Calif. gun owners must now be fingerprinted to buy ammo!!!

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
LOL.

Idiotic responses to my statement... Truly.


Toothpaste isn't made to kill people/things.. Bullets are.

/agree
I don't get why americans should be still cowboy/wannabes... I say ban guns in general and see how crime will go down... and the argument "toothpaste kills you also" is so retarded that an answer isn't even worth.

This is stupid.America is falling apart.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by PsychNurse
...I was seriously asking for a rational view as to why finger printing for ammunition is such a problem? You still get it, they just know you have it.

Because one of the freedoms America has traditionally provided is that when you abide by the laws, you have the right to do what you want to privately, particularly ownership of guns and ammunition. The idea of a Big Brother state that keeps lists of non-criminal citizens based on their private purchases would make our founding fathers turn in their graves.
The loss of these rights is really the core of the issue, not the ammo or the guns. Those who understand the United States Constitution and value it recognize this legislation as a threat to our rights as U.S. citizens.
I would further argue that the same people speaking up on this issue would speak up just as vehemently were the U.S. government to create lists of people who frequent strip clubs or vote third party...any tracking and list-making for legal activity is outside the bounds of what our government has a mandate to do.

reply to post by blamethegreys


That does make sense. But I'm not sure that comparing privacy of going to a strip club and owning firearms and ammunition fall into the same risk levels. I do see your point. Thank you for your opinion.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by 46ACE

 

LOL, I saw a suspected "terrorist" in the headlines with 4 guns and over 1000 rounds of ammunition. OMG! So scary! I don't think I know anybody with less than that? 1000 rounds of ammunition is just a convenient and cheap way to buy it, and if you have 4 or 5 guns, you ought to have 4 or 5 1000 rounds of ammunition. I know guys that buy 1000 rounds every two weeks! I know guys that have HUNDREDS of guns! Of course a couple of those guys have their FFL licenses to make things easier, but still.

Yes, somebody will eventually want to know who is buying what, and how much, and then they will get suspicious, and then they will coming knocking.

This is the slipperiest slope there is!

Yes and the thing is "they" know this and understand this but just love to drag a few guns and ammo out for the TV. They know millions of americans have several guns and many pounds of ammo and yet dont mind bashing a mutha over it. Why? They are chicken spit and really do fear a population that could mount a defence!

Carry on!

Originally posted by Alda1981

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
LOL.

Idiotic responses to my statement... Truly.


Toothpaste isn't made to kill people/things.. Bullets are.

/agree
I don't get why americans should be still cowboy/wannabes... I say ban guns in general and see how crime will go down... and the argument "toothpaste kills you also" is so retarded that an answer isn't even worth.

Cowboys? Oh no see homeland security says we all want to be Ramo these days or Braveheart with an AK-47.

Rambo

reply to post by Rockerchic4God


uuummm...as a believer in gun rights...i say good.

lets get these bitches that shoot other people off the streets for good

Good reason to load your mags while wearing gloves.

No telling what an overzealous investigator would do with an errant piece of brass lying around,eh?.

It is a good idea to load you ammo with gloves anyway,and don't toss cigarette butts about because errant DNA lying about isn't a very good idea either.

These technologies are used to create more crime from nothing,than to solve actual ones.

Really.

Originally posted by 46ACE


( f.u.!)

ADDDED; GRRRR...

The old " if you've got nothing to hide we you'vegothnothingto worry about (we should be able to look") argument??? Well; how about you send me a key to your house/apartment, So I can enter I'm trustworthy ( no really ; I am)...
if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to worry about right? I've got as much authority to enter as the govt does.

edit on 29-12-2010 by 46ACE because: 2nd paragrAPH ADDED

I don't see how the government being aware of the ammunition you have compares to you coming into my house? I don't mean to say that everything you do should be scrutinized by big brother. All I was trying to say was that if the police knew that "Jonny" had 300 rounds of this and 400 rounds of that, along with an automatic this and semi-automatic that, they would be prepared to deal with it. this wasn't intended to be a topic of trustworhty or non-trustworthy police officers routing through my house. What was the point in saying (f.u.!) to me? I don't live around guns and was curious of why it was such a bad thing to be printed? I have to have my finger prints scanned everytime I pull a medication out the dispensory to administer to a patient. Everytime!
I see stabbing victims almost on a daily basis admitted to the Emergency Department so no I don't think guns are the issue. But knowing the risks of what your walking into as a paramedic, fireman or police officer can make the job a lot easier and safer for everyone involved.

reply to post by PsychNurse


PsychNurse,

I see your logic, but it would be a false sense of security to the emergency personnel, and it would probably do more harm than good. The good law-abiding citizens that have nothing to hide, will go through the proper channels, but more than likely the police will never have occasion to enter their homes anyway. The criminals will buy their stuff on the street, and nothing will be registered, and the police will be entering those situations much more frequently.

Therefore, any information the police had, could only lead to a false sense of security thinking that the person was unarmed, OR lead to harassment of the law-abiding citizens because they are on some list, OR the most likely scenario is that police would ignore the list anyway, treat every person as if they were armed (like they do now) and the whole fingerprinting database, expense, and hassle would not serve any purpose, be a waste of time and a waste of money!

Take a look at the OP in this thread... Here's an example of why gun control is a legitimate topic....
www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=10213945#pid10213945

Shoot first ask later... what if your neighbor is a little on the funky/delusional side of the conspiracy groups and thinks your an alien... What if he was your neighbor... Well I guess you could thank him for aerating your walls.

reply to post by PsychNurse


Terrible OP! Terrible event! Terrible Gun Owners! Terrible Decision making!

Still, what does that have to do with me and my guns? I don't know a single gun owner that would make those types of terrible decisions, and I also do not for one second believe that the author of that post really has a Dad that was a SEAL. No way a specially trained military man would do that.

The fact is, most gun violence and gun accidents come from the most irresponsible gun owners, and those irresponsible types are not registering their weapons, doing weapons training, and buying weapons and ammunition through the proper channels. More regulation only hurts me, it doesn't hurt them.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I agree with you for the most part. I also doubt the OP's father was a SEAL. But wouldn't it stand to reason that if everyone had to get printed upon purchase that people like this wouldn't get the oppurtunity to READILY purchase ammunition after having an event like this, where six or seven cruisers show up to hear he was shooting at aliens. (if thwere was even a shot fired)

Just a thought... government would probably bill you for the process of the finger printing.

reply to post by getreadyalready


That was a great post. You have a fantastic perspective. Thank you for your input. You've brought a few alternate views to the table. I'm not so sure it would change anything other than how much it would cost you to buy the items with the addition security costs. Cheers! Stars for you!

reply to post by PsychNurse

It sounds to me like you are suffering from a little misunderstanding of the actual situations...

I know of no one, not a single person who owns a firearm, who would go to such an extreme as "aerating" a neighbor's walls. And remember, where I live, people just automatically assume everyone they meet is armed. Some are, some aren't, but you're right most of the time with that assumption. And everyone gets along just fine. We have very little violent crime, and practically none out where I live (last theft reported was about 25 years ago).

The law says nothing about fingerprinting mentally-unstable people. It doesn't need to. Mentally unstable people as a rule do not own guns. They either can't afford them, or they have a criminal record that prevents them from owning a gun already.

Now as to the issue of knowing what is inside the house should the police be called.... I'm sorry, but that is strictly against the Bill of Rights... it is specifically enumerated that the people have the right to be secure in their homes in Amendment4:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I do not see how anyone could 'interpret' that statement to allow such an intrusion of privacy.

I also do not see why the police need to be informed of what I own for safety reasons. From my point of view, the largest single danger the police today face is themselves and their tactics... bust in any door screaming "POLICE!" in the middle of the night in this neighborhood, and more times than not you'll be dodging lead or a club. KNOCK on the door, announce "POLICE!" and wait a couple minutes to let someone get some clothes on, and you'll just get someone grumpy from being awakened in the middle of the night.

Chances are the police will win the battle either way... but the former is inherently dangerous to the person sleeping away in their beds, any children in the house, and the police themselves. It is human nature to protect one's home, and this human nature is not only ignored in this case, but antagonized. The latter method might make the job a little more difficult if someone is trying to escape, but it is inherently safer... especially when one considers that addresses have been transposed and the wrong house raided on more than one occasion.

The former is an assault on an unsuspecting party, and carries the risk of being mistook for an armed intruder (which, come to think of it, is accurate). The latter is a safe method to eliminate 90% of the danger.

So, based on these observations, I would say that it is a foolhardy approach to police safety to combat the inherent danger of unsafe and unwise tactics with blatant removal of Constitutionally-protected rights, especially considering that this approach will only make the people more suspicious of police activity.

Wouldn't you?

TheRedneck

I think I'm going to open an ammo shop riiiiight past the California border in Oregon.

$$$

reply to post by Tharsis


You think not getting fingerprinted is bad, imagine transporting ammunition across a state line! Federal Authorities love to use "interstate commerce" as a way to regulate EVERYTHING!

Now, in order to combat an unfair business advantage that you might have in your state, the ATF will undoubtedly enact a Federal Law, and a Federal database, and you will have to be fingerprinted TWICE at every purchase, and your ammunition will be taxed TWICE for the efforts, and still, nobody will be one iota safer!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Tharsis

 

You think not getting fingerprinted is bad, imagine transporting ammunition across a state line! Federal Authorities love to use "interstate commerce" as a way to regulate EVERYTHING!

Now, in order to combat an unfair business advantage that you might have in your state, the ATF will undoubtedly enact a Federal Law, and a Federal database, and you will have to be fingerprinted TWICE at every purchase, and your ammunition will be taxed TWICE for the efforts, and still, nobody will be one iota safer!

But all that takes time. Meanwhile, I'll be laughing all the way to a Swiss bank.

Of course, that's wishful thinking.

Remember, sometimes things like this happen JUST SO an unfair business advantage can be had, no?

reply to post by Tharsis


True. Do you need a partner? We can laugh from Switzerland as the Americans give up all their rights one by one!