Big Brother's new target: Tracking of all firearms, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:53 AM by jibeho

Originally posted by vonspurter
OK, OK I was wrong. Silly me. I agree with you. Everyone and anyone in the USA should be able to anonymously buy a firearm. In fact give them away with a gallon of petrol. Arm kids and teach them basic shooting skills in nursery class.

Now, how does your ideal world work when in conjunction with your freely available AK47's etc. you have cocaine, heroine, PCP and alcohol - again all freely available? Nice safe place you live in!

It's all macho BS - my gun is bigger than yours crap. Good luck with your obsession cowboy.

You are clearly exaggerating and you are not familiar with the countless laws that are already in place to own firearms. In addition it federal laws many local county and state govts. have their own laws. For example, in Charlotte NC you have to purchase a permit from the sheriff's office in order to buy a handgun. They restrict the amount of permits that you can purchase. Some states simply perform instant background checks from a database. It varies.

Laws also vary from state to state regarding concealed carry.

I am all for laws restricting unsuitable persons from owning firearms. The problem is that we already have the laws. They are just not enforced. New laws are created to generate sensationalism and drama. We don't need them.

All gun owners are not cowboys or rednecks. Many shoot for competition, hobby and/or hunting. Personally, I enjoy shooting trap and skeet in addition to handgun for target and self defense. I also enjoy a good pheasant hunt now and then. Others are collectors of rare and unique weapons. These guns never get fired. This is my right.

Your general classification of gun owners will only get you flamed.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 06:55 AM by Anonymous ATS

reply to post by budski

Sigh, if you're going to use lame stereo types about guns at least get it right. It's not that "hillbilly" that's gonna shoot you up. It's going be that thug in the inner city that either shoots you when you step on his terroritory or you get shot when he's in yours robbing you.

Also, as you said, "more guns then people". You're absolutly right and gun related crimes are next to nothing. Most gun related crimes/deaths are that of criminals or suicide.

So as the old broken records repeats, criminals will always have the guns. Lawful gun ownership crime is so small of a fraction of the problem it's almost not worth mentioning.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 07:15 AM by vonspurter

reply to post by jibeho

Your general classification of gun owners will only get you flamed

If you read my posts you will find I am not generalising gun owners at all - it is those who want anonymous gun ownership I was referring to. But I'll chime out now - no place for a Brit who should be out jousting or beating people with sticks. I'll leave this thread for you to boast of your calibres and swap pictures of your mighty weapons.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 07:23 AM by Amaxium

Just in case anyone is wondering to the validity of HR 45. It does exist.

Here is a link to H.R. 45 on thomas.gov

The bill was introduced on 1/6/09 by Bobby Rush. No co-sponsors. It is time to write our representatives and voice our opinions regarding this BS bill. Below is some helpful information on what we all should do. I do not even want to think about the Pandora box this will lead to eventually.

As you see bills you object to being presented, you may be asking yourself, "What can an average American citizen do?". The answer is we have always had the power to change things. We just never did anything. We have to put most of the blame on ourselves for allowing this civil liberties being breached. Senate has already passed this, it is stalled in congress, though.

If the majority of the registered voters in that person's precinct demand they vote one way regarding a bill, the representative is most likely going to vote your way. Otherwise we will not vote for them nest term. They will not be re-elected. Most representatives want to be re-elected. All of us need to spread this secret to all and all of us need to start exercising our voices and votes.

Here are Direct links to find both your congressman and Senate so you can contact them.

Find and write your congressman

Find and write your Senator

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 07:33 AM by jibeho

reply to post by vonspurter

You never responded to my post about the popularity of airsoft replica weapons in the UK. There are multiple UK magazines devoted to the topic of such weapons and pretend skirmishes. It seems like many of your brethren have an affinity for firearms also. The photo that I posted is of an airsoft plastic gun replica sold in the UK.

edit to add

You referred to an "unhealthy obsession with firearms" is that a general statement? Many people like me shoot occasionally. I wouldn't call that obsessive.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by jibeho]

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 08:00 AM by Ionized

Time to begin the application process for pistol ownership and concealed weapon permit. I remember it was this time last year with all the talk about the supreme court finally deciding on the 2nd amendment that made me go get my 12ga. Now we have more catalyst for us law abiding types to get hand guns before it is impossible.

I was at Midas muffler shop getting car repaired last week, and talking to the manager in the waiting room, somehow gun ownership came up and I mentioned I need to get a pistol. He says he has a ccw and pulls out his gun to show it to me. Was yet another patriot type that had it for when the SHTF or in case of personal defense.

Guns don't create the criminal mindset. Lack of proper upbringing and natural morals, that is what creates a true criminal mindset. Unjust laws and imprisonment for alleged crimes that should never be considered crimes, that doesn't help any. You could hand out guns at birth and if the country was just and moral, there would be no crime. But our type of fake republic can never be just and moral.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:23 AM by turbokid

reply to post by Amaxium

that is a novel idea but, remember the bailout vote a while back? how we crashed their systems telling them not to vote for this nonsense, and they did anyways? if they want to pass something they will, our voices mean nothing anymore.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:34 AM by Amaxium

Originally posted by turbokid
reply to post by Amaxium

that is a novel idea but, remember the bailout vote a while back? how we crashed their systems telling them not to vote for this nonsense, and they did anyways? if they want to pass something they will, our voices mean nothing anymore.

The reason why is because the American voters need to follow-up by voting for anyone else beside those who voted "Yes" come next election. If our politicians saw that our opinions are indeed supported by our votes, then they will take heed to our opinions. If you give up on trying to fix our current governmental system you are left with 2 options.

Option 1: Sit back with or without a blind eye and let the government do whatever they want.

Option 2: Eventually, the people will get fed up and revolt violently for change. This may or may not happen in our lifetime but eventually it will.

Do not reply with this information but think about this. Who were your representatives and how did they vote? Come next election, who are you going to vote for or more importantly NOT vote for?

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:37 AM by autowrench

reply to post by burdman30ott6

I am inclined to feel the same as you. I too was raised with firearms, and at an early age learned to respect them as a killing weapon, never to be pointed unless one meant to kill. Also, I fully agree with the 2nd. Amendment of the Constitution that give us the absolute right to bear arms. This will never pass muster, you know, too many opponents, and too may Militia.
I carry myself, I have a Remington .44 revolver that feels real good on my hip. Sounds like a cannon when you fire it too!

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 09:42 AM by xman_in_blackx

You already have to do this to receive a CCW. The feds get your photo, your print, and all your background info. The upside is that you also get to carry a concealed firearm.

All police officers also get the same treatment to be able to carry concealed weapons. Before they get the job as a policeman, they must also submit all the same information.

If you want to have a federal firearms license, you must also submit similar information.

His legislation is a silly idea. If everyone has to do this with their firearms, then they will just apply for the CCW. Perfect example of politicians making laws who have no idea of the law of unintended consequences.

Anyone who really loves firearms has already done this. Especially those who enjoy class 3 firearms.

I guess how you feel about this depends on where you draw your line. I agree with jibeho. We already have plenty of laws to make sure that criminals and wackos don't have legal access to firearms. What these lawmakers always fail to see is that criminals and wackos don't care about laws. No matter what law they pass, they will still have access to firearms while the law abiding poeple will not.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by xman_in_blackx. Apparently I can't spell today, but then again, could I ever?]

[edit on 15-1-2009 by xman_in_blackx]

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 10:57 AM by Anonymous ATS

Registration is preferable to Confiscation....The Consitution provides for the free right to travel but try telling that to the toll both lady or the policeman who pulls you over for expired tags. But if they use that (car registration information) to confiscate the cars then they have will have a real problem,,,,there are more cars than citizens in this country!

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 01:49 PM by atoms.2008

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
I guess how you feel about this depends on where you draw your line. I agree with jibeho.

We already have plenty of laws to make sure that criminals and wackos don't have legal access to firearms.

What these lawmakers always fail to see is that criminals and wackos dont care about laws

No matter what law they pass, they will still have access to firearms while the law abiding poeple will not.

That's It, THAT'S IT

DUH !!!!!

Fools !!!

[edit on 1-15-09 by atoms.2008]

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 02:59 PM by burdman30ott6

reply to post by xman_in_blackx

The problem, though, is they're forcing those of us who have been law abiding citizens to make a decision: either continue as you have and become a criminal purely thanks to a change in the law or accept the new law and cooperate with the process of stripping away your rights.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 03:34 PM by xman_in_blackx

reply to post by burdman30ott6

I think our rights are already gone. I never stated that I agreed with the laws, but since it is the law, I must comply. Or (like you said) I risk becoming a criminal. Like Baretta said "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime."

