***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (1 Viewer)

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Maybe one difference is the durability of the exchange. A vote lasts only a moment, while a gun can remain operational for many years. Simply checking your name against a list at the time of purchase is more problematic because of the possibility that somebody else will later get the gun (either because they stole it or because you gave/lent/sold it to them). Or the possibility that you yourself will get "delisted" (e.g., you commit a violent felony or have mental health issues, etc.) but still retain possession of the gun you bought when you were still on the list.

If the gun was stolen, there's an additional charge for burglary, theft of a firearm, or whatever to bring against the person which will be a virtual slam dunk in court and will help close a bunch of open criminal cases if the gun is found after the commission of a different crime. If it was given/lent/sold, the person who is the registered owner will have information about who has the gun.Also, if you get "delisted," there's suddenly a record of the firearms you have in your possession, and until those weapons are turned in or registered with another owner, you're in violation of your "delisting," which the appropriate authorities can figure out and deal with. In fact, "delisting" is probably the most helpful part of a registration law - "you've lost your right to own a gun. Now account for these firearms which you are no longer allowed to possess."

I think we're arguing on the same side here.

 

[Henry Ford]

Maybe one difference is the durability of the exchange. A vote lasts only a moment, while a gun can remain operational for many years. Simply checking your name against a list at the time of purchase is more problematic because of the possibility that somebody else will later get the gun (either because they stole it or because you gave/lent/sold it to them). Or the possibility that you yourself will get "delisted" (e.g., you commit a violent felony or have mental health issues, etc.) but still retain possession of the gun you bought when you were still on the list.

If the gun was stolen, there's an additional charge for burglary, theft of a firearm, or whatever to bring against the person which will be a virtual slam dunk in court and will help close a bunch of open criminal cases if the gun is found after the commission of a different crime. If it was given/lent/sold, the person who is the registered owner will have information about who has the gun.Also, if you get "delisted," there's suddenly a record of the firearms you have in your possession, and until those weapons are turned in or registered with another owner, you're in violation of your "delisting," which the appropriate authorities can figure out and deal with. In fact, "delisting" is probably the most helpful part of a registration law - "you've lost your right to own a gun. Now account for these firearms which you are no longer allowed to possess."

I think we're arguing on the same side here.

Then I guess we're both winning.

 

[Glass Joe]

What would be the point in a gun registry? We already have background checks, if those aren't enough, beef them up.

I see very little benefit to this.

 

[tom22406]

What would be the point in a gun registry? We already have background checks, if those aren't enough, beef them up.I see very little benefit to this.

Because if your true goal is to eliminate all guns(I believe you said that)you will need to know who has them and how many.

 

[Henry Ford]

What would be the point in a gun registry? We already have background checks, if those aren't enough, beef them up.I see very little benefit to this.

When a felon loses his right to have a firearm, there is a record in the system of his guns. He is then responsible for accounting for those weapons, rather than keeping them illegally or handing them out to other felons.It also creates a paper trail on a gun - guns no longer just get lost in the system. Those felons running around doing illegal things with guns they shouldn't have? Those guns were all legit at some point. If someone has to account for a gun, he/she isn't just going to hand it over to someone else for use in a crime. Add in a spectacularly huge penalty for theft of a firearm or providing a firearm to a felon - which I think we really, really need to shore up - and you've got a tool to help reduce the number of guns in the hands of the "bad guys."How many guns do you think were purchased legally and ended up in the hands of felons when the legal purchaser became a felon or when it was sold or given to a friend or family member who is a felon?

 

[timschochet]

What would be the point in a gun registry? We already have background checks, if those aren't enough, beef them up.I see very little benefit to this.

When a felon loses his right to have a firearm, there is a record in the system of his guns. He is then responsible for accounting for those weapons, rather than keeping them illegally or handing them out to other felons.It also creates a paper trail on a gun - guns no longer just get lost in the system. Those felons running around doing illegal things with guns they shouldn't have? Those guns were all legit at some point. If someone has to account for a gun, he/she isn't just going to hand it over to someone else for use in a crime. Add in a spectacularly huge penalty for theft of a firearm or providing a firearm to a felon - which I think we really, really need to shore up - and you've got a tool to help reduce the number of guns in the hands of the "bad guys."How many guns do you think were purchased legally and ended up in the hands of felons when the legal purchaser became a felon or when it was sold or given to a friend or family member who is a felon?

This. Every other country in the world that has private ownership of firearms has this, and a national database, with no exceptions. And that includes Israel and China, which have both been cited in this thread of examples of nations where increased gun ownership has not led to an increase in crime. Most felons, from what I've been able to ascertain, do not get their guns by stealing them; they get them through illegal purchase. The purchase is illegal because it is illegal for a felon to purchase a firearm. But in the case of private gun sales, no record is kept and no background check is made, so it is impossible for the seller to know who he is selling to. Close the loophole (and the only way to do this effectively is with a national database) and then you will cut down significantly on the number of illegal sales- meaning we will cut down significantly on crime and on acts of horror like mass shootings.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

I'll say it again: Harm > Benefit

Citizens lose a little bit more control to the government. I know you guys like to laugh about why it is in the Bill of Rights, but it is there as checks and balances against a government that can turn corrupt.

How many guns did these other countries have to track? Compare that to the U.S.

What kind of compliance did they get? I wouldn't automatically translate any positive compliance statistics to that of the U.S. given our gun history and gun culture.

Those guns you mention that felons get that they do not personally steal, where do you think they come from? There was a post a couple pages back about how easy it is for a criminal to get a gun on the black market in these other countries you speak of, kind of defeats the purpose wouldn't you say?

Was it normal in these other countries for a number of owners to have gun collections worth tens of thousands of dollars? Sounds like if these records ever become public record in the US it'd be like giving a treasure map to criminals for both homes containing valuable collections of guns (if they have a collection of guns they can probably afford other expensive non-gun items) and unarmed homes. Do you know the stats for how often a burglar ejects from the scene of a crime in the U.S. once it becomes apparent the home owner is armed? This takes that element of surprise out of the equation against resourceful criminals and I would expect it to lead to more home invasions knowing the household members are unarmed, you are essentially creating a map of soft targets. It works both ways, and is detrimental for both gun owners and non-gun owners.

I'd also be curious to see what kind of favors occur in these other countries so that politically connected people could bypass all of this red tape for precisely the reasons I outlined in the above paragraph.

In a nutshell I think people's expectations about the benefits of gun registration is grossly blown out of proportion. If you disagree, I'd like to hear quantifiable predictions of the type of good this will do. We already have some pretty good data on the benefits of gun ownership for self-defense.

 

[Mr Two Cents]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice.

Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

 

[Mr Two Cents]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

 

[jafo]

I'm not sure I have a problem with the news organizations publishing the addresses of gun owners. It lets the criminals know which houses are going to be easy to invade, and which ones will have a gun pointed at them.

 

[timschochet]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice. Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

As stated before, I'm not quite sure which is more pathetic: that it's happening, or that you think it's a good thing. Probably the latter, very slightly.

 

[cobalt_27]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

Short term absurdity, no doubt. I anticipate, however, that the new laws inevitably forthcoming will be terribly uncomfortable for your gun fetish and make things safer for the rest of us. One of these days, perhaps you will grow up and evolve out of your backwoods paranoia.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

I'm not sure I have a problem with the news organizations publishing the addresses of gun owners. It lets the criminals know which houses are going to be easy to invade, and which ones will have a gun pointed at them.

Unless people bring their gun collections with them to work each day, it will be easy pickings with minimal casing.

 

[urbanhack]

I'm not sure I have a problem with the news organizations publishing the addresses of gun owners. It lets the criminals know which houses are going to be easy to invade, and which ones will have a gun pointed at them.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

Short term absurdity, no doubt. I anticipate, however, that the new laws inevitably forthcoming will be terribly uncomfortable for your gun fetish and make things safer for the rest of us. One of these days, perhaps you will grow up and evolve out of your backwoods paranoia.

Perhaps one day you will realize the U.S. is on the better half of safe countries (ranked 108th in intentional homicides) in the world and our abundance of firearms is not a curse:http://www.ncgunblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Murder-Rate-Overall-800x282.jpgor..Maybe you will realize that even if every intentional homicide was committed by a different person and a different gun each year (which is highly unlikely) that0.0055% of all guns in the U.S. are responsible for an intentional homicide each year that is...1 gun out of every 18,308...and these gun control measures which you are so adamant about infringes on the rights of the law-abiding citizens which own the 99.9945% of the guns in America which are sitting in their homes or business protecting them.For some reason however I think you will remain ignorant.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice. Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

As stated before, I'm not quite sure which is more pathetic: that it's happening, or that you think it's a good thing. Probably the latter, very slightly.

