• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A hypothetical gun control proposal

thaiboxerken said:
Thanks! These are the weapons we should be banning. I'm glad you cleared that up.
Click to expand...
And this ban would do what? They do not go away when banned. Even if they did go away, other guns would take their place.

Ranb
 
R.Mackey said:
I'm not entirely or even substantially against your proposal, but I shudder to think of how it would actually look in implementation.
Click to expand...

It would look something like the licensing in Australia which works fine and is stricter than what was proposed above.

R.Mackey said:
In order to avoid it becoming an "undue burden" and thus survive Constitutional challenge, safety education and verification would have to be either incredibly expensive at cost to the State, or it would be so dumbed down as to be worse than useless, as we have here.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, the user should pay. Or does the state pay for your driving lessons over there.

On a related note, I remember our gun buyback scheme in the 00s. I was speaking with a business in the USA (can't remember which state but it was a southern one). The person I was speaking to had been told along with everyone else at an NRA meeting or rally that, US Navy Seals were going door-to-door in Australia rounding up everyones guns.


Dave Everett
 
deverett said:
It would look something like the licensing in Australia which works fine and is stricter than what was proposed above.
Click to expand...

I'm quite amused by the many people claiming Australia is a good model for the US. No, it's not. I'm not in favor of an Australia-style solution. They can do what they think is right for them.

deverett said:
Nonsense, the user should pay. Or does the state pay for your driving lessons over there.
Click to expand...

Un-Constitutional. Thank you for playing.

deverett said:
On a related note, I remember our gun buyback scheme in the 00s. I was speaking with a business in the USA (can't remember which state but it was a southern one). The person I was speaking to had been told along with everyone else at an NRA meeting or rally that, US Navy Seals were going door-to-door in Australia rounding up everyones guns.
Click to expand...

There is no cause so righteous that one cannot find an idiot following it. :D
 
LTC8K6 said:
No one but a law abiding citizen is going to register a firearm.
Click to expand...

Why not?

It's not as if anyone is going to get the serial number from the weapon while they're using it in a robbery, so it won't increase the risk of them being caught.

And if they risk jail time for having an unregistered weapon, it'd be in their best interests to have the weapon registered. That way if the police search their home, they don't automatically go to jail.

It'd be in their best interest to register the weapon, unless they intend to use the weapon then dispose of it (such as for a murder).

But if you require both the buyer and the seller to report the transaction, it'd be more difficult for someone to purchase a weapon without their being any record of their ownership.

LTC8K6 said:
It's not going to track anything but legal gun transactions, which are already tracked.

In state private transfers of handguns already require a permit in my state, and this has been the case for a long time. This includes any transfer, even a gift, or an inheritance. I don't think it's done a thing except make law abiding citizens give the state an extra $5 each time.
Click to expand...

So you already have a defacto gun register in your state. Not every state has that.

LTC8K6 said:
Just to be clear....To buy a Glock I have to go to my Sheriff and give him $5 and a form and ask for a handgun permit. The Sheriff does a check on me to see if there's anything in my background that prevents me from owning a handgun. This takes a few days.

I then go and retrieve my permit, and take it to the shop where I want to buy a handgun. Without this permit, they generally will not even take a handgun out of the display case for you.

I still have to fill out the 4473 and have the federal background check done.

So I have now had 2 government checks done on me before I can purchase a handgun.

If you have gone to the trouble to get a concealed carry permit, it serves as the handgun permit.

How many other layers do we need? What criminal is going to make it past these checks? What criminal is even going to bother?
Click to expand...

It seems that my proposal would actually simplify the process a little. You wouldn't have to go to the Sheriff to get a permit or have a federal background check done (it would already have been done to get the license). You'd just be able to walk into the gun store, buy the gun (giving the store owner your license details), and fill out a gun registration form at the counter, which you could mail in on the way home..

(Whether or not you could take the gun home the same day depends on whether there's a mandatory cooling off period.)

LTC8K6 said:
I am not registering any of my firearms, period. I have gone through enough hoops to own them as far as I am concerned. The gov't knows all there is to know about me already. My firearms have never killed anything. I have served in the military. I have nothing on my record except a single speeding ticket.

Registration would be the last straw, imo.

I will personally destroy all of my firearms before I register them, or otherwise take whatever action I can to avoid registration. I am frankly pretty tired of the whole idea of being dictated to over the acts of criminals and psychopaths
Click to expand...

But if gun sales are tracked in your state, aren't they effectively registered already? (Unless you purchased them out of state.)
 
Brian-M said:
Why not?

It's not as if anyone is going to get the serial number from the weapon while they're using it in a robbery, so it won't increase the risk of them being caught.

And if they risk jail time for having an unregistered weapon, it'd be in their best interests to have the weapon registered. That way if the police search their home, they don't automatically go to jail.

It'd be in their best interest to register the weapon, unless they intend to use the weapon then dispose of it (such as for a murder).

But if you require both the buyer and the seller to report the transaction, it'd be more difficult for someone to purchase a weapon without their being any record of their ownership.



So you already have a defacto gun register in your state. Not every state has that.



It seems that my proposal would actually simplify the process a little. You wouldn't have to go to the Sheriff to get a permit or have a federal background check done (it would already have been done to get the license). You'd just be able to walk into the gun store, buy the gun (giving the store owner your license details), and fill out a gun registration form at the counter, which you could mail in on the way home..

(Whether or not you could take the gun home the same day depends on whether there's a mandatory cooling off period.)



But if gun sales are tracked in your state, aren't they effectively registered already? (Unless you purchased them out of state.)
Click to expand...

Gun sales are tracked, but serial numbers are not registered. SN's appear nowhere on a permit or a 4473.

They can go back to the store and match the SN if something happens, but they have no SN's up front on any paperwork.
 
R.Mackey said:
I'm quite amused by the many people claiming Australia is a good model for the US. No, it's not.
Click to expand...

How would that model not be workable in the USA? Are you saying it would be impossible to implement, or the population would actively resist it, or some other reason? I'm genuinely curious.

R.Mackey said:
Un-Constitutional. Thank you for playing.
Click to expand...

It's unconstitutional to require people to pay for their own safety training?

Dave Everett
 
deverett said:
How would that model not be workable in the USA? Are you saying it would be impossible to implement, or the population would actively resist it, or some other reason? I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

All of the above. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8882266#post8882266 for a gentle scratch at the complexity of the problem you're entertaining.

deverett said:
It's unconstitutional to require people to pay for their own safety training?
Click to expand...

Represents an Undue Burden and will be stricken down as a violation of the Second Amendment. As I said earlier in this very thread, either you pay for it for everyone, or you make it so cheap (and useless) that it doesn't represent an undue burden. The former solution is problematic and the latter solution isn't a solution.
 
LTC8K6 said:
How do you do what he did and not be "mentally ill"?
Click to expand...

Perhaps we could better describe him as not having being diagnosed as being mentally ill?

Nessie said:
I fear the horse has already bolted from the stable and such proposals are going to be as effective as Canute trying to keep the tide back.
Click to expand...

Not quite. More like proposing to build a huge dyke to hold the tide back when there's insufficient interest from the community to provide the resources to build it. Theoretically possible, but it's not going to happen.

Ranb said:
This sounds okay until the lists are used to confiscate firearms at the whim of the local governments.
Click to expand...

In a nation where the right to own firearms is a enshrined in the constitution and firmly ingrained in the national psyche... that's never going to happen. Suggesting that it would is pure scare tactics.

deverett said:
On a related note, I remember our gun buyback scheme in the 00s. I was speaking with a business in the USA (can't remember which state but it was a southern one). The person I was speaking to had been told along with everyone else at an NRA meeting or rally that, US Navy Seals were going door-to-door in Australia rounding up everyones guns.
Click to expand...

That's just..... what the hell? US Navy Seals? Confiscating guns? In Australia? :eye-poppi
 
Brian-M said:
Perhaps we could better describe him as not having being diagnosed as being mentally ill?
Click to expand...

I can understand why people would assume someone that does mass murder is mentally ill. But is it a fact? Are all murderers mentally ill? Maybe the NRA wants to register all mentally ill people as a precursor to collecting those mentally ill and placing them in a "safe" place.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I don't understand the fascination with the 5.56 AR-15 rifle.

A .30-06 round is more than twice as powerful, and is readily available in semi-auto rifles that were never banned, and are unlikely to be banned.

An AK-47 round pales in comparison to a .30-06 round. Why aren't we banning .30-06 rifles? A .30-06 round is very likely to go through a few people at maniac shooting distances.

A .22LR rimfire will kill people just as well in the hands of a maniac, and the rounds are much smaller, as are the magazines. One can easily conceal a dozen loaded .22 semi auto magazines in your pants pockets.

There's not even talk of banning guns that are just as capable, or more capable, of the Newtown massacre, as an AR-15.
Click to expand...

Because it's about perception, not reality.

This is one of my favorite cartridges:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45-70

These are general 5.56 (AR/16) cartridge specs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56×45mm_NATO

You can purchase original era rifles in the old 45/70 w/o paper work, even in California, they're considered Curio and Relic firearms, and pre-1898 are not subject to FFL transfer

In other words, this isn't dangerous

browning1885.jpg


We're not sure about this:

MVC-526S.jpg


This is pure evil:

416TE.jpg


These probably aren't too dangerous:

mvc861s.jpg


But these are:

mvc856s.jpg


Don't even ask about this!

mvc833s.jpg
 
RemieV said:
I'm relatively sure you mean 'dike', but that's some funny imagery right there.
Click to expand...

No I meant dyke. Looking it up in the OED the entry for dyke says "a frequent sp. of dike". Looking up dike, both spellings are listed.

The "dike" spelling just looks wrong to me. I never realized that some people spell it that way before.

thaiboxerken said:
I can understand why people would assume someone that does mass murder is mentally ill. But is it a fact? Are all murderers mentally ill? Maybe the NRA wants to register all mentally ill people as a precursor to collecting those mentally ill and placing them in a "safe" place.
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether or not he actually was mentally ill, stating that he was not diagnosed as being mentally ill is true either way.
 
tyr_13 said:
I still don't understand why though.
Click to expand...
Because it's seen as the first step towards a ban. Registered firearms are easy to confiscate, unregistered ones not so much.

It's not an unfounded fear.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Gun sales are tracked, but serial numbers are not registered. SN's appear nowhere on a permit or a 4473.

They can go back to the store and match the SN if something happens, but they have no SN's up front on any paperwork.
Click to expand...

Better read this:

http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf

Page three - manufacturer, model, serial, type caliber.

My carry license has firearms listed similarly, including serial.
 
 
LTC8K6 said:
That stays at the retailer. The gun info is not part of the check. But yeah, if the gun has a SN it is indeed on the 4473.
Click to expand...

And must be surrendered to ATF when the FFL closes or otherwise ceases operation, and ATF has been computerizing 4473's for going on 20 years that I know of, FOPA be damned.
 
 
The 70S also in the first pic... with the Marlin. Very fine pistol.

There's also a Beretta Model 60 in the pics, which often gets me funny looks when I say it's a model 60. Few have heard of it, or they think it's a different pistol.

I think if you search for an image of a Beretta 60, my picture is one of the few that comes up.

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/ca76/gtnymncjrlj5g.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom