As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
I'm an Ohio gun owner who is terribly ashamed of our role in fueling Chicago and easy coast violence.
If the vast majority of gun owners are responsible how do the criminals get the guns? Shouldn't the tiny minority that traffics guns to gangs be easy to track and eliminate? The answer is yes, of ccourse, IF there weren't so many nutters who drink the NRA koolaid!
Every single gun sold should have a serial number which is traceable to the purchaser, with laws to punish the original oowner if the I gun is used in a crime. You want to make a private sale, you handle it just like selling a car, by going to the proper agency to change registration.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
I'm an Ohio gun owner who is terribly ashamed of our role in fueling Chicago and easy coast violence.
If the vast majority of gun owners are responsible how do the criminals get the guns? Shouldn't the tiny minority that traffics guns to gangs be easy to track and eliminate? The answer is yes, of ccourse, IF there weren't so many nutters who drink the NRA koolaid!
Every single gun sold should have a serial number which is traceable to the purchaser, with laws to punish the original oowner if the I gun is used in a crime. You want to make a private sale, you handle it just like selling a car, by going to the proper agency to change registration.
And reporting it when it gets stolen or misplaced.This is not unreasonable.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
I'm an Ohio gun owner who is terribly ashamed of our role in fueling Chicago and easy coast violence.
If the vast majority of gun owners are responsible how do the criminals get the guns? Shouldn't the tiny minority that traffics guns to gangs be easy to track and eliminate? The answer is yes, of ccourse, IF there weren't so many nutters who drink the NRA koolaid!
Every single gun sold should have a serial number which is traceable to the purchaser, with laws to punish the original oowner if the I gun is used in a crime. You want to make a private sale, you handle it just like selling a car, by going to the proper agency to change registration.
Yah, but what you are suggesting here implies accountability and responsibility.
A lot of gun owners don't want that- they just wanna shoot shit and not get hassled.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
excellent assumption.
Mcgruff, read up a bit on Ohio Gun laws. Dont worry, its a short read. I hope at that point you could better understand my position.
I have yet to have a reasoned answer as to where the bad guys are procuring all these weapons that everyone else needs armed against to combat the problem. Start there on "gun control".
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
What exactly is the law pertaining to such a situation? I would think the person illegally selling a gun used in a crime would be at least held partially responsible since the result of such a "sale" is more likely to be involved in a crime that one sold legally.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
The specific charge isn't as important as the penalty, which should be severe.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
The specific charge isn't as important as the penalty, which should be severe.
Agreed. But the person selling it illegally should in no way shape or form be held liable for further crimes that are committed. I ve never heard of such a thing.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
excellent assumption.
Mcgruff, read up a bit on Ohio Gun laws. Dont worry, its a short read. I hope at that point you could better understand my position.
I have yet to have a reasoned answer as to where the bad guys are procuring all these weapons that everyone else needs armed against to combat the problem. Start there on "gun control".
We have the same problem in New Jersey. Most of the guns used in crimes come from Virginia. Crazy stuff. I can't believe some states don't register every gun bought.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
The specific charge isn't as important as the penalty, which should be severe.
Agreed. But the person selling it illegally should in no way shape or form be held liable for further crimes that are committed. I ve never heard of such a thing.
Chances are that if you are selling an illegal gun your clientele is on par.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
yeah if a gun is sold illegally i think the charge should be illegal sale of a weapon, nothing more. perhaps make the consequences of selling a weapon illegally harsher but don't charge them with whatever crime was committed with the illegal gun.
The specific charge isn't as important as the penalty, which should be severe.
Agreed. But the person selling it illegally should in no way shape or form be held liable for further crimes that are committed. I ve never heard of such a thing.
I think there should be a level of complicity with such a crime.
Let's say a weapon is illegally sold to an ex-felon who cannot purchase a weapon through legal means. Then the ex-felon proceeds to use the gun and kill people with it. Don't you think the seller carries a degree of complicity in such a scenario? He facilitated the crime by selling the weapon that by-passed safeguards in place to protect the public.
I don't just think there should... I know there should be a level of complicity with such a crime.
I mean it's one thing to be some ignorant gun owner that leaves his loaded handgun lying on the coffee table for his nephew to shoot his niece in the face with when they pick it up to play with it... it's quite another to be some ignorant gun owner and sell a weapon illegally in a discreet place to a felon buying the weapon in blood spattered cash.
Come on, man. You're responsible. You won't have to worry. Why spend any energy at all trying to offer a defence for someone who sells a weapon as I described above?
