Federal Gun Owner License

[BobTheCoward]

No, you're right. Its an even more important declaration of your rights.

Without it, your founding fathers would never have had the chance to "form a more perfect Union". They would not have been able to "establish Justice" nor "ensure domestic Tranquility". There would have been no opportunity for them to "provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty"

In short, without the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America could never have been established.

It has zero bearing on any US law or right.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

It has zero bearing on any US law or right.

Not exactly true...

Preamble to the United States Constitution

when interpreting a legal document, courts are usually interested in understanding the document as its authors did and their motivations for creating it;[10] as a result, the courts have cited the Preamble for evidence of the history, intent and meaning of the Constitution as it was understood by the Founders.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

How do we keep them out of the hands of criminals? Nothing we have tried seems to work.

I don't think letting anyone a have gun if they want one counts as 'things we have tried that don't work'.

 

[Elind]

Probably this has been said, but WTF is going on when all GOP senator vote against a bill to prevent "No Fly" names from buying assault weapons (and the little ones); never mind that if they can't buy them there they can just go to a gun show and pick up a few with a few thousand rounds without this stupid pretence.

Any NRA fanatics reading this?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Not exactly true...

Preamble to the United States Constitution

You are referring to the Constitution. Smartcooky was very clear in the post that he or she was still referencing the essential nature of the declaration of Independence for interpreting the Constitution.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Despite these trends, most U.S. adults think gun crimes have increased. In our 2013 survey, more than half (56%) of Americans said the number of gun crimes had gone up compared with 20 years ago. Another 26% said the number of gun crimes had remained the same,

Were they wrong, or is it just a matter of how you define a 'gun crime'?

US Gun Violence Trends

Nearly 12,000 Americans are murdered with guns every year — a rate more than 20 times higher than that of other developed countries. Although the violent crime rate has generally decreased over the past 15 years, the gun murder rate in the U.S. has hardly changed and the number of non-fatal shootings has actually increased...

We haven’t reduced gun violence in America — we just got better at treating it.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

You are referring to the Constitution. Smartcooky was very clear in the post that he or she was still referencing the essential nature of the declaration of Independence for interpreting the Constitution.

Smartcooky quoted from the Preamble so I showed how courts have been influenced by it. This is relevant because the Preamble was influenced by the Declaration of Independence. However if you want a more direct reference,

INFLUENCE OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

For nearly two centuries the Supreme Court has invoked the Declaration of Independence. Much of that time, it has used the Declaration to define the meaning of racial equality.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Probably this has been said, but WTF is going on when all GOP senator vote against a bill to prevent "No Fly" names from buying assault weapons (and the little ones)

Ask these guys,

The NSSF claims that the hunting and shooting industries contribute $33 billion to the U.S. economy each year. (Meanwhile, the Pacific Institute of Research and Evaluation estimates the annual economic costs of gun violence at $174 billion.)

In addition to PR campaigns emphasizing the economic and environmental impact of their industry, they’ve also extolled the merits of hunting and shooting as a family and youth activity. Their Families Afield program aims to eliminate state minimum age requirements so that parents can take even young children hunting, which they say is “one of the safest recreational activities enjoyed by families in the United States.”

 

[BobTheCoward]

Smartcooky quoted from the Preamble so I showed how courts have been influenced by it. This is relevant because the Preamble was influenced by the Declaration of Independence. However if you want a more direct reference,

INFLUENCE OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

You left out the part where it isn't used as a legal document.

Indeed, it technically has no legal effect. But that has not stopped American presidents and civil rights leaders from invoking it throughout our history - and what the Declaration lacks in legal force, it makes up in persuasive force

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Probably this has been said, but WTF is going on when all GOP senator vote against a bill to prevent "No Fly" names from buying assault weapons (and the little ones); never mind that if they can't buy them there they can just go to a gun show and pick up a few with a few thousand rounds without this stupid pretence.

Any NRA fanatics reading this?

I don't think I'm an NRA fanatic, but...

...my concern would be whether due process is involved on getting placed on that "no fly" list in the first place.

 

[HenryLee]

I don't think letting anyone a have gun if they want one counts as 'things we have tried that don't work'.

Anyone? Not any of these people...

The Gun Control Act (GCA) makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms. 18 USC 922(g). Transfers of firearms to any such prohibited persons are also unlawful. 18 USC 922(d).

These categories include any person:

•Under indictment or information in any court for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;


•convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;


•who is a fugitive from justice;


•who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;


•who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;


•who is an illegal alien;


•who has been discharged from the military under dishonorable conditions;


•who has renounced his or her United States citizenship;


•who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or


•who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (enacted by the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 104-208, effective September 30, 1996). 18 USC 922(g) and .

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/identify-prohibited-persons

 

[HenryLee]

Probably this has been said, but WTF is going on when all GOP senator vote against a bill to prevent "No Fly" names from buying assault weapons (and the little ones); never mind that if they can't buy them there they can just go to a gun show and pick up a few with a few thousand rounds without this stupid pretence.

Any NRA fanatics reading this?

You want to prevent people on the No Fly/Terrorist Watchlist from purchasing firearms? Indict them. Can't indict them because they've committed no crime? Rats. Stupid due process. Stupid free country.


ETA...y'know who's also not a big fan of the No Fly list? Them commies at the ACLU. They're also the ones(with the AMA) opposed to mental health reporting requirements in the NICS background check system, a law that passed with NRA support. Gah. Why can't life be more black and white?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Please show us where the US Constitution gives citizens the right to drive a vehicle or own a home. I must have missed that the last time I read it.

Isn't there a clause about "such other things not specifically prohibited"?

 

[bruto]

No, you're right. Its an even more important declaration of your rights.

Without it, your founding fathers would never have had the chance to "form a more perfect Union". They would not have been able to "establish Justice" nor "ensure domestic Tranquility". There would have been no opportunity for them to "provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty"

In short, without the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America could never have been established.

All that may be true, but A is not B. The Constitution is what it is for reasons of its own, and not what it came from. I almost never agree with Bob the Coward, but in this small area, I believe he has a point. You need to be careful when you cite authorities as fundamental as this one.

In any case, a habit of some of the most conservative folks around here, which I castigate often, is that of never just admitting when they're just plain wrong. What's the problem in just saying "oops, my mistake?"

 

[paulhutch]

In short, without the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America could never have been established.

That's false, this is a true version of the sentence.

In short, without a declaration of independence, the Constitution of the United States of America could never have been established.

See the difference, it's a very important one for US law. BobTheCoward is correct it can not be used to overturn or modify any US laws.

 

[Cleon]

Ten years ago, liberals were decrying (correctly) the no-fly list as secretive and devoid of due process, and suddenly it's a great way to keep people from buying guns.

And on the flip side, conservatives were calling liberals paranoid and soft on terrorism (or worse), and suddenly they're all concerned about due process and civil liberties.

Gawd bless America.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The 2nd is only pertinent as long is it is interpreted "correctly".

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

No, you're right. Its an even more important declaration of your rights.

Without it, your founding fathers would never have had the chance to "form a more perfect Union". They would not have been able to "establish Justice" nor "ensure domestic Tranquility". There would have been no opportunity for them to "provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty"

In short, without the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America could never have been established.

Functionally, the DoI is a revolutionary manifesto. It does not have presence within the body of law. End of hostilities with the King was the end of DoI relevance to government.

 

[Chuck Guiteau]

I posted this on another thread, but it appears that this one would be more appropriate.

Here's a thought: Let's direct our efforts toward the people who commit most of those violent crimes. To use the OP's analogy, let's stop coming up with new methods of lancing the buboes and start working on a cure for the plague.
I know this goes against the grain for the committed leftists here, but think about it for a moment.

A very small percentage of our society is responsible for a large percentage of the violence. It may not be PC, but it makes sense to direct our efforts here, and not against the public at large.
Dr. Keith, in another thread, mentioned that he wanted to hear more about my ideas on licensing so here it goes:
A national carry permit, issued by the State, but administered and coordinated through NCIC. Anyone who wants to purchase or carry a firearm has only to apply for it as a shall issue permit.

When purchasing a firearm, it must be presented (a "swipe", just like a credit card)by both seller and purchaser. The only thing the card would do is approve or deny. This could be accomplished in real time, just like a credit card. If you are legally entitled, and you get arrested(or whatever) for a crime which would otherwise prohibit you from the purchase/transfer, then your permission is denied until an adjudication is rendered. After that it, is re-instated or permanently denied pending the results.

This attacks the people who are illegally carrying/possessing/transferring firearms, but has no net effect on law abiding citizens.

You wouldn't even need to have a desire to own a firearm, the permit itself could serve as an excellent identity document (much as a drivers license).
Card readers could easily be installed at police stations, court houses and other government buildings, gun stores, sporting goods stores or even at those dastardly guns shows.
The police could easily equip their cars with readers, possibly using the same technology they use today for DL checks, wants & warrants, and insurance verification. This gives them a real tool to weed out the bad guys. If they pull over a valid permit holder, he's soon sent on his way. If they pull over an unlawful possession, he gets taken off the street on the spot.

Next, we could start enforcing the laws we already have. The Brady Act comes to mind. Every felon who has attempted to buy a firearm has violated a Federal law that carries a prison sentence with it, but the BATF and the AG spend more time coming up with excuses for their failure to enforce the law than they do in actually attempting to prosecute these offenders.

There are other things we could do to address the problem at its roots, such as re-assessing our views toward drug possession (which seems to be working quite well in many of those European countries).

Note that this license has nothing to do with registration of firearms themselves, it is a verification of the individuals right to carry/possess.
Also note that it would operate in real time. If the bank can do this with my credit card, I can think of no reason the government can't do it with my CCP.

 

[Beady]

Probably this has been said, but WTF is going on when all GOP senator vote against a bill to prevent "No Fly" names from buying assault weapons (and the little ones); never mind that if they can't buy them there they can just go to a gun show and pick up a few with a few thousand rounds without this stupid pretence.

Any NRA fanatics reading this?

I'm an anti-NRA gun owner. The argument used is that gun ownership is a constitutionally - enumerated right. As such, it can only be denied to convicted felons who have not had their rights restored by court ordered. Inclusion on a no-fly list does not rise to this level.

Oh crap!