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.
Someone can still be busted for being in possession of a stollen gun without registration. When someone reports the gun stollen they include the serial number. Also, most people are not arrested because they only have a stollen gun, they are arrested because they committed a crime with a gun or are on probation and cannot have any gun.
The gun registration scheme is so poorly inacted in states like California that the registration roles cannot even be used as evidence to get a warrant.
So write a better law. As it stands if someone stole my shotgun, if I don't have the serial number the law assumes he is the valid owner. Many don't bother to keep copies of their serial numbers. (foolish I know)I do. My gun shop guy clued me in on this a long time ago.
How many people know the serial number of their car, motorcycle, bike? Cars we do because of vehicle registration.
Because past laws are poorly written doesn't mean that future laws can't be better.
There is a gun lobby behind the US congress pushing for guns. American consumers should protest and riot until there is a ban.
Oh the irony. Funny how leftists try to come at us with the BS of getting rid of guns will make society safer, yet are the first to advocate rioting and violence when they don't get their way! So, which is it? Fortunately most Americans don't drink the kool aid that leftists are trying to serve up when it comes to their gun grabbing agenda!
End the plea bargaining, and insanity pleas, and age limits for violent crimes, and it would all come to a close.
Liberals wont allow that, protecting their criminal children.
End the plea bargaining, and insanity pleas, and age limits for violent crimes, and it would all come to a close.
Liberals wont allow that, protecting their criminal children.
I'd suggest decriminalizing drugs. A)Less people in prison for possession. B)Less people that are not really violent by nature knocking over Grandmas for her purse. C)More room to put away violent offenders for longer sentences.
Where did I say free? I didn't. But, every law abiding citizen who is not a known felon has the right and the freedom to own them. Furthermore, this POS legislation that this crackpot is trying to initiate only harms poor people in having the means to protect their property if necessary! And finally, I'm not interested in compromising my individual rights and liberties nor the rights and liberties of others, because you and others have a fear of what MIGHT happen!
So guns can cost money, that doesn't violate any rights? So how much can a gun cost before it violates a right?
I also see you skipped over the no questions asked part, which I am guessing you agree with me that there should be limitations there and you don't want to mention it because it goes against what you are saying in this post.
So guns can cost money, that doesn't violate any rights? So how much can a gun cost before it violates a right?
I also see you skipped over the no questions asked part, which I am guessing you agree with me that there should be limitations there and you don't want to mention it because it goes against what you are saying in this post.
Adding a $100.00 tax is quite excessive, and nothing more than a loophole to suit the gun grabber agenda. That really is what it comes down to. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig! And no, I don't agree with you, or stand with you on adding limitations.
I dont think you know what the words draconian or radical mean. You know that over 25% of guns recovered in Chicago for example were declared lost or stolen, so you see how tracking guns is beneficial to the rule of law, clearly there are irresponsible gun owners who keep misplacing their guns or most likely selling their guns and declaring them stolen.
true, there are irresponsible gun owners, however guns can already be tracked to the previous or initial owner of the gun, so why does there have to be another law made?
Quote:
How much were guns when the constitution was written? If I was a betting man I would say several times what one gun cost now, the right to cheap guns is not in the constitution I doubt $100 tax will break most people, passive tracking devices seems like a compromise to me, the fact that its passive means that it can only be read when someone has the gun or is in close proximity to the gun, so all the conspiracy theories about the goverment trying to track gun owners can go out the window, How would you feel about fingerprint gun locks being mandatory just as a side question.
actually the cost of guns back when the constitution was written was in about the same proportion to wages as today. as for the $100 tax breaking most people, probably true, however it would discourage many from making the purchase of a firearm. which then furthers the gun grabbers goals of eliminating guns from this countries law abiding citizens.
as for the passive tracking and gun locks, bugger off, especially since they are unenforceable laws to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boneyard1962
So write a better law. As it stands if someone stole my shotgun, if I don't have the serial number the law assumes he is the valid owner. Many don't bother to keep copies of their serial numbers. (foolish I know)I do. My gun shop guy clued me in on this a long time ago.
How many people know the serial number of their car, motorcycle, bike? Cars we do because of vehicle registration.
Because past laws are poorly written doesn't mean that future laws can't be better.
again, guns can already be tracked, even long guns, to the original purchaser of said firearm, so why do we need more laws?
End the plea bargaining, and insanity pleas, and age limits for violent crimes, and it would all come to a close.
Liberals wont allow that, protecting their criminal children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
I'd suggest decriminalizing drugs. A)Less people in prison for possession. B)Less people that are not really violent by nature knocking over Grandmas for her purse. C)More room to put away violent offenders for longer sentences.
Reps and valid points for both of you. Yes we really do need to rethink our stance on the war on drugs, and how we treat users. Honestly, I say make them all legal, and take the black market out of it. Then, if one commits a violent crime when trying to get their fix, there are no excuses!
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.
So, which is it? Fortunately most Americans don't drink the kool aid that leftists are trying to serve up when it comes to their gun grabbing agenda!
Yes we really do need to rethink our stance on the war on drugs, and how we treat users. Honestly, I say make them all legal, and take the black market out of it. Then, if one commits a violent crime when trying to get their fix, there are no excuses!