Sturm, Ruger & Company5 year chart:http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/6084/rugero.png I really don't think the gun grabbers understand us when we say sales are through the roof, we really mean they are through the roof +4 more floors

 

[Mr Two Cents]

United States — Gun Facts, Figures and the LawNumber of Privately Owned FirearmsThe estimated total number of guns held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,000Number of Military FirearmsThe defense forces of the United States are reported to have 3,054,553 firearmsNumber of Law Enforcement FirearmsPolice in the United States are reported to have 897,400 firearms

 

[urbanhack]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice. Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

As stated before, I'm not quite sure which is more pathetic: that it's happening, or that you think it's a good thing. Probably the latter, very slightly.

Sturm, Ruger & Company5 year chart:http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/6084/rugero.png I really don't think the gun grabbers understand us when we say sales are through the roof, we really mean they are through the roof +4 more floors

Who are the gun grabbers?

 

[timschochet]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice.

Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

As stated before, I'm not quite sure which is more pathetic: that it's happening, or that you think it's a good thing. Probably the latter, very slightly.

Sturm, Ruger & Company5 year chart:

http://img62.imagesh...6084/rugero.png



I really don't think the gun grabbers understand us when we say sales are through the roof, we really mean they are through the roof +4 more floors

Who are the gun grabbers?

Anyone who is in favor of the slightest gun control measure, no matter how mild.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

New gun manufacturing is going through the roof, Ruger has stopped taking new orders simply to catch up on back orders. Already twice.

Obama fixing the economy one gun at a time.

As stated before, I'm not quite sure which is more pathetic: that it's happening, or that you think it's a good thing. Probably the latter, very slightly.

Sturm, Ruger & Company5 year chart:

http://img62.imagesh...6084/rugero.png



I really don't think the gun grabbers understand us when we say sales are through the roof, we really mean they are through the roof +4 more floors

Who are the gun grabbers?

Anyone who is in favor of the slightest gun control measure, no matter how mild.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gun+grabber

 

[Cookiemonster]

Reading between the lines, I think this is just a ploy for votes in the mid-term elections. Feinstein's bill is so outrageous, that it WILL get shot down. Easily. But when it does, all of the left-wing chirping will be that the republicans squashed it. If it were to go through, dems would get killed in the mid-term elections. This all seems like a feel-good, non-issue distraction to more serious topics. Sure, if small increments of gun control can be initiated, good for the left. If further gun control can not be initiated, better for the left.

You really don't understand. Right or wrong, your opposition is sincere: they were horrified by Newtown, and they want to find ways to solve this problem. This is no ploy, no left-wing scheme. What specifically do you find outrageous about Feinstein's bill?

You really don't understand. Right or wrong, your opposition is sincere: they were horrified by democratic politicians and urban ignorance, and they have already taken millions of steps to solve this problem. This is no ploy, no right-wing scheme. We want to find ways to solve this problem, but are tired of being the target for those who want to change our lives because of a criminal. We are arming ourselves the best we can before we can't anymore. You want to take them? Come and get them. You want us to comply with unlawful, threatening laws? We will become criminals too. There will be millions of tragic boating accidents that caused people to "lose their entire arsenal at the bottom of the lake." Millions of guns will be retroactively stolen the week before. You will be making enemies and criminals of millions of people with guns!Feinstein's bill is outrageous because it goes way above and beyond the original (worthless) Clinton ban. "Evil features," that are mostly cosmetic are now marked at ONE instead of two (coupled with a detachable magazine) to become a banned weapon. Magazines over 10 rounds are again on the list. She wants to exempt specifically named guns? WOW!!! WHAT A CONCESSION!!!

