The NRA is a fricken database of gun owners. If the government wants your guns they'll just cease the NRA membership database.
GL, just a note, not every NRA member owns guns. The vast majority do. My father bought us three kids lifetime memberships in the NRA when we were little. Of the three of us, I own all the guns, my younger sister would consider it, and my oldest sister is quite anti-gun. (but I'm thinking that comes from working in a hospital and seeing all the damage they can do)
Your point is vaild though.
Your point is vaild though.
<< The latest study showed that in 1998, 1,020 of the nation's 83,272 licensed gun dealers and pawnbrokers were each the source of at least 10 guns later traced to crimes, and 132 dealers were linked to 50 or more such guns. Not all the guns were sold directly by the suspect dealers -- some were apparently lost or stolen and some passed through multiple hands before they were used in crimes. >>
Link
This shows that certain specific dealers are resonsible for a large portion of guns being used illegaly.... this is a real tangible problem... that registration of guns would assist... take for example a "law abidding" citzen who sells guns he buys legally... illegaly... I don't think anyone would argue that he shouldn't be arrested, and that these are criminal acts. Well gun registration would provide the means of catching these individuals. And it seems that according to the above these incidents are a significant reality.
I am totally against gun confiscation... but I am for responsibile gun registration, and gun safety classes in order to own a gun.
-Max
Demon-Xanth
Lifer
- Feb 15, 2000
- 20,551
- 2
- 81
HardcoreRobot
Lifer
- Nov 7, 2000
- 16,403
- 3
- 81
<< It is my constitutional right and I am a law-abiding citizen. >>
True, the right to bear arms is in the Constitution, however there is nothing that says the Constitution can't be wrong. And, its clear the Constitution has been wrong (look at all the amendments - voting and slavery issues etc.), is wrong, and will continue to have faults. Personally, I dont feel the government has any right to tell you what you personally (as in effects only you) can or can not do (ie own a gun or smoke dope etc). Additonally, it is blatantly clear that gun control would only hamper the lives of law-abiding citizens and have no impact whatsoever on criminal activity. The only type of gun control that would have that type of effect would be the complete and total ban of firearms. Although, you can be damn certain that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Just my 2 cents - enjoy
If I was a gun owner that believed in all the things the NRA believes in, I'd never ever ever become a member. You're undermining everything you believe in. If NRA records get seized they have your name, address, credit card/bank chequing acct, possible family members (whom you bought memberships for when they were young). It's a gun owners nightmare for that database to be compromised.
Any form of gun registration has the potential to lead to confiscation, no matter who "owns" the database. Ever heard of a court order? As soon as the "database" is assembled and safely stored away the anti-gun lobby will head to federal court to have it made public. I guarantee they will find some judge somewhere that will do it.
California is already confiscating guns under their registration law.
A law abiding citizen registered his SKS semi-auto. It is a semi-auto rifle that the owner used for hunting and target shooting. It wasn't on the original list of weapons outlawed in California. The California AG, seeing that this gun "resembled" others on the banned list simply added it to the list, no hearings pro or con, no chance for the owner to appeal. To keep from being branded as a criminal the owner turned the gun in.
#1. Where was the judiscial or legislative review of the AG's actions?
#2. Antbody else uncomfortable giving one bureacrat that much arbitrary power?
#3. If you think this won't happen on a federal scale you are either incredibly naive or just plain stupid. Please don't have children.
California is already confiscating guns under their registration law.
A law abiding citizen registered his SKS semi-auto. It is a semi-auto rifle that the owner used for hunting and target shooting. It wasn't on the original list of weapons outlawed in California. The California AG, seeing that this gun "resembled" others on the banned list simply added it to the list, no hearings pro or con, no chance for the owner to appeal. To keep from being branded as a criminal the owner turned the gun in.
#1. Where was the judiscial or legislative review of the AG's actions?
#2. Antbody else uncomfortable giving one bureacrat that much arbitrary power?
#3. If you think this won't happen on a federal scale you are either incredibly naive or just plain stupid. Please don't have children.
Doboji,
Currently it's legal for me to sell a gun at a gun show that I no longer want/need (ie: Bought a rifle for wild game hunting in Africa, not going to africa again). If I sell said gun to a person at a gun show, and they sell it to a criminal unknowingly, am I to blame? Furthermore, how would the police contacting me help solve the crime committed with it? I can tell them, "Oh yeah, I sold that one to some guy at a gun show, I think he had a beard.", but they won't be any closer to finding the person who committed the crime (if say, he left the weapon at the scene). I can see where maybe a handful of cases are solved due to the database existing, but I don't think any agency could justify funding it for such a small impact. Except the government that is.
