• 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

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...
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
The gun serial number is recorded in block 28. The form stays with the dealer until they go out of business.

Ranb
 
WildCat said:
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.
Click to expand...

Once guns are registered, Obama the Antchrist will order jack booted government thugs to take away all the guns before turning the USA over to blue helmeted UN troops just like Hitler. :rolleyes:
 
LTC8K6 said:
Why? Registration equals confiscation. That is the fear.

No one but a law abiding citizen is going to register a firearm.

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.

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?

Why can't we enforce the laws we have? There are certainly plenty of them.

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.

I am fully aware that I have no control here whatsoever, and that I will be swept along with the tide.
Click to expand...


Just a great post. Spot on from top to bottom.

There are already several laws in place, varying by state.

And that last part, the absolute amazement that anyone seriously thinks the acts of a completely insignificant number of criminals should be able to dictate the rules for the rest of us. Just astounding that people are falling for that.
 
The system denied William Spangler of Webster, NY the right to buy a firearm for good reason. He was a felon who had spent years in jail for murder. His neighbor acted as a straw buyer so William could purchase two firearms. In part due to her action, two firemen are dead and two more are injured.

The reason we know her identity is the registration form. The punishment she receives will be a lesson to anyone else even thinking about being a straw buyer.

It isn't hard to figure out why the gun lobby doesn't like registration. The paper trail makes it dangerous to ignore the rules.
 
Kestrel said:
The system denied William Spangler of Webster, NY the right to buy a firearm for good reason. He was a felon who had spent years in jail for murder. His neighbor acted as a straw buyer so William could purchase two firearms. In part due to her action, two firemen are dead and two more are injured.

The reason we know her identity is the registration form. The punishment she receives will be a lesson to anyone else even thinking about being a straw buyer.

It isn't hard to figure out why the gun lobby doesn't like registration. The paper trail makes it dangerous to ignore the rules.
Click to expand...

I agree fully with the first paragraph, and disagree with the second.

Thos of us that deal with registration on a constant basis realize that registration isn't so much about crime prevention or crime solving, it's simply another level of bureaucratic interference - it's an additional hoop to jump through - nothing more.

Those of us familar with the NFTR at the federal level and the difficulty ATF has had in keeping those few numbers of records straight (hundreds of thousands v hundreds of millions) doesn't give much hope that a federal registration scheme for title 1 firearms would be a great crime prevention tool,

I can count on one hand the number of violent crimes solved by a registration trace (In California) and you want to know the most simple method for a criminal actor to minimize the risk of being identified in this manner?

Dummy Cord.

Sophisticated system potentially neutralized by a $2.00 length of paracord.

Even a shoestring could work.
 
Brian-M said:
Given that gun control in the US is a hot topic at the moment, I thought I'd test the waters by presenting a hypothetical solution of my own. What would everyone's reaction be if the US government came up with the following proposal.... ?

1. Introduction of firearm licenses

Citizens would be able to apply for a license to own firearms starting from 2014. To be successful in their application, applicants would have to pass an accredited course in gun safety, use and maintenance.

The license would have to be renewed once every three years by attending a one-day refresher course, including a half-day of target practice. As of 2016 it would become a criminal offense (punishable by jail time) for persons to own or carry a firearm without a valid firearm license (with limited exemptions made for persons who have neglected to renew their expired license).

ETA: And as of 2016 it would be illegal to sell or supply firearms to persons without a valid firearm license.

2. Mandatory firearm registration

As of 2014 a national firearm registry would be formed, and firearm owners would be required to register any firearm in their possession by 2016.

As of 2016 it would be a criminal offense (punishable by jail time) to own or carry an unregistered firearm. All transfers of firearm ownership would require notification to the register within ten days by both parties. (Theft of firearms would also have to be reported.)

Citizens would be able to contact police to turn in unregistered weapons at any time without facing charges.
​

So, what does everyone think? Too harsh, too lax, or something else altogether?

If you've got an alternative proposal of your own to present, this is the thread to post it in.
Click to expand...


It's no good is it. Anyone not american reading these posts will see it as just the tossing of a very sick society. Try replacing gun and firearm with potassium cyanide, or disembowelling knife. That is, train kids and adults how to use potassium cyanide and knives responsibly.
Just awful.
 
Jonesboy said:
It's no good is it. Anyone not american reading these posts will see it as just the tossing of a very sick society. Try replacing gun and firearm with potassium cyanide, or disembowelling knife. That is, train kids and adults how to use potassium cyanide and knives responsibly.
Just awful.
Click to expand...


