It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Stupid Gunphobes!

page: 5
21
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

artificially inflating the cost of something is an infringement on rights (and violates the concept of free markets).


That opens a lot of issues we have to address, such as the definition of "artificial".



It does, and it would shine a light on a lot of what ails this nation. Because in the end, regulation that doesn't really achieve anything is worse than useless action. It becomes an impediment to innovation, as well as a constant wear and drain on the society yoked up with said regulation.

If we evaluated regulation for effectiveness rather than simply for the emotional lift it gives, we'd likely find that not only do we grossly over regulate stupid things...we'd probably also have to begin admitting that you cant legislate every nook and cranny of life. At some point we must admit that life will carry risks with it, that human involvement will lead to the unforeseen, and that in the end we might be better served returning to a world where we expected each other to make reasonable decisions, rather than asking our government to punish people who just cannot be bothered.


I agree.




posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: TinySickTears

Of course I can.

I don't live in the Peoples Republic of California.



Well you're crying like you do so I wasn't sure


And you are adding nothing of value.

If you were smart enough you would cry about our rights getting chipped away too.

Once the 2nd is gone they will go after the 1st.


Just putting my opinion out there.
I'm not paranoid about it like some of you.

Gun rights are not my main issue. That's fine if it is for you.
Just like neo can think this is bull#. I can think he is being a baby.


You are not seeing the bigger picture, oh well.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: joemoe

If the legislators that propose this nonsense were shooters, I doubt very much it would be proposed.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

It actually is when I think about it! The waiting period allows for a cooling off of emotions and the bond can be used to pay for any damage or cleanup after the protest, not to mention the extra costs to the city for increased police presence to maintain the peace.

ETA: I typed that post thinking the same as you, as simply an example to show how ridiculous it is to use financial hardship to limit rights... but in light of the recent explosion of protests against things that don't even exist, as an excuse to riot and fight, I'm starting to actually like the idea. Hey, if it's good for one right, it's good for all rights.

TheRedneck

edit on 8/16/2018 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: joemoe

If the legislators that propose this nonsense were shooters, I doubt very much it would be proposed.



That's my first reaction to many of these type of regulations. They come from people who don't have a clue how a firearm operates.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

It certainly does. Which is, of course, at least part of the reason this idiocy was proposed in the first place.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

A poll tax for you! ...and you! Everyone gets a poll tax!!



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: joemoe

If the legislators that propose this nonsense were shooters, I doubt very much it would be proposed.



That's my first reaction to many of these type of regulations. They come from people who don't have a clue how a firearm operates.


Sounds like our drug laws.
Put in place by people that don't know # about it



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: TinySickTears

Of course I can.

I don't live in the Peoples Republic of California.



Well you're crying like you do so I wasn't sure


And you are adding nothing of value.

If you were smart enough you would cry about our rights getting chipped away too.

Once the 2nd is gone they will go after the 1st.


Just putting my opinion out there.
I'm not paranoid about it like some of you.

Gun rights are not my main issue. That's fine if it is for you.
Just like neo can think this is bull#. I can think he is being a baby.


You are not seeing the bigger picture, oh well.


Not correct.
I'm just seeing a different picture than you



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: TinySickTears

Of course I can.

I don't live in the Peoples Republic of California.



Well you're crying like you do so I wasn't sure


And you are adding nothing of value.

If you were smart enough you would cry about our rights getting chipped away too.

Once the 2nd is gone they will go after the 1st.


Just putting my opinion out there.
I'm not paranoid about it like some of you.

Gun rights are not my main issue. That's fine if it is for you.
Just like neo can think this is bull#. I can think he is being a baby.


You are not seeing the bigger picture, oh well.


Not correct.
I'm just seeing a different picture than you


Awesome.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

We already have it with the $200 tax stamp.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:31 PM
link   


Just like neo can think this is bull#. I can think he is being a baby.


The one thing worse than a gunphobe.

A Neophobe.


edit on 16-8-2018 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: seagull

We already have it with the $200 tax stamp.



This tax stamp and year long waiting period is total nonsense.
All it does is encourage people to skirt the law, turning otherwise law abiding firearm owners into felons.

Bad laws make criminals while doing nothing to stop crime.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
No. If that were true, expensive healthcare would be a violation of your rights. But that is not so.


Healthcare is not a right. Equal access and opportunity to be treated is, but not the healthcare itself.

Rights derive from property. I own myself, so therefore I have the right to defend myself using whatever arms are commonplace.

I do not own the hospital or the physician's knowledge and expertise. I have the right to contract with that hospital or physician for their services for a fee. The fact that access to care costs money is not a infringement of that right. I am not entitled to be treated or seen for free.

Should doctors and hospitals ( who hold ownership of the skills and equipment ) be forced to provide services for free?

Rights derive from property. If there were a legitimate public interest that making these improvements that was served by passing these laws, I would not take issue. None of the proposed ideas make guns any safer, and given that it's California, I have to assume the intent is to restrict the abilities of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves.



The things you listed are false equivalencies, but I think your sentiment is worth consideration.


How are they false equivalencies?

Requiring that one pay a fee, or more money in order to exercise a right is exactly what we're talking about here.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: joemoe
Loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnects already exists and are practically useless. Microstamping wound easily be defeated with a file or changing the firing pin. People who make these laws know noting about firearms. These things will do nothing to stop murder especially if the criminal is already ignoring the fact that murder is illegal!


Not to mention all the weapons already on the market...they cannot make the legislation retroactive. Therefore all that needs to be done is purchase an older weapon.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: joemoe
Loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnects already exists and are practically useless. Microstamping wound easily be defeated with a file or changing the firing pin. People who make these laws know noting about firearms. These things will do nothing to stop murder especially if the criminal is already ignoring the fact that murder is illegal!


Not to mention all the weapons already on the market...they cannot make the legislation retroactive. Therefore all that needs to be done is purchase an older weapon.


Not necessarily. What they do to get around that is they put ridiculous new restrictions on the transfer of existing firearms. In some states, that even includes inheriting a gun. So eventually once all the current owners die, and their relatives can't inherit the gun because they can't afford it or clear the legal process, the old guns that don't comply with the new regs will eventually go out of circulation, or at least there will be fewer and fewer of them.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785


Not necessarily. What they do to get around that is they put ridiculous new restrictions on the transfer of existing firearms. In some states, that even includes inheriting a gun. So eventually once all the current owners die, and their relatives can't inherit the gun because they can't afford it or clear the legal process, the old guns that don't comply with the new regs will eventually go out of circulation, or at least there will be fewer and fewer of them.


Not all weapons are registered...it's not uncommon to find families with several generations worth of firearms. Transfer of ownership inside a family...I'm pretty sure it would be impossible to legislate, track or enforce. If this is a single state type of law, it's pretty easy to go outside the state and obtain legally a firearm.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   
More "regulations"

Regulations = Revenue = Taxes = Govt stealing money from the people.
"Nuff Said"



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
How does this prevent the CAD/CNC fabrication/3D printing of non-stamping components for which such plans already exist in the public domain?

Can't wait to see this shredded in the SCOTUS
edit on 8/16/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: seagull

We already have it with the $200 tax stamp.





Not to mention the ridiculous price markup for buying a 1986 GCA compliant automatic. >$20,000


This disproportionately affects average Americans who generally cannot practically part with 20 grand




top topics



 
21
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join