you're shot dead....one life saved because of strict handgun regulations is worth it....at least. in my mind....
The regulations are harmless to a law abiding gun owner....and they are not the target of gun laws....
So, what do you think is needed to decrease the handgun homicide rates in this nation?
[/quote]
Alcohol prohibition was folly.....and bound to be repealed.....but there are still restrictions on alcohol purchase and consumption...age....drinking and driving, etc....
Because people can become the victims of drunken drivers every state has seen the common sense in enacting laws that punish drivers who drink and drive....can the laws prevent all alcohol related vehicular homicides? No. But the laws, along with public education can and have made a difference.
Because the laws do not eliminate crime does not mean they are not doing something to decrease handgun related deaths. When laws are strictly enforced concerning alcohol and driving, deaths have decreased. Laws are useless or ineffective if they're not enforced.
Cocaine really messes people up...marijuana....I wouldn't have a problem if it were made legal.....then it could be regulated....more laws, yes!
[/quote]
There are restriction on weapons, use, age, etc etc. Same as alcohol.
Laws are useless or ineffective if they're not enforced...agreed. So let's enforce the law that prohibits bad guys from killing good guys. I'm down with that!!!
My question, so if a bad guy enters your home or vehicle or starts to approach you with the intent to kill you with a weapon...what exactly are you prepared to do? Debate him?
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 09:32 PM)
My question, so if a bad guy enters your home or vehicle or starts to approach you with the intent to kill you with a weapon...what exactly are you prepared to do? Debate him?
Well, while I was reaching for my legally owned handgun, one of two things could happen....he could shoot me before I had a chance to shoot him or threaten him......or he could run off.
If he felt threatened by my weapon, he might shoot when maybe he was just threatening....who knows....I would want to do something to try and save my life....I'm not sure having a gun in my car is the way....now, maybe people who carry guns in their cars could have a bumper sticker announcing that they will shoot, if necessary...think that might deter anyone from bothering you? If I did own a handgun for protection in my home I would have a sign posted on my door stating that I'm armed and will shoot to kill if necessary. Why not? The point is to deter a criminal from entering my home.....of course, a really good alarm system would be a deterrent....we have opted for that.....I don't want anyone getting to our bedrooms...doesn't do much good to have a gun for protection if you're sleeping and the person is in your bedroom...or your children's rooms...
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:50 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 09:32 PM)
My question, so if a bad guy enters your home or vehicle or starts to approach you with the intent to kill you with a weapon...what exactly are you prepared to do? Debate him?
Well, while I was reaching for my legally owned handgun, one of two things could happen....he could shoot me before I had a chance to shoot him or threaten him......or he could run off.
If he felt threatened by my weapon, he might shoot when maybe he was just threatening....who knows....I would want to do something to try and save my life....I'm not sure having a gun in my car is the way....now, maybe people who carry guns in their cars could have a bumper sticker announcing that they will shoot, if necessary...think that might deter anyone from bothering you? If I did own a handgun for protection in my home I would have a sign posted on my door stating that I'm armed and will shoot to kill if necessary. Why not? The point is to deter a criminal from entering my home.....of course, a really good alarm system would be a deterrent....we have opted for that.....I don't want anyone getting to our bedrooms...doesn't do much good to have a gun for protection if you're sleeping and the person is in your bedroom...or your children's rooms...
Glad you have a legally owned weapon--smart. I'd definitely recommend carry while outside your house, crime typically occurs outside the home. I'd sure hate to be weaponless when the armed gun man approaches me in the parking lot of your favorite mall or stopped at a traffic light. But that's me. I like to be prepared.
Im not so sure bad guys care about bumper stickers announcing any sort of potential blowback. Bad guys do understand a weapon pointed back at them.
House alarms are cool and everything, but how long do you think it takes for Brinks to call to confirm something is going on, then call 911, then the time it takes for response, then the time it takes for termination of threat.
I feel bad for the helpless victims of Chicago...no guns allowed, so they are forced to beg not to be shot. Not working out so well.
You'd be better off with an attack dog. Coupled with a nice Mossberg shot gun.
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 10:01 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:50 PM)
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 09:32 PM)
My question, so if a bad guy enters your home or vehicle or starts to approach you with the intent to kill you with a weapon...what exactly are you prepared to do? Debate him?
Well, while I was reaching for my legally owned handgun, one of two things could happen....he could shoot me before I had a chance to shoot him or threaten him......or he could run off.
If he felt threatened by my weapon, he might shoot when maybe he was just threatening....who knows....I would want to do something to try and save my life....I'm not sure having a gun in my car is the way....now, maybe people who carry guns in their cars could have a bumper sticker announcing that they will shoot, if necessary...think that might deter anyone from bothering you? If I did own a handgun for protection in my home I would have a sign posted on my door stating that I'm armed and will shoot to kill if necessary. Why not? The point is to deter a criminal from entering my home.....of course, a really good alarm system would be a deterrent....we have opted for that.....I don't want anyone getting to our bedrooms...doesn't do much good to have a gun for protection if you're sleeping and the person is in your bedroom...or your children's rooms...
Glad you have a legally owned weapon--smart. I'd definitely recommend carry while outside your house, crime typically occurs outside the home. I'd sure hate to be weaponless when the armed gun man approaches me in the parking lot of your favorite mall or stopped at a traffic light. But that's me. I like to be prepared.
Im not so sure bad guys care about bumper stickers announcing any sort of potential blowback. Bad guys do understand a weapon pointed back at them.
House alarms are cool and everything, but how long do you think it takes for Brinks to call to confirm something is going on, then call 911, then the time it takes for response, then the time it takes for termination of threat.
I feel bad for the helpless victims of Chicago...no guns allowed, so they are forced to beg not to be shot. Not working out so well.
You'd be better off with an attack dog. Coupled with a nice Mossberg shot gun.
No, we don't have a weapon in our home...not any gun, at least...we seriously thought about it...opted for a state of the art home alarm system....I was just presenting a "what if scenario" with the gun in the car.
I have a "panic button" on my car remote unit that I can use in or outside my car....when it goes off it sounds like the world is coming to an end....
You know, I have mixed emotions about gun ownership for our protection.....we really have seriously considered it....but we have a teen in the house and we were concerned about an accident.....
My father owned a handgun and got rid of it for the same reason...worried about an accident within our home. We do have a dog....he's not trained to attack but he sure sounds like it....
he scares everyone who doesn't know him...GRRR.....
Anyway....a couple of questions about using a gun for self defense.
A couple of days ago, a freshman student at one of our local colleges was accosted during the day as he was returning to his dorm. Two males tried to steal his money...he fought back....he was stabbed in the stomach...not sure yet whether a screwdriver or a knife was used...he was robbed of his cellphone...they fled...he went into his dorm...he's alright and out of the hospital. Now, if the student had a legally owned gun on him and if he shot those men before they stabbed him, would he be in legal trouble? What if he had killed one or both of them?
On the same day, a female student or a resident of the town,not sure, was accosted during the day by two males (they think the same two males, but not yet sure). They ripped her purse off her shoulder and ran. What if she had been carrying a weapon and shot them? Would she be in legal trouble? They didn't threaten her or harm her with a weapon.
Amy said...
No, we don't have a weapon in our home...not any gun, at least...we seriously thought about it...opted for a state of the art home alarm system....I was just presenting a "what if scenario" with the gun in the car.
I have a "panic button" on my car remote unit that I can use in or outside my car....when it goes off it sounds like the world is coming to an end....
You know, I have mixed emotions about gun ownership for our protection.....we really have seriously considered it....but we have a teen in the house and we were concerned about an accident.....
My father owned a handgun and got rid of it for the same reason...worried about an accident within our home. We do have a dog....he's not trained to attack but he sure sounds like it....
he scares everyone who doesn't know him...GRRR.....
Anyway....a couple of questions about using a gun for self defense.
A couple of days ago, a freshman student at one of our local colleges was accosted during the day as he was returning to his dorm. Two males tried to steal his money...he fought back....he was stabbed in the stomach...not sure yet whether a screwdriver or a knife was used...he was robbed of his cellphone...they fled...he went into his dorm...he's alright and out of the hospital. Now, if the student had a legally owned gun on him and if he shot those men before they stabbed him, would he be in legal trouble? What if he had killed one or both of them?
On the same day, a female student or a resident of the town,not sure, was accosted during the day by two males (they think the same two males, but not yet sure). They ripped her purse off her shoulder and ran. What if she had been carrying a weapon and shot them? Would she be in legal trouble? They didn't threaten her or harm her with a weapon.
Spaceman said...
Good call on the dog, barking helps alert you to the danger. I hope when he starts going wild, you have cell phone/panic button ready. I understand your mixed emotions. A teenager huh? I bet the teen is a smart and sensible young person. However, I understand the concern...and would recommend a nice safe with biometric reader... http://www.safetysafeguards.com/
I would need more details on your scenario's...but, I would think the first event would have been a clear cut case for engaging with weapon. The persons life was threatened, the bad guys had the intent, the capability, and the opportunity to kill him...and almost did. I would check state law and see what the statute's say.
In the second case, it would depend. Again, I'd check state law. But if the bad guy came running up, ripped purse off shoulder and then ran away...doubt she could blast him without some legal issues. Now if he was trying to rape her...or she felt her life was in danger, I'm sure she would have been justified.
Again, you'd need to check your state statutes on self-defense. They are usually fairly clear-cut. Here's mine:
TITLE 18
CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
CHAPTER 40
HOMICIDE
18-4009. JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE BY ANY PERSON. Homicide is also justifiable
when committed by any person in either of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property or person, against
one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a
felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent,
riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the
purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or
husband, parent, child, master, mistress or servant of such person, when there
is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some
great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished;
but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was
the assailant or engaged in mortal combat, must really and in good faith have
endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed;
or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to
apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any
riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
No, we don't have a weapon in our home...not any gun, at least...we seriously thought about it...opted for a state of the art home alarm system....I was just presenting a "what if scenario" with the gun in the car.
I have a "panic button" on my car remote unit that I can use in or outside my car....when it goes off it sounds like the world is coming to an end....
You know, I have mixed emotions about gun ownership for our protection.....we really have seriously considered it....but we have a teen in the house and we were concerned about an accident.....
My father owned a handgun and got rid of it for the same reason...worried about an accident within our home. We do have a dog....he's not trained to attack but he sure sounds like it....
he scares everyone who doesn't know him...GRRR.....
Anyway....a couple of questions about using a gun for self defense.
A couple of days ago, a freshman student at one of our local colleges was accosted during the day as he was returning to his dorm. Two males tried to steal his money...he fought back....he was stabbed in the stomach...not sure yet whether a screwdriver or a knife was used...he was robbed of his cellphone...they fled...he went into his dorm...he's alright and out of the hospital. Now, if the student had a legally owned gun on him and if he shot those men before they stabbed him, would he be in legal trouble? What if he had killed one or both of them?
On the same day, a female student or a resident of the town,not sure, was accosted during the day by two males (they think the same two males, but not yet sure). They ripped her purse off her shoulder and ran. What if she had been carrying a weapon and shot them? Would she be in legal trouble? They didn't threaten her or harm her with a weapon.
Spaceman said...
Good call on the dog, barking helps alert you to the danger. I hope when he starts going wild, you have cell phone/panic button ready. I understand your mixed emotions. A teenager huh? I bet the teen is a smart and sensible young person. However, I understand the concern...and would recommend a nice safe with biometric reader... http://www.safetysafeguards.com/
I would need more details on your scenario's...but, I would think the first event would have been a clear cut case for engaging with weapon. The persons life was threatened, the bad guys had the intent, the capability, and the opportunity to kill him...and almost did. I would check state law and see what the statute's say.
In the second case, it would depend. Again, I'd check state law. But if the bad guy came running up, ripped purse off shoulder and then ran away...doubt she could blast him without some legal issues. Now if he was trying to rape her...or she felt her life was in danger, I'm sure she would have been justified.
Again, you'd need to check your state statutes on self-defense. They are usually fairly clear-cut. Here's mine:
TITLE 18
CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
CHAPTER 40
HOMICIDE
18-4009. JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE BY ANY PERSON. Homicide is also justifiable
when committed by any person in either of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property or person, against
one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a
felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent,
riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the
purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or
husband, parent, child, master, mistress or servant of such person, when there
is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some
great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished;
but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was
the assailant or engaged in mortal combat, must really and in good faith have
endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed;
or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to
apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any
riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
QUOTE(IDASpaceman @ Nov 22 2009, 06:08 PM)
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 22 2009, 07:00 PM)
Kev
I can't find any info that tells me fingerprinting is part of an instant background check in PA.....got something on that for me? Thanks!
Fingerprints are not required for purchase...however, definitely required for concealed carry in most if not all states. Fingerprint checks will only hit on previous felons if they were printed in the first place and the prints were sent through IAFIS into the federal NCIC database...otherwise...you can print all day and get nothing. Name based checks coupled with prints is the most sound procedure.
As a side note, most criminal don't bother with the formalities...they just obtain the weapons from other bad guys.
Amy and IDA,
I misspoke. I can't say what is done in PA as I've never been there and have no clue on their gun buying SOP's. However, here in Oregon they take a thumb print when you buy a weapon. They took all 8 finger prints and 2 thumb prints when I got my CHL.
Amy ... please note the bolded in IDA's quote above.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.