I had no idea that the numbers for legally purchased guns used in crimes were that high. It'd be interesting to see them with the numbers for stolen guns taken out
Currently it's legal for me to sell a gun at a gun show that I no longer want/need (ie: Bought a rifle for wild game hunting in Africa, not going to africa again). If I sell said gun to a person at a gun show, and they sell it to a criminal unknowingly, am I to blame? Furthermore, how would the police contacting me help solve the crime committed with it? I can tell them, "Oh yeah, I sold that one to some guy at a gun show, I think he had a beard.", but they won't be any closer to finding the person who committed the crime (if say, he left the weapon at the scene). I can see where maybe a handful of cases are solved due to the database existing, but I don't think any agency could justify funding it for such a small impact. Except the government that is.
I had no idea that the numbers for legally purchased guns used in crimes were that high. It'd be interesting to see them with the numbers for stolen guns taken out
I think the selling of guns at gunshows shouldnt be so easy... Background checks are a must at gunshows. I know it's nice to be able to just go out and buy the items that is your hobby... and I appreciate that... however the impact that a firearm is capable of must be assesed in regard to the hobby. While it's convenient and easy for law abidding gun owners... it's also easy for non-law abidding citzens to get guns. This is a problem... and I believe that the same precautions should be exercised at a gunshow that are exercised when buying a gun anywhere else.
I mean think about it... we say... guns are dangerous... and we should be careful not to sell guns to people who shouldn't have them... Psychopaths, Felons... you know... so we're gonna have the following gun regulations.... except at gun shows...there any American Psychopath or felon.... law abidding citzen or not..... can buy a gun, and we cannot know who they are... where they're from.... c'mmon even you guys have to admit thats a little... stupid?
-Max
I mean think about it... we say... guns are dangerous... and we should be careful not to sell guns to people who shouldn't have them... Psychopaths, Felons... you know... so we're gonna have the following gun regulations.... except at gun shows...there any American Psychopath or felon.... law abidding citzen or not..... can buy a gun, and we cannot know who they are... where they're from.... c'mmon even you guys have to admit thats a little... stupid?
-Max
<< I think the selling of guns at gunshows shouldnt be so easy... Background checks are a must at gunshows. >>
It's not a question of where a gun is sold - it matters by whom, as in dealer vs. private sales. A dealer is both required and authorized to perform a background check on potential buyers (at a gun show or not - I've bought from licensed dealers at shows, and a background check was performed each time), but I can imagine lots of people would have significant privacy concerns if anyone could call up the local law enforcement authorities, give your name as a 'potential gun buyer', and find out private information about your background (including whether you've had mental health treatment, for example.)
<< it's also easy for non-law abidding citzens to get guns. This is a problem... and I believe that the same precautions should be exercised at a gunshow that are exercised when buying a gun anywhere else. >>
Yes, it will continue to be relatively easy for criminals to get guns, as it is easy for them to get drugs, etc., and yes, this is a problem. But nothing you've offered so far really addresses this issue in an effective way. And as others have pointed out on many occasions, licensed dealers operate under the same rules at gun shows as they do at their primary place of business.
<< but I can imagine lots of people would have significant privacy concerns if anyone could call up the local law enforcement authorities, give your name as a 'potential gun buyer', and find out private information about your background (including whether you've had mental health treatment, for example. >>
Ummm so we feel that we should respect the buyers right to not have people know that he is a psychopath?... thats stupid... there are ways to address privacy concerns without eliminating the check itself...
for example... the gun dealer need not know the intricacies of the background checks result... he only needs a yes or no answer...
-Max
<<True, the right to bear arms is in the Constitution, however there is nothing that says the Constitution can't be wrong. And, its clear the Constitution has been wrong (look at all the amendments - voting and slavery issues etc.), is wrong, and will continue to have faults. Personally, I dont feel the government has any right to tell you what you personally (as in effects only you) can or can not do (ie own a gun or smoke dope etc). Additonally, it is blatantly clear that gun control would only hamper the lives of law-abiding citizens and have no impact whatsoever on criminal activity. The only type of gun control that would have that type of effect would be the complete and total ban of firearms. Although, you can be damn certain that isn't going to happen anytime soon.>>
There were NEVER any laws that ALLOWED slavery and banned voting. These amendments merely made sure that it was deemed unconstitutional to prohibit one from exercizing these rights. The constitution does state that I have a RIGHT to bear arms.
There were NEVER any laws that ALLOWED slavery and banned voting. These amendments merely made sure that it was deemed unconstitutional to prohibit one from exercizing these rights. The constitution does state that I have a RIGHT to bear arms.
It's clear that some people can't do anything but parrot, "Register guns! Guns bad! Awk! Awk!", but can't understand why government can't be trusted. They just say, "You're paranoid. That could never happen here."
Yeah, right.
Check out the site of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and especially read the articles about how Gun Control is a prelude to GENOCIDE that will explain why any THINKING person would be extremely leary of any gun registration scheme.
Remember, OUR GOVERNMENT rounded up Japanese-AMERICANS in the wake of Pearl Harbor and shipped them to internment camps for four years. They lost their homes and businesses and were treated as enemies of the state.
If you think that it can't happen again, you're kidding yourself. Look at the demonization of tobacco, SUVs, guns, fatty foods, etc. (all LEGAL products) to see that the pattern is the same: Government "declares war" on some social issue, propagandizes against it and whips up public opposition to whatever, then it moves against the target while the crowd cheers.
They executed Tim McVeigh last week and for his part in the plot to blast OKC. Only a fool or someone willing to be duped believes that McVeigh acted alone. Why did the government rush to execute him? When the FBI documents popped up, why didn't they say they'd wait to find out the truth? Was it because the government knows something and didn't want to risk McVeigh spouting off? If so, does that mean there are more bombers walking among us WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S BLESSING? What if "bringing closure" closes the door on the TRUTH?
Whenever someone wants you to support a cause, you should always ask yourself, "What's in it for THEM? Why do they want me to support this?" The people were starting to shake their addiction to government control in 1995 and then BLAM!!!, OKC happened and people fell back into the herd and forgot any ideas of reducing the size and scope of governmental influence. Pretty convenient, eh?
I'm not saying that the government blew it up, but there were reports that people tried to warn the govt. of an attack, but no one took notice. Why not? Incompetance or because it benefitted those in power? Think about it.
Yeah, right.
Check out the site of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and especially read the articles about how Gun Control is a prelude to GENOCIDE that will explain why any THINKING person would be extremely leary of any gun registration scheme.
Remember, OUR GOVERNMENT rounded up Japanese-AMERICANS in the wake of Pearl Harbor and shipped them to internment camps for four years. They lost their homes and businesses and were treated as enemies of the state.
If you think that it can't happen again, you're kidding yourself. Look at the demonization of tobacco, SUVs, guns, fatty foods, etc. (all LEGAL products) to see that the pattern is the same: Government "declares war" on some social issue, propagandizes against it and whips up public opposition to whatever, then it moves against the target while the crowd cheers.
They executed Tim McVeigh last week and for his part in the plot to blast OKC. Only a fool or someone willing to be duped believes that McVeigh acted alone. Why did the government rush to execute him? When the FBI documents popped up, why didn't they say they'd wait to find out the truth? Was it because the government knows something and didn't want to risk McVeigh spouting off? If so, does that mean there are more bombers walking among us WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S BLESSING? What if "bringing closure" closes the door on the TRUTH?
Whenever someone wants you to support a cause, you should always ask yourself, "What's in it for THEM? Why do they want me to support this?" The people were starting to shake their addiction to government control in 1995 and then BLAM!!!, OKC happened and people fell back into the herd and forgot any ideas of reducing the size and scope of governmental influence. Pretty convenient, eh?
I'm not saying that the government blew it up, but there were reports that people tried to warn the govt. of an attack, but no one took notice. Why not? Incompetance or because it benefitted those in power? Think about it.
What if the NRA is a tool of the government to get all conscientous gun owners to register in a database with sensitive information knowing full-well these people wouldn't do so with a government organization? Conspiracy theories abound!
defref..... I have some very disturbing information for you....
It was I who killed JFK! From the Grassy gnoll
-Max
It was I who killed JFK! From the Grassy gnoll
-Max
I have no real issues with registering my guns. In fact, some of mine already are. For me, it makes them traceable. Am I using these to commit any crimes? No. I know where they are at all times since they are locked and secured and I have the key on me at all times. Second, if they would be stolen and recovered, I actually have a chance at getting them back. My guns have more value as sentimental items than mere tools they are. Personally I would like to see better traceability from the factories themselves.
With more companies in the world adopting ISO standards and tracebility, this will probably soon go out of the government's hands and into the manufacturers' hands as they need the traceability to comply with their own self imposed standards. I don't see gun manufacturers going to this tomorrow or even next year but within this decade.