-Requires owners of existing "assault weapons" to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 transfer tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE's permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

-Prohibits the transfer of "assault weapons." Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein's new bill, "assault weapons" would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

-Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm "overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose." Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines "overwhelmingly chosen" by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein's list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

I guess we are getting sick and tired of having our gun rights under attack by politicians who preach, "Do as I say, not as I do," carrying concealed handguns themselves, escorted by armed security and sending their kids to schools with armed guards but telling us we don't have the right to do the same. We are getting sick and tired of people supporting them who are by a vast majority from inner-city and urban areas that have been under strict gun control for so long that they don't know the difference. The lady down the street survived a home invasion and they only took her TVs, laptop, jewelry and car, but left her with only minor bruising so we don't really need guns afterall!!! schtick doesn't sit well with me. So you come from a big city and haven't been the victim of a violent crime, therefore support the right of a 110 pound female to fistfight with her 220 pound attacker?

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

 

[timschochet]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

 

[boots11234]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

 

[timschochet]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

tired?

You mean aside from Cuba, China, Russia, and most other totalitarian states?

let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.

Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate

1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.

The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.

How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s

What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)

Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100626143039AAIVbUH

 

[5 digit know nothing]

If this new AWB gains any traction expect to see more of these kits for various weapons pop up:

Complicating things further, a series of after-market kits that converted the SKS rifle with a fixed magazine to one with a detachable magazine began to be sold. These kits, however, were not anticipated by the writers of the Roberti-Roos law.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/1999/07/3745/#E3TiMrlk55z7xop1.99

 

[5 digit know nothing]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

 

[5 digit know nothing]

*Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include

-Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law;

Most gun owners don't feel they should have to register their guns nor do they trust LE not to confiscate and I would be surprised (if this does pass) what kind of turnout they will actually get. This could turn into a witch hunt with LE tracking down owners of guns in the end.

Well, that IS outrageous. It's outrageous that gun owners could be so paranoid as to distrust law enforcement and fear a "witchhunt." It is NOT outrageous to register all guns. This is something that should have been done decades ago.

Witchhunt indeedLooks like the case was eventually dismissed at the Supreme Court of CA:

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=2000647100CalRptr2d547_3586.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

 

[boots11234]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

Again, LOL! "HE'S KIA!!!!"

 

[Guest]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

Nah. We know that anyone owning a gun is 4x more likely to hurt them or their family than anybody else. Eventually Darwinism will take its course.

 

[timschochet]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

Is this guy trying to sound like Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men? Or is the parody unintentional? Either way. it's rather hilarious that this is "making the rounds".

 

[5 digit know nothing]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

Is this guy trying to sound like Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men? Or is the parody unintentional? Either way. it's rather hilarious that this is "making the rounds".

making the rounds as in front page on cnnthis is going to turn into the "war on guns" if this type of legislation passes where previously innocent civilians with no criminal record are going to become the targets for non-compliance

 

[Rich Conway]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

 

[timschochet]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

Is this guy trying to sound like Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men? Or is the parody unintentional? Either way. it's rather hilarious that this is "making the rounds".

making the rounds as in front page on cnn

That's because they're either horrified or laughing at you. Or both.

 

[Henry Ford]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

No, it really does not disturb me.

 

[timschochet]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

It does, yes. Perhaps we could have laws against this, in the same way we have laws against naming rape victims. Contrary to the claim of many people here, none of the Bill of Rights are absolute. But while it disturbs me, it's not enough to change my mind.

 

[timschochet]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

tired?

You mean aside from Cuba, China, Russia, and most other totalitarian states?

let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.

Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate

1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.

The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.

How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s

What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)

Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100626143039AAIVbUH

Yes tired. And with no direct causation, other than in the imagination of some very paranoid people,

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

Nah. We know that anyone owning a gun is 4x more likely to hurt them or their family than anybody else. Eventually Darwinism will take its course.

Time to ban suicides

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

tired?

You mean aside from Cuba, China, Russia, and most other totalitarian states?

let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.

Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate

1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.

The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.

How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s

What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)

Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100626143039AAIVbUH

Yes tired. And with no direct causation, other than in the imagination of some very paranoid people,

So you deny that this has already happened in the U.S., in California?

 

[Glass Joe]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

Is this guy trying to sound like Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men? Or is the parody unintentional? Either way. it's rather hilarious that this is "making the rounds".

making the rounds as in front page on cnnthis is going to turn into the "war on guns" if this type of legislation passes where previously innocent civilians with no criminal record are going to become the targets for non-compliance

I'll celebrate it.

 

[pantherclub]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

That reeks of an attention whoreI have no idea how the military got to be held in such high regard? We should emulate the police, firefighters and first responders as we do the military but for some reason we dont. And please spare me the "they fight for our freedom" crap as there hasnt been a war in say 70 years that our freedom was even in jeopardy.

 

[Henry Ford]

Difficult to even find reloading supplies today, you anti-gun nuts are getting exactly what you don't want.

Nah. We know that anyone owning a gun is 4x more likely to hurt them or their family than anybody else. Eventually Darwinism will take its course.

Time to ban suicides

That's actually the perfect solution. Only criminals won't follow the law, ensuring that our law abiding citizens are left alive.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

This is making the rounds:

Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted,Joshua BostonCpl, United States Marine Corps2004-2012

Is this guy trying to sound like Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men? Or is the parody unintentional? Either way. it's rather hilarious that this is "making the rounds".

making the rounds as in front page on cnn

That's because they're either horrified or laughing at you. Or both.

Boston said he served in Afghanistan twice and Iraq twice between 2004 and 2011. Although no longer serving in the military, the 26-year-old said he still owns guns and believes the government does not need to know what guns he owns; he believes weapons registration would lead to confiscation.Many of the people who posted the more than 1,400 passionate comments about the letter said they agreed with Boston.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

Not only does it not disturb me, I'm a big fan.

 

[pantherclub]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

It does, yes. Perhaps we could have laws against this, in the same way we have laws against naming rape victims. Contrary to the claim of many people here, none of the Bill of Rights are absolute. But while it disturbs me, it's not enough to change my mind.

we already have wayyyy too many laws dude

 

[5 digit know nothing]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

If only this came out sooner, think of the criminal lives that could have been saved post-Katrina/Sandy.

 

[Rich Conway]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

Not only does it not disturb me, I'm a big fan.

Why?I always want the bad guys to think I might have a gun, even if I don't.

 

[timschochet]

Sorry, rant not aimed at you Tim. I know most here arguing for gun control only want to see registration and some for magazine restrictions. It's just that as gun owners, we know the restriction doesn't stop there. It continues and progresses, like a cancer. Before you know it, it is entangled into just about every major organ and is terminal, with no hope of treatment or a fight. We are hoping to catch it early enough to make a fight possible. To protect this right, we have to fight at every sign of intrusion. I was not a "nut job" about gun rights before all of this, but have become one thanks to it. I can't disagree with you guys wanting registration and training and education. Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.[/George Carlin]. The more disturbing idea is to be judged in the same way by people like this.

But you don't know this. You fear it, but in fact you don't know it, because it's never happened. Gun ownership in Israel and China and all the other countries in the world that have registration hasn't decreased since registration started; it's increased. What's decreased has been gun violence. I think the registration has something to do with that. You're free to argue the point. What you're not free to argue, IMO, is that there is a slippery slope involved here that will eventually mean your guns will be seized, because that hasn't happened. In fact, so far as I know, there is not a single country in the history of this planet in which the registration of firearms was the first step in the ultimate seizure of those firearms. Perhaps you can find an example of this; I can't.

Seriously? Try this.

LOL! As they say in COD....SMOKED!!!

Really? Apart from some gun nut's theories about Hitler that are easily debunked by any reputable historian, I didn't see anything except the same old tired NRA arguments.

tired?

You mean aside from Cuba, China, Russia, and most other totalitarian states?

let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.

Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate

1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.

The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.

How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s

What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)

Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100626143039AAIVbUH

Yes tired. And with no direct causation, other than in the imagination of some very paranoid people,

So you deny that this has already happened in the U.S., in California?

Yes I deny it. The registration didn't lead to the banning. The banning led to the banning. There was no slippery slope; there never is.

 

[timschochet]

For those arguing for registration and government lists, does an occurrence like the recent newspaper "gun map" really not disturb you?

It does, yes. Perhaps we could have laws against this, in the same way we have laws against naming rape victims. Contrary to the claim of many people here, none of the Bill of Rights are absolute. But while it disturbs me, it's not enough to change my mind.

we already have wayyyy too many laws dude

Not when it come to guns. We don't have enough.