Here comes Gun control:

thebrasilian

New Member
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/whit ... trol.html#

At the beginning of his State of the Union address, President Obama tipped his hat to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who?s now recuperating in a Houston medical facility. But throughout the hourlong speech, he never addressed the issue at the core of the Giffords tragedy?gun control?and what lawmakers would, or should, do to reform American firearm-access laws.

That was intentional, according to the White House. An administration official says Obama didn?t mention guns in his speech because of the omnipresent controversy surrounding the Second Amendment and gun control. Tuesday?s speech was designed to be more about the economy and how, as Obama repeated nine times, the U.S. could ?win the future.?

But in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.

Tuesday night after the speech, Obama adviser David Plouffe said to NBC News that the president would not let the moment after the Arizona shootings pass without pushing for some change in the law, to prevent another similar incident. ?It?s a very important issue, and one I know there?s going to be debate about on the Hill.?...
 

Schultz

New Member
Personally I'm all for them strengthening some laws however they also need to push for better enforcement of the ones already on the books.
 

Dirk Pitt

New Member
If they can keep lunatics from obtaining guns through legal means like us law abiding citizens do without making the rest of us sane people, though I suppose calling some of y'all sane is a bit of a stretch :p , jump through a bunch of hoops like circus performers than I'm all for it. All these shootings like this Virginia Tech, Columbine, and Arizona aren't being committed by normal sane folk. But than again I'm not going to submit to a psychiatric exam to buy a damn gun ether...
 

Schultz

New Member
thebrasilian said:
Courious...Strengthen what laws?

We have all done this and I'll probably get crap for this but start with closing the gun show loophole IE: private sales. While most don't like it IMO private sales at gun shows shouldn't be allowed, That also goes for all private sales in newspapers, flea markets, etc etc. If you want to conduct a private sale do it through a dealer that way there is a background check involved.
 

thebrasilian

New Member
Schultz said:
thebrasilian said:
Courious...Strengthen what laws?

We have all done this and I'll probably get crap for this but start with closing the gun show loophole IE: private sales. While most don't like it IMO private sales at gun shows shouldn't be allowed, That also goes for all private sales in newspapers, flea markets, etc etc. If you want to conduct a private sale do it through a dealer that way there is a background check involved.
I have to disagree with you on this. It would be another nibble at our liberties. Then what would be next? Do the same with AR mags, firing pins, fertilizer sales between farmers? Licensing (like for your cars) and monitoring sales of gun powder, lead, brass and primers?

We have laws. It is your responcibility to follow them. Keep your paper trail i.e. bill of sales. You can't legislate away bad people from doing bad things. Otherwise you start infringing on peoples rights.
 

Dave29461

Active Member
I have to agree with The Brasilian. I will not, however, give you a load of heiferdust for saying what you feel. The problem with our system today is the inability to tolerate others' opinions and discuss them in a civil manner. This forum is a good example, so far, of civil discourse between people with different points of view. I'm a 'liberal conservative' and my best friend is a 'conservative liberal'. What does that mean? We agree to disagree about some things but keep an open mind to the possibility that we may have to take a closer look at our opinions in light of new or discovered facts. So, go for it. Let us know how and why you feel like you do and we'll return the favor.

Dave

P.S. I consider the right to privately sell at gunshows or in state without dealer transfer a right, not a loophole. I do keep a paper trail. If someone won't show picture ID they can't buy my gun.
 

Schultz

New Member
See I knew I'd get crap for it, Don't get me wrong I see both sides of the private sale argument however coming from a family that's over half law enforcement I have seen some of the problems they have faced from this.
 

thebrasilian

New Member
By the way it's not crap. Wasn't intended to be rude. Didn't think i was.

I have a few friends in law enforcement as well. I am also half Brasilian and know what gun ban laws have done there.

Guns are already here. In the hands of law abiding citizens and people that mean to do you harm. Unfortunately, any new restrictions won't change any of what I just said except for reducing the size of law abiding citizens who can protect themselves.

How would a limiting high capacity mags solve anything? I already have 10+ for my AR. 5+ for my PT99 (Man I need more)(FYI 17 rounds, Clinton preban).
How would back ground check stop the exchange of guns between people. Twice in my life I have had people with garbage bags full of hand guns come up to me asking if I was interested. (disclaimer: Long ago and I walk in a very fast but respectful manner away from them.)
Then there's the question that comes up "Why wound anyone need these type of weapons?" That's a flawed questions. Why does anyone need a Ferrari, a jacked up jeep (like mine), an expensive peice of art/jewlery, sword, E+ size model rockets, model airplanes with real jet engines...(aside: did you know people are now doing genetic engineering in their garages?)... Reason, because they want to.
 

Schultz

New Member
You weren't rude it's just a figure of speech and I never said anything about high cap mags either, Lord knows I have plenty of them. :shock:
 
What we need to legistlate is a ban on stupid people. Just let the ATF test everyone just before they become 18 years old. Anyone who does not pass the stupid test, can not buy a gun, or a car, a butcher knife or a fishing pole. We would need to find some way to keep them away from hot coffee also. Of course they would not be able to vote. We would not want stupid people at the ballot boxes- RIGHT ?
These people will go directly to first line military service. They can walk the roads ahead of any vehicles looking for IED's. they could carry bombs to their designated locations. They would be great for ferretting out enemy locations. Just dress them up as a well gromed goat. They could have guns - BUT no ammo. Or they could work in chow hall. Of course we would need to steralize them soo they could not reproduce.
 
Schultz said:
See I knew I'd get crap for it, Don't get me wrong I see both sides of the private sale argument however coming from a family that's over half law enforcement I have seen some of the problems they have faced from this.
We do not need any new laws. The problem is with these people you have already identified - law enforcement!
In this age of computers and instant communications - My neighbor knows more about me from my facebook account than the ATF.
The LEO's do not talk to the State guys, the state guys do not talk to the federal guys- Turf wars :roll:
The problem is with Law enforcement and they have created for themselves a purposely-structured elite society where communication is non-existence.
That is why background checks are not valid. And no leo wants things to change.
 

HHB Guns

New Member
Schultz said:
See I knew I'd get crap for it, Don't get me wrong I see both sides of the private sale argument however coming from a family that's over half law enforcement I have seen some of the problems they have faced from this.
I'm with you Schultz. As a law enforcement officer and a dealer I can tell you I feel 100% all transfers of ownership should go through a dealer. If you are the seller just tell the buyer he has to pay $15 to get it in his name. I could care less that I'm a dealer. That is not why I'm saying it. It is way to easy for the 9 prohibited persons to get guns without even getting them on the down low from criminals. They can go to armslist.com and in 10 minutes they can meet with a seller give him cash and as dave says "get a copy of their drivers license" and they now have a gun. Dave...Are you checking their license somwhere like NICS or just keeping it on file to clear your own butt when the criminal goes out and kills 20 people? Convicted felons still have valid drivers license so you or anybody else who sells a gun locally and gets a copy of their DL has no idea what their background is.

Dave I was not picking on youby any means because I consider you a good friend but it is 100% true. The only way to help keep criminals from getting guns is to complete a NICS check. You may be cleared because you keep good records but your not helping the problem with keeping criminals from getting guns so easy. I am die had republican and hate most gun control but background checks are a must. We are making it to damn easy as it stands.

Just my two cents and I'm sure I have pissed most of you off. I spoke nothing but facts though. The sad part is they will never make background checks in SC on private sales a law. So criminals can get them all day long without fear.
 

Dave29461

Active Member
Shucks Henry, I've been married for 32 years. It takes a lot more than that to piss me off. I haven't sold very many guns. I still have the first umpteen I ever bought and I've usually sold to friends or family members. I guess I always thought someone who wanted a gun for illegal purposes wouldn't want to leave a trail to be followed. I wish there was a way to allow a NICS check by anyone but I also realize the problems. I've bought more guns in private sales than I've sold by a wide margin. I see where y'all are coming from, I just hate to give up anymore privacy than I have to. I think back to the days when I was growing up and thought you could trust the government to do what was right and moral towards their citizens. Those days are long gone.
I appreciate your friendship and I value your opinion.

Dave
 

jmt2566

New Member
I think that I have to side with Henry & Schultz on this one. I am not for registering guns or any such thing but background checks to ensure we are in keeping with existing laws are reasonable in my opinion. (You guys have no idea how hard it is for me to reconcile this with my otherwise very libertarian beliefs!)

Jeff
 

Frost

Active Member
It is not a matter of being sensible.
It is a matter of letting them drive another nail in the coffin of freedom.
 

fordnut

Active Member
Guys: I hear and understand what you all are saying. Guns in the wrong hands is a big problem...Noone knows how to stop it...but....passing laws for more gun control isNNNNNOT the answer.

How do we get drunk drivers off the road...stop making alchol...
How do you stop drug addition.....stop making drugs....

How do you stop stupid politions...give them more power to take away your rights...

There has to be a stopping point somewhere. New laws are not going to keep bad guys from doing whatever they want...

Lets not let them take away all our rights just because some idiot kills some people with a gun.

Steve
 

wsa111

New Member
This is a very touchy subject, unless you have a conceled weapons permit purchasing clips over 10 rounds would require the permit??????

But the problem is listen to money mans ads saying they have a sale on all firearms.

You hate to have state control, but defenitely not federal control on purchase of clips & handguns.

The crooks will always have guns, but is it feasable to control the impulse buyer of ammo or??

That lady Giffords was lucky she was hit by a full metal jacket projectile, if she was hit with a hollow point or a plastic nose bullet she would not be here today.

I agree that todays laws just need to be enforced.

This latest tragity will just open the door for politicians to take a shot at the present laws.

Hang on, will see what happens, Bill
 
Top