free hit counter
Sensible Gun Law 101 - Page 2 - Redneck Clubhouse - Of, By and For Rednecks!

Assault on the 2nd Amendment Here's the spot to post firearms related threads about proposed new laws, lies about shootings, gun myths, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 1st, 2015, 02:13 AM
trlrtrash13's Avatar
trlrtrash13 trlrtrash13 is offline
Trailer Park Hero
9 Ball Connect Champion 3D Frogger Champion Baseball Champion FogHorn Thanks Champion Ace Driver Champion 2D Knock-Out Champion UNO 3 Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Trailer Park
Posts: 4,295
Likes Given: 397
Liked 972 in 790 Posts
trlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moomin View Post
We come back to this - regulation of whatever kind is kinda pointless, since it does not affect the lawless by default.

There is no misconception here that this would stop all gun crime. However, this would affect the lawless. Straw purchasers would now be "on the hook" as when they purchase a gun their id is now on the title filed by the shop that sold the gun. They now have to either register the gun in their name and then turn it over to a crook, or fail to register it in a timely manner, in which case they will be red flagged as having bought a gun that they failed to register.



As far as infringement, there is none. Anyone who could buy a gun the day before passage can buy one the day after. Every gun that could be purchased legally before can also be purchased after. There is no infringement.
__________________

You know what date is on this coin? 1958. It's been traveling 22 years to get here. And now it's here. And it's either heads or tails, and you have to say. Call it.
  #12  
Old November 1st, 2015, 04:22 AM
moomin's Avatar
moomin moomin is offline
€COM#1
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Freezer
Posts: 6,955
Likes Given: 766
Liked 1,827 in 1,621 Posts
moomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trlrtrash13 View Post
There is no misconception here that this would stop all gun crime. However, this would affect the lawless. Straw purchasers would now be "on the hook" as when they purchase a gun their id is now on the title filed by the shop that sold the gun. They now have to either register the gun in their name and then turn it over to a crook, or fail to register it in a timely manner, in which case they will be red flagged as having bought a gun that they failed to register.
Fair enough. How does this differ from the current situation? I mean, I assume you have to show ID to buy a gun, and thus if that gun is used in a crime you can already be "fingered" by any police investigation?
__________________
Dance like no one is watching. Sing like no one is listening. Love like you've never been hurt and live like it's heaven on Earth.
  #13  
Old November 1st, 2015, 09:35 AM
trlrtrash13's Avatar
trlrtrash13 trlrtrash13 is offline
Trailer Park Hero
9 Ball Connect Champion 3D Frogger Champion Baseball Champion FogHorn Thanks Champion Ace Driver Champion 2D Knock-Out Champion UNO 3 Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Trailer Park
Posts: 4,295
Likes Given: 397
Liked 972 in 790 Posts
trlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to behold
Default

Not really. You show id to buy at gun shops or retail stores but they have gun shows where there are loopholes. Also, you buy a gun then register it and that's that. If you sell it there is no need to notify anyone. Thus, if I can buy guns but you can't I can buy one and sell it to you. If it's found at a crime scene they'll come ask me and I'll tell them I sold it to you. Then you, of course, tell them you loaned it to your cousin and he traded it for a gold chain and that guy sold it for drug money. Each lead more obscure than the last, and no person in the chain is accountable for their part in the process because we don't have a law like this.
__________________

You know what date is on this coin? 1958. It's been traveling 22 years to get here. And now it's here. And it's either heads or tails, and you have to say. Call it.
  #14  
Old November 1st, 2015, 01:02 PM
walruskkkch's Avatar
walruskkkch walruskkkch is offline
They call me MR. Kitty
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Katmandhu
Posts: 6,783
Likes Given: 153
Liked 2,313 in 1,940 Posts
walruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant future
Default

Ahhh the ol' liberal "Loophole" ploy. Smartly played sir, smartly played. Also disingenuous and plain wrong. Once again, infringement by "Commonsense" regulation. Straw purchasers are already committing a crime which your "Commonsense" infringement won't solve, but will make it more arduous and difficult for legal purchasers. Punish the guilty not infringe the innocent.
__________________


Quote:
“I think it’s unfair. We voted for Hillary Clinton, but it is Trump who won. It is unfair,” Heloïse said.
Gentlemen, he said I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes
I've moved your mountains and marked your cards
But Eden is burning either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage for the changing of the guards.
  #15  
Old November 1st, 2015, 07:55 PM
trlrtrash13's Avatar
trlrtrash13 trlrtrash13 is offline
Trailer Park Hero
9 Ball Connect Champion 3D Frogger Champion Baseball Champion FogHorn Thanks Champion Ace Driver Champion 2D Knock-Out Champion UNO 3 Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Trailer Park
Posts: 4,295
Likes Given: 397
Liked 972 in 790 Posts
trlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walruskkkch View Post
Ahhh the ol' liberal "Loophole" ploy. Smartly played sir, smartly played. Also disingenuous and plain wrong. Once again, infringement by "Commonsense" regulation. Straw purchasers are already committing a crime which your "Commonsense" infringement won't solve, but will make it more arduous and difficult for legal purchasers. Punish the guilty not infringe the innocent.


There is nothing disingenuous about it. Assuming I am wrong, I am genuinely wrong, but I don't believe I am. It is a fact that federal law differentiates between private gun sales and sales by a business. In the same way that a business selling clothes is regulated differently than an individual who sells clothes at a flea market, a business selling guns is required to do a background check whereas an individual can sell without doing them at gun shows. If this is wrong, proof up instead of calling me disingenuous.



Notice you sit here and point out that the things I am proposing for the law there are already existing laws against while at the same time claiming this is "infringement"? I understand we already have laws on the books. The only thing revolutionary about my proposal is that it would make those laws enforceable.



Btw, you still haven't explained how a law that allows you to keep all the guns you have and buy all the guns you want in the future is somehow "infringing" on your right to keep and bear arms.
__________________

You know what date is on this coin? 1958. It's been traveling 22 years to get here. And now it's here. And it's either heads or tails, and you have to say. Call it.
  #16  
Old November 1st, 2015, 08:39 PM
walruskkkch's Avatar
walruskkkch walruskkkch is offline
They call me MR. Kitty
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Katmandhu
Posts: 6,783
Likes Given: 153
Liked 2,313 in 1,940 Posts
walruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant future
Default

Why not just be honest, write a constitutional amendment that removes the right to bear arms, give the government the power to regulate all firearms and be done with it? Do that and I would grant you the government has the right and power to do whatever you find to be covered by "commonsense" regulation. Short of that I see no point in arguing degree or nuances nor splitting hairs and determining how many angels are allowed to dance on a pin with a gun.
__________________


Quote:
“I think it’s unfair. We voted for Hillary Clinton, but it is Trump who won. It is unfair,” Heloïse said.
Gentlemen, he said I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes
I've moved your mountains and marked your cards
But Eden is burning either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage for the changing of the guards.
  #17  
Old November 1st, 2015, 10:05 PM
trlrtrash13's Avatar
trlrtrash13 trlrtrash13 is offline
Trailer Park Hero
9 Ball Connect Champion 3D Frogger Champion Baseball Champion FogHorn Thanks Champion Ace Driver Champion 2D Knock-Out Champion UNO 3 Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Trailer Park
Posts: 4,295
Likes Given: 397
Liked 972 in 790 Posts
trlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to beholdtrlrtrash13 is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walruskkkch View Post
Why not just be honest, write a constitutional amendment that removes the right to bear arms, give the government the power to regulate all firearms and be done with it? Do that and I would grant you the government has the right and power to do whatever you find to be covered by "commonsense" regulation. Short of that I see no point in arguing degree or nuances nor splitting hairs and determining how many angels are allowed to dance on a pin with a gun.


Me be honest? I'm not trying to take your guns. I don't want to take your guns. Nothing in my suggestion would take your guns, nor limit your ability to get guns in the future.



Why don't you state your case instead of tossing out ridiculous and unsubstantiated accusations? I support the right to keep and bear arms. Has titling cars led to a drastic reduction in car ownership? Are people who support the process of having a title for cars anti-car zealots who are trying to take your cars? On a most simplistic level, the fact that I want a way to establish legal ownership of a gun has to first and foremost be predicated on the idea that one has the right to own a gun. If I want to prevent you from owning a gun, of what use would it be to create titles for guns? Frankly, you're coming of as a bit paranoid and delusional here. I would not write a Constitutional amendment that removes the right to bear arms because I support that right.
__________________

You know what date is on this coin? 1958. It's been traveling 22 years to get here. And now it's here. And it's either heads or tails, and you have to say. Call it.
  #18  
Old November 2nd, 2015, 01:37 AM
Midnight Marauder's Avatar
Midnight Marauder Midnight Marauder is offline
Registered Beer User
Asteroids Champion 007 Everything or Nothing Champion 9-Ball Champion Bombing By Night Champion Flash Pacman Champion Carmageddon Champion Gotham Punch Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Where the Buffalo Roam
Posts: 8,225
Likes Given: 7,697
Liked 2,907 in 2,357 Posts
Midnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant futureMidnight Marauder has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moomin View Post
Fair enough. How does this differ from the current situation? I mean, I assume you have to show ID to buy a gun, and thus if that gun is used in a crime you can already be "fingered" by any police investigation?
When we buy, sale or trade motor vehicles they come with a title, and this title MUST be renewed on any transactions. Firearms do not have this safeguard. Therefore a straw purchaser can buy a firearm for someone who can't qualify, give them the gun then if something happens with said gun, can claim oops, it was stolen!

This way, what Steve is proposing, this straw purchaser would have this firearm titled, and if he gives this firearm to someone else or sells it, but does not transfer title, he is liable still, for that gun.

If I sell my pickup truck to some dude, and we don't transfer the title, I am on the hook for it when he then goes out and kills someone in a DWI. Therefore there is NO way I am not doing that title transfer when I sell that truck.

This proposal STOPS straw purchases and brings firearms to the same level as other important property such as autos, boats, campers, RVs and such.
__________________
Could it be that I could be the cowboy in that mystery who died so long ago in that El Paso sand?
  #19  
Old November 2nd, 2015, 12:29 PM
moomin's Avatar
moomin moomin is offline
€COM#1
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Freezer
Posts: 6,955
Likes Given: 766
Liked 1,827 in 1,621 Posts
moomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant futuremoomin has a brilliant future
Default

Then I see few downsides. Of course, where I live, that's already the rule - I would commit a felony if I sold my gun to someone who does not show me both license and id, and if I don't transfer title to him. Very similar to the rules we have for vehicles. Now, this proposal strikes me as over-elaborate in detail and I would be hesitant to give the Feds a central registry like that, on account of how we know that there is apparently no register security whatsoever in the US, but that's just procedure.

Only how could this ever be implemented? Surely, if blacks are too stupid and lazy, according to democrats, to get IDs for voting, requiring IDs for guns is tantamount to disparate outcome racism too?
__________________
Dance like no one is watching. Sing like no one is listening. Love like you've never been hurt and live like it's heaven on Earth.
  #20  
Old November 2nd, 2015, 01:58 PM
walruskkkch's Avatar
walruskkkch walruskkkch is offline
They call me MR. Kitty
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Katmandhu
Posts: 6,783
Likes Given: 153
Liked 2,313 in 1,940 Posts
walruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant futurewalruskkkch has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Why don't you state your case instead of tossing out ridiculous and unsubstantiated accusations? I support the right to keep and bear arms. Has titling cars led to a drastic reduction in car ownership? Are people who support the process of having a title for cars anti-car zealots who are trying to take your cars? On a most simplistic level, the fact that I want a way to establish legal ownership of a gun has to first and foremost be predicated on the idea that one has the right to own a gun. If I want to prevent you from owning a gun, of what use would it be to create titles for guns? Frankly, you're coming of as a bit paranoid and delusional here. I would not write a Constitutional amendment that removes the right to bear arms because I support that right.
I have stated my case, it is you that have problems accepting it. I can't help that. I can, however, reject your gun banning rules wrapped in "commonsense" regulation clothing. You can accept that or not as your want. Luckily we haven't yet fully explored the field of "Commonsense" 1st amendment regulation in this country... yet. You seem to argue based on the wrong premise. I have nothing against any policy you want to adopt in regards to car ownership, nor many other things. Their is nothing that prevents the government from outright banning of the ownership of cars if they want outside public opinion. There is nothing in the Constitution which explicitly prevent it. Guns are different. There is plain text that should be understandable by anyone capable of reading. That makes it different and therefore, follow me here, not suitable to simple legislation from Congress. YOu do have a means to change that. The fact that you won't pursue that course of action is not my problem. I don't know how much plainer I can make my point. The Constitution limits government in some very, very specific areas and this is one of them. YOur desires and goals are subservient to that fact. It might be painful and hurtful to realize that but if you want to regulate arms then do it in a Constitutional manner and stop trying these end runs around the clear and plain text that is the Supreme law of the land. All ist klar, Herr Kommisar?

Moomin, as an aside, check out Project Exile and the stats on stricter law enforcement of felons having guns and their effect on crime levels.
__________________


Quote:
“I think it’s unfair. We voted for Hillary Clinton, but it is Trump who won. It is unfair,” Heloïse said.
Gentlemen, he said I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes
I've moved your mountains and marked your cards
But Eden is burning either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage for the changing of the guards.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright ©2000 - 2018 usmessageboards.com all rights reserved