I will say, however, that none of the laws make any sense to people who know anything about firearms.

For example, I see no real difference between and pistol with a stock on it or just the pistol alone. You put a forward grip on a pistol because you go to prison 10 years, $10,000 fine (unless it comes from the factory that way and is registered as an AOW). What is the difference between a pistol and a pistol with a forward grip? Does it make it any deadlier? Nope.

Another example is the reclassification of semi-auto street sweeper shotguns that made them class 3, even though you can purchase a similar shotgun (russian saiga) which holds just as many rounds that is not a class 3 weapon. Both weapons perform the exact same function, both are equally deadly, but one is class 3.

It makes no sense, but it is the law created by someone in Washington who is out of touch. BATFE doesn't care how silly the laws are, they are required to enforce them. As many law enforcement officers will tell you, if you do not like the law, then ask your congressman to change the law.

Join the NRA. Get a group together to inform people on how important the 2nd Ammendment is to their country and how it has nothing to do with hunting.

As you may have noticed if you have tried to buy ammo lately, you are lucky to buy any, and if you can get it, it is expensive. Try finding anything for reloading 5.56, .223 Remmington, or 7.62x39. It is crazy. I know people who have gone into debt in order to buy firearms and ammo.

All that will happen is if lawmakers get enough momentum in their anti-gun furor, they will have purchased firearms and ammo that they will have to turn in unless they wish to become a criminal.

Lawmakers have stuck their toes in the water to see if they meet resistance. I doubt it will have a happy ending.

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 03:43 PM by projectvxn

I knew that the Democrats would start grabbing guns. I hope this bill is stricken as unreasonably restrictive and unconstitutional because that is exactly what this is.

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 11:01 AM by turbokid

Originally posted by Amaxium

The reason why is because the American voters need to follow-up by voting for anyone else beside those who voted "Yes" come next election. If our politicians saw that our opinions are indeed supported by our votes, then they will take heed to our opinions. If you give up on trying to fix our current governmental system you are left with 2 options.

Option 1: Sit back with or without a blind eye and let the government do whatever they want.

Option 2: Eventually, the people will get fed up and revolt violently for change. This may or may not happen in our lifetime but eventually it will.

Do not reply with this information but think about this. Who were your representatives and how did they vote? Come next election, who are you going to vote for or more importantly NOT vote for?

good points but i dont think our votes matter anymore.
i've tried working within the system, it is my belief that when it comes to a choice between politicans you are picking between one chosen person and another chosen person.
these men are bought and paid for. think about it, why would anyone get into politics? the salary? to help "the people" HA! its to make better, more well connected business deals. the average salary for congressmen is something like 170,000, yet most of these folks are millionaires. Switching between two leaders backed by the same special interest groups is only a change in name and face, that part that matters stays the same.

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 11:05 AM by Amaxium

reply to post by turbokid

Then what are you suggesting? Monarchy, dictatorship? Free-for-all?

I understand the points you make as well. So how do we fix them? Can they be fixed?

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 11:45 AM by turbokid

Originally posted by Amaxium
reply to post by turbokid

Then what are you suggesting? Monarchy, dictatorship? Free-for-all?

I understand the points you make as well. So how do we fix them? Can they be fixed?

well, i dont have all the answers thats for sure but i'd say outlawing lobby groups, and corporate campaign contributions would be a good start. it would drive out the snakes who wish to be in politics.

i'm not suggesting a change in the style of government, merely a change in the incentives for our representatives to obtain their positions. There are to many back door deals and "back scratching" going on.

in my state the governer is the owner of a 9.5 billion dollar business, and is a multi-millionaire. after being elected to the position of governer, which pays 100,000 per year, he stepped down from his position in the company, There must be good reason for this.
i hope you can see where i am coming from.

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 12:07 PM by Amaxium

reply to post by turbokid

This I would wholeheartedly agree with. But, I am not so sure of banning all lobbyist groups. NRA and Greenpeace are two lobbyist groups which IMO do serve a good purpose, just to name a couple. NRA helps to protect the rights of gun owners. Greenpeace helps to protect the environment.

So I guess the next question is who is going to gather the needed information to draft a proposal to make the much needed changes? I would be more than happy to but I am not familiar with all the lawyer lingo necessary and to ensure there are no "loop holes". Anyone have any suggestions?

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^