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.
(3) regulations providing for effective receipt and secure storage of firearms relinquished by or seized from persons described in subsection (d)(8) or (g)(8) of section 922.
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
Liberals don't care about the law. They want rule by man.
They are going to disregard any law they don't like.
Considering in the past the OP has boasted about having a child illegally carry a concealed weapon from the age of 16 it's laughable for people to defend this nonsense with talk about caring for the law.
HINT: The term 'law abiding' DOES NOT mean only living within the laws one likes.
I'll note he has also stated in the past:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
At the beginning... it was law, everyone had to grow pot.
while providing nothing to support that statement so excuse me if I don't take his 'interpretations' of law as being based on anything other than personal opinion.
Considering in the past the OP has boasted about having a child illegally carry a concealed weapon from the age of 16 it's laughable for people to defend this nonsense with talk about caring for the law.
HINT: The term 'law abiding' DOES NOT mean only living within the laws one likes.
US 18 -926, reinforces the constitutional right's only restraint. Shall not be infringed. Upheld by the Supreme Court, before 18-926 was established.
Unconstitutional laws....
Using the Bill of Rights as your guide, what was illegal about a person keeping arms?
What age is a person, a person?
You can only try to deny a person their endowed rights to life & liberty.
Your readings of the law reminds me of an old hit: Twist and Shout!
Read me the 2nd amendment...
Show me the age requirement, clause?
Show me the denial of a person to keep & bear when told by government requirement, clause?
Show me the mentally sane, requirement clause?
Show me the non-felon, requirement clause?
Show me the shall infringe when we want, clause?
Show me the registration requirement clause?
To insure that the FFL dealer does not violate 18 U.S. Code § 922 part D, a background check is necessary.
From your own links:
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) is a fugitive from justice;
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26)));
(6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;
(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and
(B)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector who pursuant to subsection (b) of section 925 of this chapter is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925 of this chapter.
If you want your FFL dealer to stay in business, he needs you to accept the background check. Live with it. I am a Libertarian. It's just part of the process so we can have firearms dealers.
To insure that the FFL dealer does not violate 18 U.S. Code § 922 part D, a background check is necessary.
From your own links:
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) is a fugitive from justice;
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26)));
(6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;
(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and
(B)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector who pursuant to subsection (b) of section 925 of this chapter is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925 of this chapter.
If you want your FFL dealer to stay in business, he needs you to accept the background check. Live with it. I am a Libertarian. It's just part of the process so we can have firearms dealers.
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
Same reason you don't have to give a police officer your name or ID, when asked. To do so would be a 4th amendment violation.
The courts would have to publish a list of those under indictment, to the public daily and by the minute. Not the other way around. Government approved dealers(Unconstitutional) would have to have government send, signature required a list of all people under indictment.
926 forbids the logging of information, Period. In order to do a background check. Information is logged.
The Supreme Court ruled, it violates the 4th amendment, in the process and denied people their rights.
Again, 926, sentence 3.) just reinforces what the Supreme Court already ruled, before it was composed. Done so there was no confusion.
The last part of 926 - ""Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.""
Is 922.
Firearms were sold by anyone and everyone, not just government authorized dealers.
If you want your FFL dealer to stay in business, he needs you to accept the background check. Live with it. I am a Libertarian. It's just part of the process so we can have firearms dealers.
I take it, government has turned what was a persons liberty under the Bill of Rights, into a privilege granted by the MASTERS.
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
Same reason you don't have to give a police officer your name or ID, when asked. To do so would be a 4th amendment violation.
The courts would have to publish a list of those under indictment, to the public daily and by the minute. Not the other way around.
926 forbids the logging of information, Period. In order to do a background check. Information is logged.
The Supreme Court ruled, it violates the 4th amendment, in the process and denied people their rights.
Again, 926, sentence 3.) just reinforces what the Supreme Court already ruled, before it was composed. Done so there was no confusion.
The last part of 926 - ""Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.""
Is 922.
Firearms were sold by anyone and everyone, not just government authorized dealers.
Your legal record is not your background check. A background check reviews your legal record.
The storage of your legal record is not covered under these provisions.
The background check is to protect the FFL dealer from them being prosecuted under 922 d. The Federal and State governments are barred from keeping a record of your background checks under 926. They are not barred from keeping a record of your legal acts and deeds. The individual dealer CAN keep a record of your background checks as long as the state laws do not bar them from keeping the record.
926 (3) basically says: There can be no state or federal registry of firearms owners.
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.