Interesting that you consider all non-Americans irrational.
 
Brian-M said:
Given that gun control in the US is a hot topic at the moment, I thought I'd test the waters by presenting a hypothetical solution of my own. What would everyone's reaction be if the US government came up with the following proposal.... ?

1. Introduction of firearm licenses

Citizens would be able to apply for a license to own firearms starting from 2014. To be successful in their application, applicants would have to pass an accredited course in gun safety, use and maintenance.

The license would have to be renewed once every three years by attending a one-day refresher course, including a half-day of target practice. As of 2016 it would become a criminal offense (punishable by jail time) for persons to own or carry a firearm without a valid firearm license (with limited exemptions made for persons who have neglected to renew their expired license).

ETA: And as of 2016 it would be illegal to sell or supply firearms to persons without a valid firearm license.

2. Mandatory firearm registration

As of 2014 a national firearm registry would be formed, and firearm owners would be required to register any firearm in their possession by 2016.

As of 2016 it would be a criminal offense (punishable by jail time) to own or carry an unregistered firearm. All transfers of firearm ownership would require notification to the register within ten days by both parties. (Theft of firearms would also have to be reported.)

Citizens would be able to contact police to turn in unregistered weapons at any time without facing charges.
​

So, what does everyone think? Too harsh, too lax, or something else altogether?

If you've got an alternative proposal of your own to present, this is the thread to post it in.
Click to expand...

Sounds a lot like Illinois and even less restrictive than Chicago. I guess the results in Illinois, and specifically in Chicago, say your proposal won't help and may hurt.
 
brenn said:
Sounds a lot like Illinois and even less restrictive than Chicago. I guess the results in Illinois, and specifically in Chicago, say your proposal won't help and may hurt.
Click to expand...

The effectiveness of Illinois firearms laws are limited by the lax laws in neighboring states such as Indiana.
 
Jonesboy said:
Try replacing gun and firearm with potassium cyanide, or disembowelling knife. That is, train kids and adults how to use potassium cyanide and knives responsibly.
Just awful.
Click to expand...
I learned how to handle potassium cyanide in high school chemistry class, as well as how to use a disemboweling knife (filet knife) in grade school at a fishing lake. When did you grow up; ignoranceisblissland?

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Is this more of the satire I have come to expect from people who have nothing of substance to add to the discussion?

Ranb
 
Last edited:
Ranb said:
...as well as how to use a disemboweling knife (filet knife) in grade school at a fishing lake.
Click to expand...

I co-sponsored my daughter's fishing club last year. I was pretty suprised that the principal had cleaning/fileting as an approved activity for 4th graders.
 
Kestrel said:
Once guns are registered, Obama the Antchrist will order jack booted government thugs to take away all the guns before turning the USA over to blue helmeted UN troops just like Hitler. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ing-illinois-bill-to-ban-all-modern-firearms/

“Based on what we know about Cullerton’s bill, firearms that would be banned include all semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns. Pump action shotguns would be banned as well. This would be a very comprehensive ban that would include not only so-called ‘assault weapons’ but also such classics as M1 Garands and 1911-based pistols. There would be no exemptions and no grandfathering. You would have a very short window to turn in your guns to the State Police to avoid prosecution.”

Feinstein is calling for no grandfathering in her bill. That means every gun mentioned in that bill becomes illegal.

On her 1994 ban:



You keep using that rolleyes icon like no one is calling for this.

Why did Canada do away with long gun registration?
 
Last edited:
OnlyTellsTruths said:
And that last part, the absolute amazement that anyone seriously thinks the acts of a completely insignificant number of criminals should be able to dictate the rules for the rest of us. Just astounding that people are falling for that.
Click to expand...

Insignificant... until one of your close friends or family is shot by a gun. You might think the statistics small, but they are clearly not insignificant or an anomaly.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Insignificant... until one of your close friends or family is shot by a gun. You might think the statistics small, but they are clearly not insignificant or an anomaly.
Click to expand...

Insignificant...until one of your close friends or family is killed because they weren't allowed to carry protection. You might think at least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year is small, but they are clearly not insignificant or an anomaly.
 
shawmutt said:
Insignificant...until one of your close friends or family is killed because they weren't allowed to carry protection. ..
Click to expand...

Which is even less likely than being shot by a criminal. Also, strict gun control measures would make shootings even more "insignificant."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom