The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 3001 - 3020 of total 5484 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 02:38pm PT
In fact, it is the FEDERAL level that falls short of record keeping...

If they want to be that specific, why do they not want the model and serial number of the gun being purchased?


So, what you are saying is that we NEED MORE FEDERAL LEVEL RECORD KEEPING/REGULATIONS.

Got it. Thanks.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 28, 2013 - 02:39pm PT
Norton,, to answer,,
The brady paper work requies us to SPECIFICALLY identify ourselves as hispanic or non- hispanic, as well as white, red or other.
If they want to be that specific, why do they not want the model and serial number of the gun being purchased?


good points

why would they need to know the race/ethnicity anyway, any thoughts on this?

and yes, I don't understand why they don't want the model and serial number

is it because those records have to be kept by the selling dealer legally maybe?


by the way Ron, I assume you support universal background checks expect maybe close blood relatives exempted and much stricter straw buyer penalties, all of which the President is asking congress to vote on one way or another?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 02:44pm PT
n 1998, the FBI published the final rule implementing NICS. The NRA challenged the NICS regulations in court, claiming that the rules allowing the government to maintain an “audit log” for six months (later reduced by the Department of Justice to 90 days) amounted to a de facto firearm registry, contrary to the Brady Act. The NRA suit was dismissed, but since 2004, Congress has inserted language in annual spending bills requiring the FBI to destroy firearm transfer records within 24 hours of approval — as Congress did most recently in fiscal year 2012.

That is NOT strict record keeping... it is record taking, followed by destruction... and certainly falls short of a federal registry... unless you are only concerned about crimes committed 24 hours after the original purchase.

http://factcheck.org/2013/01/nra-misfires-on-federal-gun-registry/
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 28, 2013 - 02:51pm PT

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is a point-of-sale system for determining eligibility to purchase a firearm in the United States of America.


Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders are generally required by law to use the NICS to determine if it is legal to sell a firearm to a prospective purchaser. Mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 and launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998, NICS determines if the buyer is prohibited from buying a firearm under the Gun Control Act of 1968. It is linked to the National Crime Information Center and the Interstate Identification Index among other databases maintained by the FBI.[1]

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is applicable to sales from federally licensed dealers. Sales of firearms by private sellers are allowed to proceed without a background check unless required by state law. These regulations remain in place at gun shows, where no special leniency is granted to licensed sellers, and no additional requirements are placed upon private sellers.

NICS is accessed by an FFL, on the firearm buyer's behalf, by phone or computer. When contacted by phone, the communication is either with an FBI/NICS Examiner, who directly receives the information submitted by the FFL, or by proxy through a Call Center representative, who forwards the information electronically to the NICS. Whether an Examiner or a Call Center representative is contacted depends on the state in which the sale is conducted. When using a computer, an FFL representative can submit the buyer's information using the E-Check system which is a web interface to the NICS. An FFL can be an individual or an organization such as a retail store. An organization registered as an FFL minimizes the overhead involved in managing identification for multiple individuals who are employed by the organization.

By law, an FFL must receive a response from the NICS within 3 days or the firearm sale can proceed, although the FFL seller is not required to do so. If, after 3 days, the sale is completed and later it is determined the buyer should not have received the firearm, then the firearm must be retrieved.

Contents [hide]
1 Firearm Denial Appeals
2 Persons subject to prohibition
3 References
4 See also
wiki
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 03:26pm PT
It was the State agency of public health that put the kai-bosh on the democrat legislators attempt to purchase a weapon. Not the Brady check.

Which "democrat" legislator was that?

But a local LEO only need to make one call to find out the exact originating buyer from any local gun store, FFL dealer or authorized gun show participants.

And what ONE number would they call?


Do you want them to balance your bank account?

Sure, at least someone would be doing it!

Or provide you with world peace? Wouldnt you rather your state have the controls

Yes, when Pearl Harbor was attacked we should have left it up to Hawaii to handle it. When NY was attacked, we should have left it to them to hunt down bin Laden. I'm sure NV can import its own oil and other resources with state to country trade agreements. Genius.

we want the FEDS to decide who can marry who

No, we want to ensure that if legal contracts and associated benefits are available they should be available to any citizen, regardless of their gear.

who has to wear seat belts or be in child seats

If my tax money pays for uncovered medical expenses and scraping brains off the pavement, etc... then absolutely!

what type of friggin light bulbs we can use-- wtf over!??

Dear gawd, what are you rambling about now?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 03:47pm PT
What ONE number to local LEOs call for the exact originating buyer of a particular gun?


And yet, as far as I can tell, Brooks has never been convicted of anything... could go to another gun store and purchase a firearm?... and there is nothing stopping him?

Yeah, no need for stricter gun control laws...
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 03:57pm PT
But a local LEO only need to make one call to find out the exact originating buyer from any local gun store

So how many criminals do you think use guns purchased from local gun stores?

so research can be done by reviewing the licensed dealer listings and calling each one.

Well, THAT sounds like a good use of tax payer money! What century is it?


The LAWS only affect one of those.

Which one?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
Guns are the biggest commodity in the world.. You think any laws new or old have/will work in keeping them out of the hands of those with bad intent?

Hold up... WORLD? I thought it was genetics and/or Merkin culture?

Well, okay, since you mention the rest of the world... it works well in England and...

Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it; however, most countries similar to the United States have a more secure social network. Higher gun-related death rates can be found in developing countries and countries with political instability. However, developed countries with strict gun laws have essentially eliminated gun violence.

Rogers, Heather. "Gun Control: An International Comparison". IVN. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

Kopel, David B (1993). "Japanese Gun Control". Asia Pacific Law Review. Asia Pac. L. Rev. (2): 26–52. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

Adelstein, Jake (6 January 2013). "Even gangsters live in fear of Japan's gun laws". The Japan Times. Retrieved 11 February 2013.

Fisher, Max (23 July 2012). "A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths". The Atlantic. Retrieved 11 February 2013.


And per the second amendment, shouldnt they just conclude everyone is or has the right to be armed?

That is absurd. Clearly everyone does NOT have the right to be armed. If that was the intention our brilliant 4fathers would have said just that... instead they put it in the context of a "well regulated militia" which you all conveniently ignore.

Self-protection, fine, whatever, I'm not opposed to that... but that doesn't mean EVERYONE has the right to be armed. And implying a federal registry infringes on the right to have an bear arms is 100% fuking absurd.



Brooks was stopped by the dept of public safety and all licensed dealers have info regarding him, so the only way he can get one is the black market or a gun runner, or maybe his mum. Or go to CALI and buy one there.The LAWS only affect one of those.

...

She hasnt broken a law UNTIL she gives the gun to sonny.

Really? There are no laws that affect black market sales or affect a gun shop in CA selling him one?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:28pm PT
I agree, this country is great. I think it would be better if it wasn't so easy for criminals to have their relatives/friends buy guns for them.

Update... apparently FFL's only have to report when someone purchase more than 2 guns in a one week period. That is absurd considering nobody I have ever met buys more than 1 or 2 a year. Why not require reporting for those who buy more than 1-2 a year? So what if you get reported... it wouldn't be illegal, just suspicious... if you haven't done anything wrong you'd have nothing to worry about.


Yeah hedge, we understand, you want ALL guns outlawed. That is your opinion... I'm not fighting with or against you on that one. I happen to like shooting guns... I just think there should be WAY more quality control on the caliber of people who are allowed to keep and bear them.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:36pm PT
Keep reading Ron... almost there...

The term "regulated" means "disciplined" or "trained".[132] In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that "[t]he adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."

In order to be a part of a well-regulated militia, potential or existing, you should have to show some semblance of proper discipline and training. The fact that gun-nuts are complaining about waiting periods suggests a serious lack of proper discipline. Any training classes required?

And BATFE most likely knows everything any gun store has in their computers

BATFE... BATFE... sounds pretty efficient if they know EVERY gun in EVERY store... hmmm... isn't that one of those inefficient FEDERAL agencies?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:44pm PT
You are conveniently ignoring specific words intentionally included by our founding fathers... "well regulated."

Besides, restricting the sales of firearms does nothing to infringe on your right to have and bear them.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
Many murderers would have never committed a murder if they hadn't had a gun.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 28, 2013 - 04:54pm PT
It's a Mexican Standoff
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:10pm PT
No sane society sanctions a thousand murders a month - as many people as we lost on 9/11 every 3 months.

We can turn that around. Murder rates are going up and down and stuff, you know, depending on how you look at it... there's always two sides to the truth.

One thing is clear, we need more people with more guns and no interference from the FEDS... you know, since they are the ones law enforcement ACTUALLY calls to trace guns used in crimes.

they would have used a rock, stick, board, knife, arrow, gas or chainsaw.

Do you ever tire of the irrelevant and absurd?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:23pm PT
Here's how I see this discussion


EVERYONE, including Ron, agrees that we do need more and better gun control legislation.

For example, we all agree that we support the current likely proposed bill which will include much tougher penalties for straw buyers and also will increase background checks.

I don't see how any reasonable person could be opposed to either one of those.


Now, where the discussion gets contentious is when Joe Hedge insists that the ONLY way to deal with mass murder in the US is by flat outlawing guns.

This is like saying the only way to deal with tooth decay is for everyone to have all their teeth pulled out. It is so obviously unrealistic and unlikely that such talk not only does not help the conversation in any constructive way but it also raises emotions in response that shut off talk.

But Hedge persists anyway,
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:28pm PT
if i wanted to kill some one but didnt have a gun, id use a knife and stab their lung.

Yes, if you are one of the few who actually plan to kill a person by whatever means necessary, sure. But that would make you a psychopath.

We both know that is not how most murders are committed.

How many LEO's are killed in the line of duty with a rock or knife?



Norton is the only sane person involved here, present company included. Thanks Norton.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:46pm PT
But now your saying it in someone else's culture.

Why would you need to make a distinction if it's in our as well.

BTW, equating the desire of a woman to protect your children with the desire of a man to commit violent crime is ridiculous.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:50pm PT
And since it's worse somewhere else, we shouldn't make changes here.


And just for you Anderson:

Equating a mother's care for a child to violent crime is funny as hell.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:51pm PT
I was threatened with a chain saw once.

So what? I've been threatened with 4 guns, 2 bats, a few hammer, fists, a broom, a car, skateboards, and a fork. The ONLY ones that were likely to kill me from a split second lapse in judgement... the guns.

How hard is it to get away from someone with a chainsaw? I mean YOU did it, so it couldn't be THAT hard, right? I don't hear of many chainsaw murders.

WHY do YOU think the brady check is interested SPECIFICALLY in hispanics?

Just guessing here... maybe to cross reference names and sh#t with Mexican authorities?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 28, 2013 - 05:53pm PT
Actually,

WHY does the form specifically ask if a gun buyer is LATINO or HISPANIC anyway?

WHY would it matter?

Hispanics who are US citizens own guns legally just like any other race or ethnicity.

So to me, the FFL form does seem to be discriminatory.


Here is what a PRO gun website says about it, and I think they bring up this point very well.


]Where previously the form asked a general question about the purchasers’ race (ethnicity), the section now requires Americans in the Hispanic community to designate themselves as such.

Curiously, the form’s “Race” section has been divided into two parts. Section 10a, now labeled “Ethnicity,” requires you to check off whether you’re “Hispanic or Latino” or “Not Hispanic or Latino.” The new 4473 document’s 10b section no longer includes Hispanics or Latinos as a race.

Boasting a US population density of 16.3%, Hispanics, in general, encompass a large portion of the gun owning community. Given this fact, the change, that went into effect early July with little to no press or fanfare, has left many gun owners baffled as to why the ATF is singling out Hispanics.

Evan Nappen, General Counsel of Pro-Gun New Hampshire, reported on the alteration as a blatant form of racism, asking, “What if the “ethnicity” question demanded “Jew or Not a Jew”? Would that “ethnicity” question be acceptable? Like the Hispanic/Latino question, it is offensive and not necessary. It has nothing whatsoever to do with one’s qualification to purchase a gun.”



Infowars’ Matt Williams asked a Houston ATF public relations spokesperson why the change had gone into effect and why it specifically targeted Hispanic and Latino Americans. The ATF told us the change had been implemented by White House order of the Obama Administration’s Office of Management and Budget and has been ordered across the board nationally to be carried with all federal agencies.

Further investigation provided no answers as to why the minority group has been singled out, and no conclusive evidence shows that any other ATF form, or government agency for that matter, has adopted the protocol. Even the form licensing home manufacture of



firearms/class 3 weapons (i.e. machine guns, suppressors, etc.) does not include this stipulation.[
/http://usahitman.com/arphgo/]
Messages 3001 - 3020 of total 5484 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews