New DNC head is furious you can sell your own property without government permission

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
reply to post by macman

 

Do you know why regulations are put in place? Regulations happen when the average citizen can not govern themselves in a particular area anymore and people get ripped off,hurt, or killed! Look to the old west to see what it was like. Arguments were solved in the middle of the street for the whole world to see. Sorry, you guy's can use the Constitutional crutch all you want, but it wont change anything if the majority of the people want regulations. You will be the minority. Lets face it, many of us in this country are tired of the minority speaking for the rest of us!

Wrong again. research shows that there was less gun crime that has been dramatized in movies and by Hollywood.
No, regulations happen when the Govt thinks that people can't govern themselves.
But, the fed Govt has no authority in this matter. The States hold the sole authority.
No, you and others like you are the minority. This is demonstrated by the fact that the lawful process of passing laws in circumvented and replaced with regulating these things.

Try again.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
reply to post by projectvxn

 

My point was if a non law abiding citizen sells his gun to an unsuspecting law abiding citizen then the person with a weapon in their possession that was used in a murder could be charged with the crime.

If anyone is worried about this, just have the transaction notarized at the time of sale.
Then you hve proof of when you either took or relinquished posseion of the gun.

reply to post by projectvxn

I deal with it every day.I firmly support my Constitution. You should relise that the Constitution is in constant change. Do you have any idea haw many laws have be added or removed from the Constitution. It is MY OPINION that a regulation SHOULD be put in place for privatized gun sales. No difference to me. A sale is a sale, it makes no difference if it is in a gun shop or a guy on Craig's list.

reply to post by CaptGizmo


It makes a difference if it's in state or cross state border commerce. For guns going across state lines, that's fine. For private sales it is a state commerce issue not federal.

I recommend you READ the constitution.

reply to post by projectvxn

I would love to continue this conversation but I am at work and my lunch break is over. The big Cheese is starting to give me the evil eye. Good talks guys.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
reply to post by projectvxn

 

I deal with it every day.I firmly support my Constitution. You should relise that the Constitution is in constant change. Do you have any idea haw many laws have be added or removed from the Constitution. It is MY OPINION that a regulation SHOULD be put in place for privatized gun sales. No difference to me. A sale is a sale, it makes no difference if it is in a gen shop or a guy on Craig's list.

Obviously you don't support the Constitution. The 2nd amendment protects the right to bare arms. Don't really see where it gives the Fed Govt the authority to monitor/control/regulate the sales of said firearms.

Now, you believe that the Constitution is a living breathing document that should be subject to the "Regulations of the Day". Wrong again.
There is the correct way to change it. The process is laid out very clearly as well.
Regulations are merely a 'work around' to getting laws in place. They are unlawful.
If the masses truly wanted this type of gun control, why use regulation instead of the lawful process laid out in the Constitution you said you support.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
You generalization is amusing. A gun is a deadly weapon used for killing or hunting.

100% wrong.

A firearm has but one purpose: To fire a projectile. Where that projectile goes is determined by the human operator.

A hammer has but one purpose: To hammer stuff. Now, whether the object being hammered is a nail or a skull is determined by a human operator.

You are blaming the tool for the actions of a human. An inanimate object cannot be responsible for what a human does with it.

If you want to have an adult conversation about this, I suggest you debate intelligently, like an adult.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
I think the title of this thread is a little misleading. I opened this expecting to read about personal property as in land or your home. I don't see why gun owners are so upset. The argument that this is personal property is a weak one in my opinion. Look this is not like you are trying to sell a stamp collection or a guitar or something. This is about the private citizen attempting to sell a deadly WEAPON. I know I would want anyone trying to do that put under the microscope. Could have been a weapon used in a murder for all you know. Next they find the weapon and you own it. Guess who gets charged with murder!

Yo do realize that the personal items within the confines of your home are deemed personal property. Also, property on your persons per the law are deemed private ownership.

Possession is a property interest under which an individual is able to exercise power over something to the exclusion of all others. It is a basic property right that entitles the possessor to (1) the right to continue peaceful possession against everyone except someone having a superior right; (2) the right to recover a chattel that has been wrongfully taken; and (3) the right to recover damages against wrongdoers.

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Actual possession exists when an individual knowingly has direct physical control over an object at a given time. For example, an individual wearing a particular piece of valuable jewelry has actual possession of it. Constructive possession is the power and intent of an individual to control a particular item, even though it is not physically in that person's control. For example, an individual who has the key to a bank safe deposit box, which contains a valuable piece of jewelry that she owns, is said to be in constructive possession of the jewelry.

reply to post by CaptGizmo

A gun is a deadly weapon used for killing or hunting. Not cooking or cutting your grass.

No actually a gun is an inanimate object, a tool if you will. It cannot be used without the hands of the beholder. Fairly simple concept to understand?