Earlier, above, I asked what the legality is regarding a person illegally selling a gun used in a crime and would not that person be held at least partially responsible for the crime since the result of such a "sale" is more likely to be involved in a crime that one sold legally? Never got an answer but that would be moot anyway. I'm guessing we all know what the ethics involved here are. It's difficult to see why anyone would defend that. Is doing so more of that NRA thinking I also referred to previously? (Question, not accusation.)
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
You can make the initial punishment and parameters for selling or buying a unregistered firearm more harsh,I think you can even backtrack after a crime and impose that same selling penalty.But you cannot hold the seller responsible for the buyers misdeeds or crimes.Thats just pushing it.I think the car sales and drunk driving example is correct. Only if a sale was with intent or knowledge of a crime to be committed should additional charges as an accomplice apply.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
If the purpose of the truck is to kill people the logic is clear....you are trying to compare a weapon made for killing to an item that provides transportation
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
excellent assumption.
Mcgruff, read up a bit on Ohio Gun laws. Dont worry, its a short read. I hope at that point you could better understand my position.
I have yet to have a reasoned answer as to where the bad guys are procuring all these weapons that everyone else needs armed against to combat the problem. Start there on "gun control".
We have the same problem in New Jersey. Most of the guns used in crimes come from Virginia. Crazy stuff. I can't believe some states don't register every gun bought.
Most of the guns used in crime come from Virginia? Where can I check those numbers out?
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
If the purpose of the truck is to kill people the logic is clear....you are trying to compare a weapon made for killing to an item that provides transportation
So what? You are still breaking the law in either case. If you sell a gun illegally you should be charged with just that, not first degree murder. Amd fines and punishments vary from state to state. and before you go there: did you know congress passed a bill that says gun manufacturs are not held responsible for crimes committed by the weapons they manufactured. So no gun industry lawsuits from victims of shootings.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
If the purpose of the truck is to kill people the logic is clear....you are trying to compare a weapon made for killing to an item that provides transportation
So what? You are still breaking the law in either case. If you sell a gun illegally you should be charged with just that, not first degree murder. Amd fines and punishments vary from state to state. and before you go there: did you know congress passed a bill that says gun manufacturs are not held responsible for crimes committed by the weapons they manufactured. So no gun industry lawsuits from victims of shootings.
But if you sold a gun illegally and that gun was used to kill someone, you are ultimately responsible. Had you sold the gun legally, that person could still be alive. The truck comparison makes no sense.
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
you want the original owner of the gun held liable if the gun is sold to another person and used in a crime? so this is like saying if I sell my truck and the new owner kills someone while driving intoxicated I'm also in trouble? where is the logic in that?
I don't want to speak for mickeyrat but I assumed he meant that if the gun was sold without going through the proper legal channels then the last legitimate owner would be responsible. That would put the onus on each legitimate owner to use the appropriate process to sell the gun, just like the process of privately selling a car and having that registered (here it is with our provincial insurance company). If it is stolen, then it should be reported immediately.
excellent assumption.
Mcgruff, read up a bit on Ohio Gun laws. Dont worry, its a short read. I hope at that point you could better understand my position.
I have yet to have a reasoned answer as to where the bad guys are procuring all these weapons that everyone else needs armed against to combat the problem. Start there on "gun control".
We have the same problem in New Jersey. Most of the guns used in crimes come from Virginia. Crazy stuff. I can't believe some states don't register every gun bought.
Most of the guns used in crime come from Virginia? Where can I check those numbers out?
my bad, pa is first: • The majority of out-of-state crime guns came from Pennsylvania and five southern states known for their loose requirements for gun purchasing: North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida, which accounted for 1,084 guns. Those states represent tributaries of what law enforcement officials call the "iron pipeline," through which guns flow up Interstate 95 and into New Jersey, New York and other states where buying firearms is more difficult. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/01/map_where_do_nj_criminals_get_their_guns_mostly_not_here.html
I'm stubborn, I just don't like the governments deep reach into our lives.
Godfather.
I'm with you! My problem is that the government pretty much fucks up anything it gets involved in, so why would anyone want an irresponsible governing body reaching into their lives...Oh, I forget, libtards cannot handle their own affairs! On the note of people being responsible for putting guns in the hands of criminals, did you guys hear that the Garland shooter's gun was a "Fast and Furious" gun??? I guess that anyone responsible for "Fast and Furious" should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I may actually support that!
I'm stubborn, I just don't like the governments deep reach into our lives.
Godfather.
How many ways does the government's deep reach into your life benefit you vs. hurt you? If it hurts you tremendously more, you probably ought to vote for the politicians who feel the same way you do, and promise the same things you desire. If the general populace outvotes you and the politicians who do and say and feel the opposite become/stay in power, you probably ought to leave, as you no longer live in the nation that best fits your specific wants in life. This is your right.
The purpose of a government is not to be like a god - invisible and supposedly omniscient and well-meaning; it is supposed to be like a parent - visible and actively well-guiding, providing the aid that defines the rights deemed to be universal to all members of the nation, and not just you specifically. If your right to bear arms infringes on others' rights to live without a bullet through their skulls, and if this is proven an epidemic (how many shootings have there been in the US over the past X years?), it is not only a 'best practice' on the part of a government to work towards harsher restrictions on guns - but I would say it is an obligation.
As has been said too many times to count here, if you are a law-abiding citizen with a solid track record and proper training and protocol in gun usage to merit your right to bear arms - you need not worry about the government taking "the precious". If this is the case, you have never been and will never be the government's target in restricting the purchase or sale of firearms.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
You can make the initial punishment and parameters for selling or buying a unregistered firearm more harsh,I think you can even backtrack after a crime and impose that same selling penalty.But you cannot hold the seller responsible for the buyers misdeeds or crimes.Thats just pushing it.I think the car sales and drunk driving example is correct. Only if a sale was with intent or knowledge of a crime to be committed should additional charges as an accomplice apply.
There are many instances where people are complicit in crimes even though they are not directly involved in it.
A guy cannot shrug his shoulders and claim ignorance selling a weapon illegally to someone who proceeds to go use that very gun in a crime. F**k, if we hold a bartender responsible for over serving a drunk who goes and kills people in a motor vehicle accident... we sure as shit should be holding some rodent responsible for selling his gun illegally to another rodent.
You can make the initial punishment and parameters for selling or buying a unregistered firearm more harsh,I think you can even backtrack after a crime and impose that same selling penalty.But you cannot hold the seller responsible for the buyers misdeeds or crimes.Thats just pushing it.I think the car sales and drunk driving example is correct. Only if a sale was with intent or knowledge of a crime to be committed should additional charges as an accomplice apply.
There are many instances where people are complicit in crimes even though they are not directly involved in it.
A guy cannot shrug his shoulders and claim ignorance selling a weapon illegally to someone who proceeds to go use that very gun in a crime. F**k, if we hold a bartender responsible for over serving a drunk who goes and kills people in a motor vehicle accident... we sure as shit should be holding some rodent responsible for selling his gun illegally to another rodent.
Yes, in theory an establishment can even be sued if someone shows up already drunk, they refuse to serve him and let him get into his car and drive away to kill somebody. If I remember the dram shop laws correctly from my bartending days. I don't think it's a stretch to charge someone with a negligent death type of crime for illegally providing a firearm to someone. Especially since a firearms main purpose is to injure or kill another living thing.
I'm stubborn, I just don't like the governments deep reach into our lives.
Godfather.
I'm with you! My problem is that the government pretty much fucks up anything it gets involved in, so why would anyone want an irresponsible governing body reaching into their lives...Oh, I forget, libtards cannot handle their own affairs! On the note of people being responsible for putting guns in the hands of criminals, did you guys hear that the Garland shooter's gun was a "Fast and Furious" gun??? I guess that anyone responsible for "Fast and Furious" should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I may actually support that!
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I'm stubborn, I just don't like the governments deep reach into our lives.
Godfather.
I'm with you! My problem is that the government pretty much fucks up anything it gets involved in, so why would anyone want an irresponsible governing body reaching into their lives...Oh, I forget, libtards cannot handle their own affairs! On the note of people being responsible for putting guns in the hands of criminals, did you guys hear that the Garland shooter's gun was a "Fast and Furious" gun??? I guess that anyone responsible for "Fast and Furious" should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I may actually support that!
Like former pres bush?
Absolutely, him and Obama could share a cell! The two of them have done more to destroy unity and drive this nation apart than any president since Lincoln (yes, Lincoln was an asshat too) Why do people assume that because someone supports the constitution and gun rights that they are automatically Bush fans? I am as Libertarian as they come. The world would be a better place if people just helped one another instead of depending on the government to decide how people should help one another. What program has the government not fucked up?
Comments
This is why.....Article is a couple years old but it illustrates my point perfectly about MY state.
http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2013/06/21/Ohio-is-a-top-supplier-of-guns-used-crimes-in-other-states.html
As a citizen of Ohio , I am ashamed that people have died as a result of the laxity in Ohios laws governing gun sales. ONLY the initial purchaser needs to undergo the checks established by law. PRIVATE Sales do not.
So as a legally able person to purchase as many guns as I wish , I could then sell to whomever I wanted after that. Fuck all that that person may or may not be able to purchase otherwise.
People say that the bad guys will get them regardless, I agree, but the laws in Ohio make that so incredibly easy
Because traceability is made so difficult on authorites I shudder to think how many bought in Ohio have been used for crime elsewhere since these studies came out.
If the intial buyer of a weapon could be held accountable when that gun is proven to have been used in criminal activity , we would likely see a drop in the number of guns found so readily on the streets. Logic states such. Choose to ingnore this ,then there is no reason to "debate" Your fucking opinions are meaningless.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
If the vast majority of gun owners are responsible how do the criminals get the guns?
Shouldn't the tiny minority that traffics guns to gangs be easy to track and eliminate?
The answer is yes, of ccourse, IF there weren't so many nutters who drink the NRA koolaid!
Every single gun sold should have a serial number which is traceable to the purchaser, with laws to punish the original oowner if the I gun is used in a crime. You want to make a private sale, you handle it just like selling a car, by going to the proper agency to change registration.
A lot of gun owners don't want that- they just wanna shoot shit and not get hassled.
where is the logic in that?
Mcgruff, read up a bit on Ohio Gun laws. Dont worry, its a short read. I hope at that point you could better understand my position.
I have yet to have a reasoned answer as to where the bad guys are procuring all these weapons that everyone else needs armed against to combat the problem. Start there on "gun control".
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Let's say a weapon is illegally sold to an ex-felon who cannot purchase a weapon through legal means. Then the ex-felon proceeds to use the gun and kill people with it. Don't you think the seller carries a degree of complicity in such a scenario? He facilitated the crime by selling the weapon that by-passed safeguards in place to protect the public.
I don't just think there should... I know there should be a level of complicity with such a crime.
I mean it's one thing to be some ignorant gun owner that leaves his loaded handgun lying on the coffee table for his nephew to shoot his niece in the face with when they pick it up to play with it... it's quite another to be some ignorant gun owner and sell a weapon illegally in a discreet place to a felon buying the weapon in blood spattered cash.
Come on, man. You're responsible. You won't have to worry. Why spend any energy at all trying to offer a defence for someone who sells a weapon as I described above?
Earlier, above, I asked what the legality is regarding a person illegally selling a gun used in a crime and would not that person be held at least partially responsible for the crime since the result of such a "sale" is more likely to be involved in a crime that one sold legally? Never got an answer but that would be moot anyway. I'm guessing we all know what the ethics involved here are. It's difficult to see why anyone would defend that. Is doing so more of that NRA thinking I also referred to previously? (Question, not accusation.)
Only if a sale was with intent or knowledge of a crime to be committed should additional charges as an accomplice apply.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Godfather.
So no gun industry lawsuits from victims of shootings.
• The majority of out-of-state crime guns came from Pennsylvania and five southern states known for their loose requirements for gun purchasing: North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida, which accounted for 1,084 guns. Those states represent tributaries of what law enforcement officials call the "iron pipeline," through which guns flow up Interstate 95 and into New Jersey, New York and other states where buying firearms is more difficult.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/01/map_where_do_nj_criminals_get_their_guns_mostly_not_here.html
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
The purpose of a government is not to be like a god - invisible and supposedly omniscient and well-meaning; it is supposed to be like a parent - visible and actively well-guiding, providing the aid that defines the rights deemed to be universal to all members of the nation, and not just you specifically. If your right to bear arms infringes on others' rights to live without a bullet through their skulls, and if this is proven an epidemic (how many shootings have there been in the US over the past X years?), it is not only a 'best practice' on the part of a government to work towards harsher restrictions on guns - but I would say it is an obligation.
As has been said too many times to count here, if you are a law-abiding citizen with a solid track record and proper training and protocol in gun usage to merit your right to bear arms - you need not worry about the government taking "the precious". If this is the case, you have never been and will never be the government's target in restricting the purchase or sale of firearms.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
A guy cannot shrug his shoulders and claim ignorance selling a weapon illegally to someone who proceeds to go use that very gun in a crime. F**k, if we hold a bartender responsible for over serving a drunk who goes and kills people in a motor vehicle accident... we sure as shit should be holding some rodent responsible for selling his gun illegally to another rodent.
Godfather.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14