America's Gun Violence

1157158160162163175

Comments

  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    dudeman said:

    I wonder where all the guns in Chicago are coming from? My guess? Something similar is going on in Indiana. But God forbid we try to reduce illegal gun trafficking.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/03/08/nypd-undercover-operation-links-to-22-virginia-residents-to-gun-trafficking-ring/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-local:homepage/card&utm_term=.f888fdb34ddb

    Have any suggestions? Illegal gun trafficking is already illegal. Will more legislation help?
    Registration.
    On the state or federal level? Many gun owners believe that registration is the beginning of confiscation, and it's hard to completely discount that fear based on a few politicians that are hell bent on getting them out of the hands of all citizens. I'm not sure why people do not trust the government... :|. Not to mention, the government couldn't even track the firearms through the utterly failed "fast and furious" debacle...what makes people think that they would be able to track them through the general population on a mass scale? That, and modern technology has made it to where anyone with a 3D printer can print the parts needed to get by any registry if they desired... All that being said, the only people the registry would have impact on are the ones that do follow the laws already. I'm all about stiffer penalties for those that are caught illegally in possession of firearms, but I just do not see a registry being of much benifit...unless you want to mass confiscate down the road...
    Blah blah blah, "dog ate my homework"
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    dudeman said:

    I wonder where all the guns in Chicago are coming from? My guess? Something similar is going on in Indiana. But God forbid we try to reduce illegal gun trafficking.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/03/08/nypd-undercover-operation-links-to-22-virginia-residents-to-gun-trafficking-ring/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-local:homepage/card&utm_term=.f888fdb34ddb

    Have any suggestions? Illegal gun trafficking is already illegal. Will more legislation help?
    Registration.
    On the state or federal level? Many gun owners believe that registration is the beginning of confiscation, and it's hard to completely discount that fear based on a few politicians that are hell bent on getting them out of the hands of all citizens. I'm not sure why people do not trust the government... :|. Not to mention, the government couldn't even track the firearms through the utterly failed "fast and furious" debacle...what makes people think that they would be able to track them through the general population on a mass scale? That, and modern technology has made it to where anyone with a 3D printer can print the parts needed to get by any registry if they desired... All that being said, the only people the registry would have impact on are the ones that do follow the laws already. I'm all about stiffer penalties for those that are caught illegally in possession of firearms, but I just do not see a registry being of much benifit...unless you want to mass confiscate down the road...
    Blah blah blah, "dog ate my homework"
    What an intelligent response...
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    edited March 13
    What do you expect? Every response I get they call me a racist because I don't want my country turned into a third world shithole. And they also expect me to subsidize it.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    dudeman said:

    I wonder where all the guns in Chicago are coming from? My guess? Something similar is going on in Indiana. But God forbid we try to reduce illegal gun trafficking.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/03/08/nypd-undercover-operation-links-to-22-virginia-residents-to-gun-trafficking-ring/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-local:homepage/card&utm_term=.f888fdb34ddb

    Have any suggestions? Illegal gun trafficking is already illegal. Will more legislation help?
    Registration.
    On the state or federal level? Many gun owners believe that registration is the beginning of confiscation, and it's hard to completely discount that fear based on a few politicians that are hell bent on getting them out of the hands of all citizens. I'm not sure why people do not trust the government... :|. Not to mention, the government couldn't even track the firearms through the utterly failed "fast and furious" debacle...what makes people think that they would be able to track them through the general population on a mass scale? That, and modern technology has made it to where anyone with a 3D printer can print the parts needed to get by any registry if they desired... All that being said, the only people the registry would have impact on are the ones that do follow the laws already. I'm all about stiffer penalties for those that are caught illegally in possession of firearms, but I just do not see a registry being of much benifit...unless you want to mass confiscate down the road...
    Blah blah blah, "dog ate my homework"
    What an intelligent response...
    I don't have patience for prevaricating bullshit at the moment, I hope later I can summon the patience for a real response.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    What do you expect? Every response I get they call me a racist because I don't want my country turned into a third world shithole. And they also expect me to subsidize it.

    It's not us, it's the overlords. They want you to subsidize the liberal elimination of the White race.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    See?

  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    See?

    See what? Your own words given back to you?
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    PJPOWER said:

    rgambs said:

    dudeman said:

    I wonder where all the guns in Chicago are coming from? My guess? Something similar is going on in Indiana. But God forbid we try to reduce illegal gun trafficking.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/03/08/nypd-undercover-operation-links-to-22-virginia-residents-to-gun-trafficking-ring/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-local:homepage/card&utm_term=.f888fdb34ddb

    Have any suggestions? Illegal gun trafficking is already illegal. Will more legislation help?
    Registration.
    On the state or federal level? Many gun owners believe that registration is the beginning of confiscation, and it's hard to completely discount that fear based on a few politicians that are hell bent on getting them out of the hands of all citizens. I'm not sure why people do not trust the government... :|. Not to mention, the government couldn't even track the firearms through the utterly failed "fast and furious" debacle...what makes people think that they would be able to track them through the general population on a mass scale? That, and modern technology has made it to where anyone with a 3D printer can print the parts needed to get by any registry if they desired... All that being said, the only people the registry would have impact on are the ones that do follow the laws already. I'm all about stiffer penalties for those that are caught illegally in possession of firearms, but I just do not see a registry being of much benifit...unless you want to mass confiscate down the road...
    Blah blah blah, "dog ate my homework"
    What an intelligent response...
    I don't have patience for prevaricating bullshit at the moment, I hope later I can summon the patience for a real response.
    I look forward to it...and I understand, it's a Monday, lol
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,184
    I am a little confused. Isn't registration already a requirement?
    Some states it is easier to not register a handgun, but it is still required. I believe some states allow you to do a private party sale between 2 people and the buyer is responsible for sending in paper work. It would be easy not to, but it is still required.
    I would be for strict regulations that make that tougher. Many states require all gun transfers go through an authorized dealer. But even then there is a lot of room for improvement to make it easier and more efficient for both the buyer and state. Less efficiency means wasted time and money.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    edited March 13
    mace1229 said:

    I am a little confused. Isn't registration already a requirement?
    Some states it is easier to not register a handgun, but it is still required. I believe some states allow you to do a private party sale between 2 people and the buyer is responsible for sending in paper work. It would be easy not to, but it is still required.
    I would be for strict regulations that make that tougher. Many states require all gun transfers go through an authorized dealer. But even then there is a lot of room for improvement to make it easier and more efficient for both the buyer and state. Less efficiency means wasted time and money.

    Nope, in some states there are no legal requirements to record sales between individuals on the buyer or seller's part unless you are making a business out of it (aka FFL). Also no requirement for people to register what they purchased outside the realm of an FFL dealer's documents. Even then, the sale is recorded in paperwork, but there is no electronic registry and the FFL holder is responsible for keeping the records for auditors (it is never sent anywhere or anything). They do not "register" anything, just keep record of sale. In Texas, you cannot legally sell to anyone with a criminal record or a resident outside of Texas, but there is no accountability paperwork or required background if the sale is between two individuals. Safe practice would still be to keep a record of the time and when a firearm was sold to keep yourself safe if it were ever used illegally though. Every state has their own requirements, I believe.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    See?

    See what? Your own words given back to you?
    I stand behind my comments, you twist them how you will. Debate the issue and stop trying to turn everything into a race issue. You wonder why Trump one, people are sick of you.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    edited March 13
    mace1229 said:

    I am a little confused. Isn't registration already a requirement?
    Some states it is easier to not register a handgun, but it is still required. I believe some states allow you to do a private party sale between 2 people and the buyer is responsible for sending in paper work. It would be easy not to, but it is still required.
    I would be for strict regulations that make that tougher. Many states require all gun transfers go through an authorized dealer. But even then there is a lot of room for improvement to make it easier and more efficient for both the buyer and state. Less efficiency means wasted time and money.

    It depends on the State as the previous reply mentions, federally the ATF has form 4473 that is filled out with every licensed transaction. You can't just go across State lines to circumvent another State law, that is a lie spread by the anti gun crowd. Straw purchasing is illegal already as well. The paperwork clearly states all of the laws, it is the uneducated that continue to spread mistruths.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    mace1229 said:

    I am a little confused. Isn't registration already a requirement?
    Some states it is easier to not register a handgun, but it is still required. I believe some states allow you to do a private party sale between 2 people and the buyer is responsible for sending in paper work. It would be easy not to, but it is still required.
    I would be for strict regulations that make that tougher. Many states require all gun transfers go through an authorized dealer. But even then there is a lot of room for improvement to make it easier and more efficient for both the buyer and state. Less efficiency means wasted time and money.

    It depends on the State as the previous reply mentions, federally the ATF has form 4473 that is filled out with every licensed transaction. You can't just go across State lines to circumvent another State law, that is a lie spread by the anti gun crowd. Straw purchasing is illegal already as well. The paperwork clearly states all of the laws, it is the uneducated that continue to spread mistruths.
    Laws designed to be unenforceable.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    Which law is that?
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,184
    It was my understanding that whatever state you are from a new gun is purchased through the FFL dealer who then gives than info the ATF. I wouldn't be surprised if none of it was electronic, but there is a record of every new gun sold.
    But then could vary state by state after that. I did think that even private party transfer did require some paperwork in all states, but apparently there are some where none is needed?
    What law is designed to be unenforceable?
    I've never heard of not having to show ID when buying a gun, so I really don't think there is a way around that law of crossing state lines to buy one easier. There are serious penalties for straw purchasing, and no one would want their name tied to a gun that was purchased illegally anyway.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    Every gun purchased through an FFL has paperwork saying who bought it and what it is.

    Private party sales laws vary from State to State.
  • rssesqrssesq Fairfield CountyPosts: 3,299
    are there a lot of Americans posting on the Nickelback forums regarding Canadian politics?
    FACE. lol
    "Apology made to whoever it pleases, still they got me like Jesus." Chuck D
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    edited March 13
    mace1229 said:

    It was my understanding that whatever state you are from a new gun is purchased through the FFL dealer who then gives than info the ATF. I wouldn't be surprised if none of it was electronic, but there is a record of every new gun sold.
    But then could vary state by state after that. I did think that even private party transfer did require some paperwork in all states, but apparently there are some where none is needed?
    What law is designed to be unenforceable?
    I've never heard of not having to show ID when buying a gun, so I really don't think there is a way around that law of crossing state lines to buy one easier. There are serious penalties for straw purchasing, and no one would want their name tied to a gun that was purchased illegally anyway.

    Technically there is a paper record of every "new" gun sold unless you buy at a gun show (gunshow loophole) where all dealers have to do is check for appropriate age/state identification and do an instant background check (unless you already have your CHL). Nothing is given to the ATF unless they specifically ask for an FFLs records. There are no paperwork or identification requirements for individual transfers or trades in TX, although you could be held liable for knowingly selling to someone out of state and purposely buying firearms to sell to someone that couldn't normally buy is illegal (straw purchasers). I'll agree with what others said, many laws are pretty much unenforceable and are "feel good" laws to please gun control supporters or so politicians can "say" they support gun control for constituents approval.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    The gunshow loophole is another myth. If the seller is an FFL they have to produce paperwork of the transaction. Now a private person can sell there too but many show promoters are going away from that. Plus the internet makes most of that antiquated when you can just meet directly.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    unsung said:

    The gunshow loophole is another myth. If the seller is an FFL they have to produce paperwork of the transaction. Now a private person can sell there too but many show promoters are going away from that. Plus the internet makes most of that antiquated when you can just meet directly.

    There are still plenty in TX flying under the "secondary party" rule at gun shows. I think every state has different regulations surrounding gun show sales as well. I don't even think they have to do a background check if they are selling under the "secondary party" rule, they just ask for valid state ID and sell away. Some people are okay with this within the gun owner community and others are not.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,184
    I grew up in CA where the laws are too strict. Too strict in that they just waste time and money because they are not very efficient. You can buy 3 used guns at the same time, but they will be 3 different background checks, and you end up spending $150 in registration fees as a result, which is seen by many as the state's way to detract people from buying guns if they have to do all this paperwork every time. But you can buy 10 long rifles and they are somehow able to do the background check all at once for those, and pay 1 fee no matter how many you buy.Gun show loopholes were done away in the 80s over there.
    It makes sense to me to require registration for all transfer of guns, there shouldn't be private party or gun show loopholes for anyone.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,320
    mace1229 said:

    I grew up in CA where the laws are too strict. Too strict in that they just waste time and money because they are not very efficient. You can buy 3 used guns at the same time, but they will be 3 different background checks, and you end up spending $150 in registration fees as a result, which is seen by many as the state's way to detract people from buying guns if they have to do all this paperwork every time. But you can buy 10 long rifles and they are somehow able to do the background check all at once for those, and pay 1 fee no matter how many you buy.Gun show loopholes were done away in the 80s over there.
    It makes sense to me to require registration for all transfer of guns, there shouldn't be private party or gun show loopholes for anyone.

    I am on the fence when it comes to registration. That registration may lead to confiscating is the argument I hear most against it, which I cannot say is an invalid fear. I'm not sure I would want the government deciding what I can and cannot pass down to my children either. I still think that the resources would be better allocated towards disbanding gangs and criminal enterprises that are violent in general...if you are truly wanting to reduce violence.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    Let me pose a question.

    Should an individual be able to seek professional psychological help in a situation and not worry about having his, or her, firearms taken away if they are not deemed to be a hazard to themselves or others?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    Let me pose a question.

    Should an individual be able to seek professional psychological help in a situation and not worry about having his, or her, firearms taken away if they are not deemed to be a hazard to themselves or others?

    Yes, but the whole "not worry" thing gets blown out of proportion by paranoia.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    Let me pose a question.

    Should an individual be able to seek professional psychological help in a situation and not worry about having his, or her, firearms taken away if they are not deemed to be a hazard to themselves or others?

    Yes, but the whole "not worry" thing gets blown out of proportion by paranoia.
    So a person that owns firearms should have due process afforded before their personal property is seized?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    rgambs said:

    unsung said:

    Let me pose a question.

    Should an individual be able to seek professional psychological help in a situation and not worry about having his, or her, firearms taken away if they are not deemed to be a hazard to themselves or others?

    Yes, but the whole "not worry" thing gets blown out of proportion by paranoia.
    So a person that owns firearms should have due process afforded before their personal property is seized?
    Yes, I believe they should.
    I do not believe they should be afforded due process in acquiring the firearms to begin with.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,452
    edited March 13
    Well good, the first part anyway.

    The second part is why we won't register.

    Unfortunately there us a State Senator in my State that thinks that an accusation of assault is enough to have your guns taken away and she has introduced legislation to do so.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 8,212
    unsung said:

    Well good, the first part anyway.

    The second part is why we won't register.

    Unfortunately there us a State Senator in my State that thinks that an accusation of assault is enough to have your guns taken away and she has introduced legislation to do so.

    There are certainly those radical folks out there, but they won't overwhelm common sense.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • ponytdponytd NashvillePosts: 399
    unsung said:

    Well good, the first part anyway.

    The second part is why we won't register.

    Unfortunately there us a State Senator in my State that thinks that an accusation of assault is enough to have your guns taken away and she has introduced legislation to do so.

    What kind of assault? And just an accusation? That gets into a big gray area. For instance, an accusation of domestic assault that doesn't lead to a formal charge because the spouse was too afraid too press charges should exclude that person from being able to own a firearm. But what about a guy who was out at a party, maybe he was drinking, maybe not, but somebody started a fight with him because he mistook him for somebody else and while in the course of him defending himself, he kicked the other guys ass and the guy who got beat up accused him of assault. Should that person not be allowed to purchase a firearm?

    Be interested to see that bill and the language involved.
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,409
    dropped this in the wrong thread earlier
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
Sign In or Register to comment.