I don't like this and it should not happen. I recently bought a gun from my sister. I know the history, I know my sister, why should I go through a bunch of BS to buy it from her?
As for criminals, wake up people. Look at the stats for how they actually get their guns. They do not buy them. They break into peoples homes and steal them, unless the people happen to be home at the time, then that doesn't work out so well. How is this law going to stop that?

reply to post by SmokeandShadow


YYYyaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy for you!

This was, for the most part, the general idea starting out. The federal government had VERY limited power to reach into people's lives, as the constitution was mainly a document restricting them to very specific functions.

The way things were supposed to be, your state capital was supposed to be the biggest pain in our behinds, because it would be easier for the people to deal with their local governments and address problems directly - having the power of government far-removed from the people was one of the big gripes in the Declaration of Independence.

Nullifynullifynullify any invalid federal 'laws'. They're exceeding their authority, those in government that allow them to do it are oathbreakers, and it's already out of hand.

Thanks again, friend.

reply to post by HabaneroPepper


Well said

Most people with this line of thinking don't seem to realize that pretty much EVERYTHING is a weapon - I could beat someone to death with pots and pans or run over them with my lawnmower, if I didn't feel like just taking out the blade for ease of transport.

Blaming guns for anything is ridiculous, and restrictive gun laws, in addition to being completely unconstitutional are stupid. Laws only restrict those who obey them, and leaving citizens unable to defend themselves from the criminals who will then be the sole group holding them - other than tax feeders who are only minutes away when you need them in seconds - is quite simply ludicrous.

It's a documented fact that crime rates decrease when citizenry is more readily armed. Criminals actually start worrying that they might pay directly for their crime and start to work with that whole self-preservation thing. There was a great news article some time back about a home intruder that locked himself in the bathroom and called 911 when the homeowner showed up as he thought the owner might have a gun!

reply to post by Praetorius


Agreed. In Australia 2004, they had a mandatory gun turn in. Once those weapons were destroyed, ( mind you law abiding citizens) the criminals however, din't turn them in. Crime went through the roof! I think if i recall correctly, rape went up like 42%
and robberies like 60%.

Tried to find the old article but could snatch it.

reply to post by HabaneroPepper


Indeed.

Britain (maybe the whole UK?) saw the same thing. Sad, stupid stuff.

reply to post by Praetorius


Yeah, its amazing to me that the liberal left would prefer to unarm the people and allow chaos to ensue.

reply to post by colbyforce


Could you give me more info on those facts as I am interested thanks!

You can see this dynamic at work within a single state--Texas.

Juries in the metropolitan areas reflect the more homogenized USA; the jurors have never handled a gun personally, and so they fear the object. They are also suspicious of anyone who has a gun at the ready to use in self defense.

On the other hand, in the rural half of the state, the dynamic is the opposite. Most jurors are gun owners, and many of them pack guns every day, especially outdoor workers who deal with snakes, etc.

The rate of home invasions in rural areas is slow low it becomes difficult to measure. But then, practically every rural farmstead is well armed, and knows the neighbors' vehicles by sight. People out of place are detected instantly, and people who "shoot first," as long as they shoot a perpetrator, are viewed as home-town heroes. Which is why practically no one needs to repel a home invader in rural areas. Even the perps know how dangerous it is to just waltz on to private property and start raising hell.

The police are much more polite also. Nothing like an armed populace to keep the cops on their best behavior.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
reply to post by macman

 

Do you know why regulations are put in place? Regulations happen when the average citizen can not govern themselves in a particular area anymore and people get ripped off,hurt, or killed! Look to the old west to see what it was like. Arguments were solved in the middle of the street for the whole world to see. Sorry, you guy's can use the Constitutional crutch all you want, but it wont change anything if the majority of the people want regulations. You will be the minority. Lets face it, many of us in this country are tired of the minority speaking for the rest of us!

We aren't the minority bro. We are Americans and nothing more and nothing less. It is wrong to regulate exchange between people. Coffee has caffeine and caffeine is a drug and by buying a cup of coffe you are selling a drug.... It may be an abstract generalization but caffeine is harmful to the body, Should we regulate how much coffee we drink via gov't because peopl drink too much coffee and it can harm them. It is self governance and erosion of personal sovereignty. My son was killed a few years ago due to somebody shooting him... I am sad because of it but I do not believe in regulating gun sales because it was owned by a legal owner. I am all for extending gun ownership to all Americans so we can govern ourselves and protect ourselves.

how about she worries about sentencing drug kingpins that are extradited to the u.s., some of them with hundreds of ordered killing under their belt, to more than a lousy 20 years in prison.

which seems to be the average sentence for people that import over 10,000 kilos a month of coc aine, have murder counts in the thousands including police, judges, civilians, women and children and anybody else that gets in their way.

not to mention the massive arsenals of illegal weapons they have.

yes, her priorities are right, let's get law abiding citizens selling a gun to other law abiding citizens. yet gangbangers are riding around with mac-10's and fully automatic ak-47s. no mention of that in her stupid speeches.

she's whacked out of her mind. america is in bad shape when it goes after the good guys.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I would not worry. A large number of Democrats are pro gun. It's not about Party. Lot's of Dem's hunt and shoot.