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.
reading the posts. the complete blindness to why someone would want or need a firearm, is numbing.
i can only put it this way, unless u have seen a loved one gang raped or a family or friend beaten to death, the answer to "why would anybody would want a firearm" will continue to be an utter mystery to u.
That scenario aside, why anyone would penalizing states for their proximity to Mexico is absurd. This is not merel a gun issue, but a regulation designed by the federal government to treat equal states unequally.
Liberals cannot grasp that concept, or even discuss it because of their hatred of firearms.
A while back I had a thread about our present administration not letting up on their attempt to control gun ownership and sales "under the radar". Here is an example of them doing it right out in the open. I don't know what this judge's politics were before she was appointed but I bet I can guess.
reading the posts. the complete blindness to why someone would want or need a firearm, is numbing.
i can only put it this way, unless u have seen a loved one gang raped or a family or friend beaten to death, the answer to "why would anybody would want a firearm" will continue to be an utter mystery to u.
Getting shot at before tends to make you a believer too. Been there, done that. But wait...that's not all. Anyone ever left Pizza Hut and had an armed robbery twenty minutes later? SOB...that was a close one. How about a scrap yard that broke out in heavy gunfire not ten minutes of leaving! SOB...that one was even closer. Someone is looking out for me! My luck may just run out someday! "It won't happen to me!" Bullshipwreck!!
That form 4473 I fill out is close enough to "registration" already, and it sure hasn't prevented me from buying whatever I've wanted. And gun sales over the past three years have been very good.
Where are you seeing the sales drop as a result of Obama policy?
This was a banner year for guns -- 2011 is set to smash the record for gun sales. The record for a single year was set just last year, when the FBI reported that 14,409,616 background checks were requested. In 2011 that figure will top 16 million.
I've purchased three handguns at one time, all on the same 4473. The dealer told me that would trigger FBI/ATF interest in me. That was 3-1/2 years ago and they've never come knocking on my door. Holder doesn't scare me, either. And he shouldn't. I'm no criminal.
Stop being such a big scaredy-cat.
I really wish more gun owners would take this stance. I honestly don't understand why so many supposedly law abiding citizens are so afraid of a few cautionary restrictions/registration requirements.
Again I don't understand the need to own so many guns. But then again I don't understand why my fiancee has so many bottle of shampoo in our shower. Just because I don't understand something doesn't mean I want people arrested.
If wade owns a ton of guns but sees no problem in filling out registration for them and uses the appropriate amount of responsibility and precaution to ensure that he keeps track of all of them and ensures they never fall into another person's possession. Than all the power to him!
I honestly mean that. I know many probably think that I want all gun owners arrested but that is farrrrrr from the case.
Adding a few reasonable and intelligent restrictions to the second amendment does not automatically mean we are on the way toward outlawing the second amendment entirely just adding a few intelligent and reasonable restrictions on the first amendment has not led to its demise nor restricted anyone free speech in any REAL way. Yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater is not free speech, and people realize this. Just as being forced to register weapons and keep track of your weapons should not be viewed as restricting the second amendment in any real way.
I think a lot of gun owners would be surprised by how many non gun owning liberals would come out and support them if the second amendment was ever actually threatened in an actual way.
A lot of people keep saying that if we make more restrictions and make it harder for criminal to get from gun stores that they'll find other ways. Through illegal shipments from other countires, etc.
I don't doubt it. I don't doubt it at all! Criminals will always have guns!
Why is it such a bad idea to try and make harder for them to acquire them though? Sure some people will still get guns illegally, but considering how high the price of an illegal gun already is, imagine how high it will rise when all illegal guns have to be illegally shipped into the country. Criminals will still get their guns but it will be A LOT harder and the number of criminals who will be able to afford them will shrink considerably.
It's easy to say criminals will get their guns no matter what. But the fact of the matter is in Philadelphia the majority of guns that are used to commit murder where purchased right here in this country, "legally", in the state of florida.
Those who keep talking about eric holder like straw purchases didn't exist before him are kidding themselves. Straw purchased guns have been ravaging my city for decades.
Even if we can just reduce the amount of criminals who get their hands on guns by 15% wouldn't it be worth the extra regulations?
A little extra paperwork? The legal requirement to report a stolen gun? The legal requirement to re-register your gun and prove you still own it after a couple of years.
We're not talking about restricting the 2nd amendment. We're talking about spending a few extra minutes filling out paper work and an errand that needs to be run every few years.
I imagine it won't be fun. I imagine it will be run as efficiently and will be as annoying as any other bureaucratic nightmares like renewing your driver's license or filing for a permit. You will dread doing it. But in the end it will hardly take up any of your time and as long as you're not a criminal, it will no way restrict your ability to own firearms.
Wouldn't a little extra headache be worth reducing the amount of criminals who can own guns by even the slightest bit? Wouldn't it be worth it if even just a few people were not killed by criminals who shouldn't have been able to own a gun?
Anyone who is against such a reasonable law is a fool. Really? You have a problem that a gun store is supposed to report a person who is buying multiple high powered rifles? REALLY?
"Shall not be infringed"
Please read the US Constitution, Amendment 2.
The Bible prohibits me from calling anyone a fool. The temptation is strong sometimes...
I live in one of the four border states and all it means is I have to waste more fuel to get what I want. I will still buy whatever I want and I won't report it. The cartels can just as easily get their weapons directly from such places as China, Romania, and many countries in South America, and probably at a reduced cost. Fast and Furious was nothing more than a end around play against 2nd ammendment rights and this administration will try it again. First our second ammendment rights, and then one by one, all of our rights will be taken away... Whether or not you support the gun ownership, it is at the cornerstone of protecting all of your rights... When you give one up, others will follow.
I live in one of the four border states and all it means is I have to waste more fuel to get what I want. I will still buy whatever I want and I won't report it. The cartels can just as easily get their weapons directly from such places as China, Romania, and many countries in South America, and probably at a reduced cost. Fast and Furious was nothing more than a end around play against 2nd ammendment rights and this administration will try it again. First our second ammendment rights, and then one by one, all of our rights will be taken away... Whether or not you support the gun ownership, it is at the cornerstone of protecting all of your rights... When you give one up, others will follow.
I simply do not agree with this logic. If small restrictions were placed on the second amendment, the logical conclusion is not necessarily that eventually it and all other amendments would be abolished.
If that were the case any other changes to the bill of rights would result in the eventual crumbling of our rights. if a small change to the second amendment would destroy our constitution, then logically so would a small change to the first. The fact is that changes have been made to the bill of rights though. Court cases have repeatedly refined them.
If someone yells "fire!" in a crowded theater they can be arrested and would be in pretty big trouble. Why? Well when people do this people rush to exit the building and sometimes people get trampled to death. Thus we as a people have decided that this is a reasonable restriction. Giving up the right to yell fire in a crowded theater in no way harms the ability of free speech in any real or useful way. Yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is NOT a fire is just dangerous and serves no purpose.
This restriction is part of the clear and present danger test that was enacted as part of a supreme court case all the way back in the time of world war one. 100 years later and we still have the freedom of speech today along with all of our other rights. Requiring registration, waiting periods, etc does not directly infringe upon your second amendment rights. You are in no way restricted in your ability to bear arms, you simply have to go through a process that ensure that only law abiding citizens can acquire them.
If you disagree with gun restrictions that is your business. But you should only disagree with them based on their own merit. you should not disagree with any restrictions just because you fear future restrictions. One restriction does not automatically lead to stricter restrictions. As the clear and danger test shows, we are more than capable of slightly restricting an amendment in the interest of public safety and then going over a century without any further restrictions. In fact over the past century we have actually moved sort of backwards as the clear and present danger test restricts less speech today than it did when it was first created.
My bottom line. Small and reasonable restrictions to the second amendment are just that. Small and reasonable restrictions. They in no way signal a greater erosion of rights. We are very much able to restrict the second amendment in reasonable ways while at the same time ensuring its long term protection.
Wow. Lots of posts but hardly any substance or education. Allow me:
1. ID is REQUIRED when buying a firearm. When they do your background check, they report height, weight, eye and hair color, and I believe they have to take your ID/DL number.
2. Form 4473 is a long legalese form with questions that you have to check "yes" or "no" to.
Example: "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" "Do use drugs recreationally" etc.
3. My local gun store owner says that 1 in 10 firearm sales are denied. This means that it actually does work. (He then proceeded to joke that I might be the first of the year. lol.)
4. The kind of rifle you can buy in 95% of gun stores is not an assault rifle. Assault rifles are military-grade, select-fire capable firearms (allow you to switch from semi to fully automatic or burst). The gun stores that you can buy those weapons from are very few and far between, and they get in RIDICULOUS amounts of trouble if any firearms go missing (all of those rifles and sales of those rifles are monitored closely. The ATF can do inspections on gun stores.)