To the person who brought up the scenario of the private gun sale at a gun show, yes the police as closer. They should have a description of the person you sold it to. Maybe even a name or alias. While it isn't a grandslam, every little bit helps sometimes.
Personally, I rather see ammo become the hard to get item rather than the guns themselves. It doesn't interfere with the collectors but does make it harder/more expensive to shoot. If you know what you are doing, loading your own shells should not be an issue. Kinda like fly fishing. "If you don't have the patience to tie the flies yourself, you really don't have the patience to fly fish well." To quote many people's grandfathers, mine included.
With more companies in the world adopting ISO standards and tracebility, this will probably soon go out of the government's hands and into the manufacturers' hands as they need the traceability to comply with their own self imposed standards. I don't see gun manufacturers going to this tomorrow or even next year but within this decade.
To the person who brought up the scenario of the private gun sale at a gun show, yes the police as closer. They should have a description of the person you sold it to. Maybe even a name or alias. While it isn't a grandslam, every little bit helps sometimes.
Personally, I rather see ammo become the hard to get item rather than the guns themselves. It doesn't interfere with the collectors but does make it harder/more expensive to shoot. If you know what you are doing, loading your own shells should not be an issue. Kinda like fly fishing. "If you don't have the patience to tie the flies yourself, you really don't have the patience to fly fish well." To quote many people's grandfathers, mine included.
Yep...this is the usual response. "Yer a crazy, whacko, militia nut!"
Of course, the same people who refuse to study history and attack those who mention it are the same ones who complain about Product Activation and spyware for the control it'll have over their lives. Kind of ironic.
Sorry I mentioned it.
Of course, the same people who refuse to study history and attack those who mention it are the same ones who complain about Product Activation and spyware for the control it'll have over their lives. Kind of ironic.
Sorry I mentioned it.
Right to bear ARMS.
Does arms refer to guns? I would think so. They existed when those words were first drafted.
But I'm curious how revelant they will be in a few centuries when guns become obsolete. Surely they will be obsolete some day. Will the word ARMS then refer to something that didn't exist back when the Constitution was drafted. Will ARMS include phasors or whatever the future standard weapon is.
Just curious.
Does arms refer to guns? I would think so. They existed when those words were first drafted.
But I'm curious how revelant they will be in a few centuries when guns become obsolete. Surely they will be obsolete some day. Will the word ARMS then refer to something that didn't exist back when the Constitution was drafted. Will ARMS include phasors or whatever the future standard weapon is.
Just curious.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,382
- 19,648
- 146
<< Often times legal guns fall into the hands of criminals... it is important for investigators to discover how and from whom this is happening to prevent this slippage.
<< It is my constitutional right and I am a law-abiding citizen. >>
I wholeheartedly agree... it is most certainly your right and mine to own a gun... but nowhere in the constitution does it say anything against registration of guns. I understand why people would be opposed to the government owning the database of guns because of confiscation fears. But being able to trace guns used illegally is extremely beneficial.... we're not even talking about tracing guns on a regular basis... we're talking about ONLY tracing weapons that have been used illegaly!...
How can you possibly argue against this...
Let me reiterate so that you can understand clearly:
A mandatory registration of all firearms with the NRA... which is under a lock and key so that no government agency can get the database. Allowing law enforcement agencies to do Gun traces on guns used illegaly.
How on earth can you see this as non-beneficial?
-Max >>
Max, has car registration stopped car theft or use of stolen cars in crimes? No. It's only purpose is the taxation of cars on a continuing basis with the registration used to take money from people with legal, registered cars..
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,382
- 19,648
- 146
<< Right to bear ARMS.
Does arms refer to guns? I would think so. They existed when those words were first drafted.
But I'm curious how revelant they will be in a few centuries when guns become obsolete. Surely they will be obsolete some day. Will the word ARMS then refer to something that didn't exist back when the Constitution was drafted. Will ARMS include phasors or whatever the future standard weapon is.
Just curious. >>
"Arms" refers to standard issue infantry weapons so as to keep an armed miltia made up of the whole people. Both then and now, long guns and side arms are standard issue infantry weapons.
<< has car registration stopped car theft or use of stolen cars in crimes? No. It's only purpose is the taxation of cars on a continuing basis with the registration used to take money from people with legal, registered cars.. >>
Registering your car also makes sure it adheres to all safety regulations which saves millions of lives every years, it allows for the reporting of aggressive driving... and the reporting of millions of automobile assisted crime every year. So obviously the only purpose is not to collect taxes....
-Max
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter