The Right To Bear Arms & The Spirit of Law (Registration is Counter to the Purpose of the Right)!?!, page 2


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 16-11-2012 @ 08:03 PM by NavyDoc
Originally posted by phroziac
reply to
post by NavyDoc



Theres plenty of ways to sell guns to people and not actually know them. Gunshows for example. Also what if i say the gun was stolen or i sold it to some guy when i really didnt?

I also own a pre 4473 gun. Doesnt even have a serial number. Its a 12 gauge sears and robuck/jc higgins model 20 with a 28" barrel and mod choke, 5 shotppump, made my high standard.

Unrelated but i love when people call for gun control and have no clue what theyre talking about. A guy told me sniper rifles should be illegal, talking about the washington dc sniper, who used a bushmaster xm15 carbine. A very piss poor choice of a "sniper rifle". I pointed out to this guy that its only a sniper rifle because a sniper used it....infact its one of the worst choices there is for a sniper rifle. No excuse for stupidity. *any* rifle can be used for sniper attacks.
edit on 16-11-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)


But there you go. You have a pre 4473 rifle. It is pretty untraceable unless the initial buyer who sold it to you is still living. The problem with, and my objection of, 4473 's is that they are a record that the government has already been databasing. It is a form of backdoor registry.

You are quite on and to expand on your well put post, the whole point of the "gun show loophole" debate is to try to shut down all face to face transfers so that all transfers of firearms are on paper with, you guessed it 4473's.


reply posted on 16-11-2012 @ 08:42 PM by slugger9787
reply to post by syrinx high priest



No matter how sophisticated the ships, cannons, planes bombs nuclear devices are,
unless you can field a force of armed men on the ground you do not win wars.
A fact we learned from the Viet Kong and a fact the Russians learned from the Afghanistan's.
If you can read about this information on the net. Do so.
You enjoy complete freedom of speech, an inalienable right.
Granted to you by the forceful exercise of one of the other inalienable rights.
Maybe you think that restrictions on gun right will curtail violent gun crimes
however SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE indicates otherwise.


reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 04:40 AM by Logarock
Originally posted by happykat39
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by happykat39


With that said, I do believe that if we are going to require driver education and passing a test to drive a car we should also require gun safety training to buy a gun. But I also believe that once you have that training, and a certificate to prove it, that is the end of it. All you should have to do is show it to your gun dealer and he sells you the gun with no other registration of your certificate of training or the purchase of the gun.


This prerequisite to gun ownership is simply another intrusion on the right as it is writen.


Then maybe we could just have everybody take gun safety classes in school just like taking driver ed. It wouldn't even have to use real guns as there would be no need to teach marksmanship, just how to safely handle, carry and store a weapon. The rationale behind doing that would be that even if you or your family will never be gun owners you never know when someone will come across one in a friends or relatives house.

Then when you buy a weapon at least you would have had some kind of training to keep you from being a complete idiot - oops, correct that; some people will be complete idiots no matter how they have been trained. But at least responsible people would know how to safely handle a weapon.
edit on 16-11-2012 by happykat39 because: clarified a point


The points are taken but have nothing to do with the amendment itself. Maybe you should open a thread on gun safety.


reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 05:12 AM by phroziac
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by phroziac
reply to
post by NavyDoc



Theres plenty of ways to sell guns to people and not actually know them. Gunshows for example. Also what if i say the gun was stolen or i sold it to some guy when i really didnt?

I also own a pre 4473 gun. Doesnt even have a serial number. Its a 12 gauge sears and robuck/jc higgins model 20 with a 28" barrel and mod choke, 5 shotppump, made my high standard.

Unrelated but i love when people call for gun control and have no clue what theyre talking about. A guy told me sniper rifles should be illegal, talking about the washington dc sniper, who used a bushmaster xm15 carbine. A very piss poor choice of a "sniper rifle". I pointed out to this guy that its only a sniper rifle because a sniper used it....infact its one of the worst choices there is for a sniper rifle. No excuse for stupidity. *any* rifle can be used for sniper attacks.
edit on 16-11-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)


But there you go. You have a pre 4473 rifle. It is pretty untraceable unless the initial buyer who sold it to you is still living. The problem with, and my objection of, 4473 's is that they are a record that the government has already been databasing. It is a form of backdoor registry.

You are quite on and to expand on your well put post, the whole point of the "gun show loophole" debate is to try to shut down all face to face transfers so that all transfers of firearms are on paper with, you guessed it 4473's.

Yes, the gunshow loophole is just "private party sales". Feds have no authority on private party sales unless it crosses state lines and even thats hard to prove.

Oh yeah, heres a fun one. Fed law says you have to be 21 to buy pistols. Did ya know several states made laws saying 18? has to be private party though, federally licensed dealers have to follow federal law...

Form 4473 is honestly a failure at whatever its supposed to be. Totally useless.



reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 05:23 AM by Logarock
Originally posted by phroziac
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by phroziac
reply to
post by NavyDoc



Theres plenty of ways to sell guns to people and not actually know them. Gunshows for example. Also what if i say the gun was stolen or i sold it to some guy when i really didnt?

I also own a pre 4473 gun. Doesnt even have a serial number. Its a 12 gauge sears and robuck/jc higgins model 20 with a 28" barrel and mod choke, 5 shotppump, made my high standard.

Unrelated but i love when people call for gun control and have no clue what theyre talking about. A guy told me sniper rifles should be illegal, talking about the washington dc sniper, who used a bushmaster xm15 carbine. A very piss poor choice of a "sniper rifle". I pointed out to this guy that its only a sniper rifle because a sniper used it....infact its one of the worst choices there is for a sniper rifle. No excuse for stupidity. *any* rifle can be used for sniper attacks.
edit on 16-11-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)


But there you go. You have a pre 4473 rifle. It is pretty untraceable unless the initial buyer who sold it to you is still living. The problem with, and my objection of, 4473 's is that they are a record that the government has already been databasing. It is a form of backdoor registry.

You are quite on and to expand on your well put post, the whole point of the "gun show loophole" debate is to try to shut down all face to face transfers so that all transfers of firearms are on paper with, you guessed it 4473's.

Yes, the gunshow loophole is just "private party sales". Feds have no authority on private party sales unless it crosses state lines and even thats hard to prove.

Oh yeah, heres a fun one. Fed law says you have to be 21 to buy pistols. Did ya know several states made laws saying 18? has to be private party though, federally licensed dealers have to follow federal law...

Form 4473 is honestly a failure at whatever its supposed to be. Totally useless.


Just big brother at work. They just have to let everyone know that hay, we are around here watching, regulating and keeping an eye out. Its psyops.


reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 07:23 AM by happykat39
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by happykat39
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by happykat39


With that said, I do believe that if we are going to require driver education and passing a test to drive a car we should also require gun safety training to buy a gun. But I also believe that once you have that training, and a certificate to prove it, that is the end of it. All you should have to do is show it to your gun dealer and he sells you the gun with no other registration of your certificate of training or the purchase of the gun.


This prerequisite to gun ownership is simply another intrusion on the right as it is writen.


Then maybe we could just have everybody take gun safety classes in school just like taking driver ed. It wouldn't even have to use real guns as there would be no need to teach marksmanship, just how to safely handle, carry and store a weapon. The rationale behind doing that would be that even if you or your family will never be gun owners you never know when someone will come across one in a friends or relatives house.

Then when you buy a weapon at least you would have had some kind of training to keep you from being a complete idiot - oops, correct that; some people will be complete idiots no matter how they have been trained. But at least responsible people would know how to safely handle a weapon.
edit on 16-11-2012 by happykat39 because: clarified a point


The points are taken but have nothing to do with the amendment itself. Maybe you should open a thread on gun safety.


NOTED:
I did overplay the point somewhat but most of it was in response to others remarks too. However, I don't think a gun safety thread would go anywhere unless we run into a spate of idiots shooting their couches, with their 5 year old kid sitting on it, or blowing off their toes etc, etc, etc ad infinitum ad nauseum. Then there might be enough interest in gun safety to carry a thread past the first page.


reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 07:58 AM by ganjoa
reply to post by Logarock



We do indeed live in strange times. I'm no proponent of regulation or restriction when it comes to our "guaranteed" liberties. Some would call regulation the "price" of freedom, but then again, those folks don't under stand the FREE part either - regulation always comes with a price, paid by the people to the government. Hmmmmmm

ganjoa


reply posted on 17-11-2012 @ 08:39 AM by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by MOMof3



Can you explain how registration is not just the only hope but how registration could help catch mentally ill people?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



UN Proposes Tax On Americans for 3rd world countries
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags
Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school
  Posted 12 days ago with 27 member flags
" Climate Change Is Not A Hoax", says Obama!!??
  Posted 4 days ago with 21 member flags
Former Arizona Sheriff Mack, ‘Gun Control Against the Law’
  Posted 13 days ago with 12 member flags
Limiting Freedom & It\'s Effects On Society
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags