Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's funny. You may claim to not be an anti gun nut, but they would not kick you out of one of their meetings.
Those requirements are Ludicrous, and no one 9s going to abide by them. Also no way to enforce them.
Tell me, How does Registration save a life? Can you answer that question? Bet you can't.
Those are very similar standards to what Japan uses, though less stringent. Tell me about how Japan has such an out-of-control gun problem.
How does registration save a life? Really? Registration can save lives by deterring people from committing the crimes in the first place as there is a record of them having the firearm in question. It makes it easier to trace said firearm as well, meaning illegal sales become less likely because you can trace them back to where the gun originated. And when you couple registration with other measures like the one I mentioned, yes, it can save lives.
The Constitution was written in a time that automatic guns weren't being tossed around to every assinine person. The Constitution was signed in the year 1787. No automatics even existed! Here were the original "arms" we had a right to bear: https://www.collegehillarsenal.com/s...87-Product.jpg
(Wow, what a wooden device of mass destruction.. so threating that pop gun is..)
This isn't 1787 anymore.
Different time all together.
Get with the times, America.
Except that concepts such as rapid fire (for then) and exchangeable magazines did exist at the time. The knowledge of such devices predates the Constitution by about 50-60 years.
Further, before one says it would only be in military hands, keep in mind that merchant ships of the time often had cannons, to say nothing of the concept of the Privateer back then.
From its inception in 1993 until it was abolished in 2012, Canada's long gun registry did not help to solve a single crime. It did however, waste $2 billion in government funds that could have been used to pay for any number or methods to effectively reduce crime - like hiring more police officers, for example.
Help me understand something.....does the 2nd forbid liability insurance requirements for gun owners? Does it guarantee cheap guns and ammo? Does it allow for individuals to have a tank in their driveway? Rocket launchers? Drones? Does it define a militia as individuals? Just asking. I really don't think the writers of the 2nd got into that much detail. They could not have imagined.
Help me understand something.....does the 2nd forbid liability insurance requirements for gun owners? Does it guarantee cheap guns and ammo? Does it allow for individuals to have a tank in their driveway? Rocket launchers? Drones? Does it define a militia as individuals? Just asking. I really don't think the writers of the 2nd got into that much detail. They could not have imagined.
In answer to part of your question, there is that wording "shall not be infringed". When one starts saying things like liability insurance or placing heavy taxes on guns and ammo (to address the "cheap guns and ammo"), then one is treading into the area of infringed.
Further, when one gets into requiring one part of the population but not the rest to do something, such as through money, then it is falling on the 14th amendment.
Now, if one wants to require the whole country to pay for liability insurance, that may be legal.
Help me understand something.....does the 2nd forbid liability insurance requirements for gun owners? Does it guarantee cheap guns and ammo? Does it allow for individuals to have a tank in their driveway? Rocket launchers? Drones? Does it define a militia as individuals? Just asking. I really don't think the writers of the 2nd got into that much detail. They could not have imagined.
I don't think they could have imagined that they would have had to get into that much detail. Reading the Constitution is simple and straight forward. However, many people decide to read it however they feel like it. Whether it is correct or not.
There are plenty of examples of people using firearms as a means of protection.
So anyone thinking taking all firearms away is a good idea is an idealist in my opinion.
But we don't need to be owning AK47s, assault automatic rifles, and the like. I'm all for public workers such as teachers for example to have permits to both carry/hold and fire a weapon safely.
If someone's crazy bent on ending a bunch of people's lives in some massacre, give others the means to help and end their life quickly.
Another thing too.. these people that do this should be utterly publically shamed continuously ..
Like this Holmes guy.. absolute trash to society.. the lowest of low.. and all others like him..
It takes a piece of trash to do something like he did. I don't care what type of mental diagnosis people are ascribing the blame to. He's the one that pulled the trigger.
Society has to stop coddling these people making them famous. The man's name should be erased and he should know it.
Making him pay a bunch of money he doesn't have and the families will never get? absolute stupidity
First of all, we have learned not to trust the government when it comes to registries, such as the machine gun registry. While it is legally true that one can buy a machine gun after certain procedures, one can only buy a machine gun that was built around 1986 or before. Why? Because during the Reagan administration, the registry was closed to permit no more machine guns entered.
It may not have been the original intention of the registry but that is what came about. Good faith is wonderful if we were talking about something like a God that once things were agreed on, would never be changed......but one must remember that the government, any government, is made of people and even if the people who made it do not change the agreement, there is nothing to say that the next won't.
Secondly, when it comes to cars, do keep in mind that as a nation, we do register them but we don't register them nationally. We register them locally and that provides a heap of money for each state. Of course, here we are talking about guns and not cars, but should it ever be in the argument that "it's just like registering cars", I suspect one will quickly find a lot of resistance from the states because of that tax money lost....even if it wasn't there in the first place.
Now, on another point, say the registry is flawless; will a person be able to have more than one gun at a time? The basic point is that one gun does not fit all missions. I love my H&K USP because it is the excellent replacement when one is without a rifle. Thing is, to conceal it, one needs to be wearing a field jacket. So I got the Kimber 1911. It's great and with its single stack, easier on my hands....but it's like a Formula 1 racing car in that it needs to be finely tuned to perform. So my gun merchant set me up with a Sig P239, which, so far, seems to work as needed. In fact, it will probably be my gun of choice to put in the ranch house's ready lockers because it shares the same caliber with the Uzi carbine. The Uzi, got to love it for it may be heavy, primitive in the night sights, a bulky (by modern polymer standards) beast, but despite where it is, it will still fire.
Etc, etc, etc.
WHO SAYS TEN ROUNDS IS MORE THAN ENOUGH TO PROTECT YOURSELF?
One of the things that the ammo shortage has forced me to do is to buy the range's ammo. It is a simple logistical issue for I know they will always have a supply.
Before the ammo shortage, years ago, however, I would shop around, find places to buy my ammo cheaper, cut down on my training costs. I could go into my range where I have a membership, shoot for an hour or two, pay my $2.00 for targets, and be done. These days, though, using their ammo, runs about $30 per pistol visit. Rifle ammo is too expensive to go that route so I supply my own.
There are at least three problems with closely controlled ammunition by the government. First of all, as illustrated above, it increases the financial burden on the individual for someone to practice. Secondly, should the government decide it is going to curtail the amount of available ammo for whatever reason, what recourse does the individual have? Finally, it could be very easily used as a way to circumvent the 2nd amendment by limiting the supplies, either directly or by making them so difficult to obtain through procedure that it is no longer worth it.
1. Machines guns...really? No one needs a machine gun. Sure, the government could ban all guns I suppose that were made after the registry, but they sort of had a point about banning machine guns. When the guy who invented the machine gun was working on it he didn't think to himself "this would be great for hunting and shooting sports!" That guy designed it to be capable of firing a lot of lead really fast downrange to stop people. Join the armed forces if you NEED a machine gun.
2. Yes, cars aren't registered nationally. However I can ask a state to pull registry information about a car from said state. When I need dispatch to get me car information, they can usually get it for me. National gun registry or not, I think that we can think of a way to make it work. Yes, using the car example wasn't the best comparison. However, it is something that people can get their heads around.
3. Yes, you can have more than one gun. A registry doesn't limit you to one gun. You can buy all the guns you want, they would only need to be registered. Just like cars. Again, cars aren't the best example, but it's something that everyone can understand. I need a pickup for my contractor work, and a small car to commute in to save fuel.
4. As for limiting bullets...The idea of only allowing 10 rounds annually is a poor one. There is no doubt that for those of us that carry on a daily basis need to be able to practice. I shoot around 30-100 rounds per range session. I think that ammo sales should be tracked, not limited. This way when the police need to determine how to assess a suspect, they can see how much ammunition said suspect could be sitting on.
The 2nd amendment isn't going anywhere and it doesn't say "you can have guns that Big Brother doesn't know about". Making a national gun registry isn't going to magically ban all future guns. The 2nd amendment is around to make sure of that.
The issue is that both side of the issues can't get together and negotiate like adults on this issue. It's either "nerr nerr you can't control my guns i need them all!" vs "Guns are evil and we need to ban them all!". Let's get real and find a middle ground. Yes, Obama probably would like to ban all guns in his ideal country, but he is at least smart enough to know that there is an amendment that was founded on solid grounds to protect that right. He is only wanting to get a couple rules together that will benefit all gun and non gun owners.
........4. As for limiting bullets...The idea of only allowing 10 rounds annually is a poor one. There is no doubt that for those of us that carry on a daily basis need to be able to practice. I shoot around 30-100 rounds per range session. I think that ammo sales should be tracked, not limited. This way when the police need to determine how to assess a suspect, they can see how much ammunition said suspect could be sitting on........
As I have noted before, in the heyday of ammo surplus, week's practice was 250 rounds pistol and 100 rounds rifle. As I noted before, in high school JROTC, we shot 40-50 rounds a day, 4 days a week during the school year.
So who is to say what is too much to have on hand?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Wow, what a wooden device of mass destruction.. so threating that pop gun is..) 