5. AR-15 DOES NOT STAND FOR "ASSAULT RIFLE". The "AR" in AR15 stands for "ArmaLite", the company who originally made them. Unfortunately, even quite a few gun owners don't know this and it makes them look... stupid.
6. Machine guns, short barreled rifles (barrel length less than 16" with a muzzle brake), suppressors, destructive devices, short barreled shotguns, and "AOW" (any other weapon class, these are sort of hard to define) and their sales are monitored VERY CLOSELY by the ATF. To purchase these items, one must go to a Class 3/SOT dealer. They are VERY few in comparison to pawn shops, gun stores, hell, even Wal-Mart used to sell hunting rifles and shotguns. Anyways, there is a $200 tax that must be paid upon purchasing these things. The stamp can ONLY be issued by the ATF. To acquire these weapons, one must also have ridiculous amounts of money. The cheapest fully automatic firearms sell for between $2500 and $3500, and that's just the STARTING price. Things like fully automatic M16s cost well in excess of $10,000. Many of these firearms are NOT purchasable by ordinary people- if it was made pre-1986, you can buy it if you have enough money. If it was made post-1986, it is a DEALER SAMPLE and you cannot own it unless you hve a Class 3 dealer license, and you can't have this license unless your occupation is to sell guns. You can't "have it just to have it."
In addition, many of these things require a signature from your chief law enforcement officer in your area. There is a heirarchy- chief of police, county sheriff, US marshals, all the way up to the attorney general. If none of them approve the purchase of a Class 3 item, you ARE NOT GETTING IT. In addition, if your municipality has outlawed possession of them, YOU ARE NOT GETTING IT.
Lastly, these firearms/accessories require ATF approval. There are inspectors for the ATF in every state. The form for your purchase/tax stamp for the item you're trying to buy must cross their desk. If they do not approve, YOU ARE NOT GETTING IT. But wait, there's more! Approval doesn't take place same-day. Or same-week. Or even same-month. The current wait time for approval is something like 16 weeks. So now you're out several thousand dollars and you STILL may not be able to take the firearm home, even after 12 weeks of waiting.
These items ARE registered with the government. You also need to fill out a separate form for every time you plan on transporting these items out of your state of residence. Wait time for that is around a month, and you may not be approved.
7. Many places will ask for photo ID when buying ammunition. The place where it is most easily attainable, Wal-Mart, requires verification that you are 18 (for rifle ammunition) and 21 (for "pistol" ammunition). Gun store owners/operators have to be very cautious due to the nature of what they're selling- unless you are a regular, expect for them to be "checking you out."
Firearms bans have banned certain firearms or firearm parts for pretty much no reason. Old "Assault Weapon Ban" features that weren't allowed were things like collapsible stocks, pistol grips, "high capacity" magazines, and "barrel shrouds." These features in and of themselves do nothing to make a firearm more concealable or deadly. A pistol grip is more ergonomic. A collapsible/telescoping stock is adjustable for the person firing the gun (this can cause a lot of pain for whoever is firing the gun, as a sidenote. Too short of a stock and the recoil will make your shoulder black and blue.) "High Capacity" magazines are only labeled that way because people want you to be afraid of them. Most semi-automatic rifles CAME with 20 or 30 round magazines when they were manufactured. They aren't an aftermarket accessory. All the AWB of 1994 did was make firearms and accessories that were banned MORE VALUABLE, because most of it was "grandfathered" in. News flash: there are magazines with capacities greater than 30 rounds. They're just ridiculously expensive. And bulky. And a total pain in the ASS to load.
-There is no such thing as an assault clip, no matter what the Brady Campaign wants you to think. "Clips" are "stripper clips", and are not actual magazines- they just hold 10 rounds or so in a strip to make magazine loading more easy.
- Barrel shrouds are not common items on firearms that aren't Class 3 related, as per my earlier post. Barrel shrouds "partially or completely encircle a barrel to prevent a user from burning their hands." This is only a necessary feature on machine guns, not semi-automatic copies. Handguards and accessory rails do not accomplish this function, as they 1.) throw off accuracy and 2.) heat up with repeated firing.
There ya go. I consider myself slightly more educated than the average Joe, I own firearms, and when I purchased them, I bought them just because I could and because I wanted to.
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.
But wait...that's not all. Anyone ever left Pizza Hut and had an armed robbery twenty minutes later? SOB...that was a close one. How about a scrap yard that broke out in heavy gunfire not ten minutes of leaving! SOB...that one was even closer. Someone is looking out for me! My luck may just run out someday! "It won't happen to me!" Bullshipwreck!!
