Up to 53% of Americans believe background checks for guns could lead to confiscation of legally owne
130 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Kopimi;40198382]source on "most people buy from FFL" and the reason we want federally mandated background checks is because i can get an AK at the gun show for $400 cash in hand, no questions asked. i've done it before and seen it happen a million times so don't bullshit me with some shit about how i'm lying[/QUOTE]
If it was from a dealer, than that was a felony. Dealers have to run background checks at shows the same as if it was at their storefront.
Private party firearm sales are not illegal in most states.
This is what happens when a situation arises, yes you're guns will be confiscated. Any Legally owned ones of course...
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4[/url]
the funniest argument about the guns is "100 years from now what if the government turns shitty"
well chances are you'll be in the ground and/or your bones will be a fine ash
[QUOTE=Blunt Master;40201230]This is what happens when a situation arises, yes you're guns will be confiscated. Any Legally owned ones of course...
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4[/URL][/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;xReYMOL8nZY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xReYMOL8nZY[/video]
freedom died
rip
[editline]7th April 2013[/editline]
video made unironically by tea party spergs who think the government is out to get them.
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40201304]the funniest argument about the guns is "100 years from now what if the government turns shitty"
well chances are you'll be in the ground and/or your bones will be a fine ash[/QUOTE]
So what?
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40201304]the funniest argument about the guns is "100 years from now what if the government turns shitty"
well chances are you'll be in the ground and/or your bones will be a fine ash[/QUOTE]
Yeah man fuck the future, long-term concerns like climate change and pollution aren't worth worrying about
[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;40201912]Yeah man fuck the future, long-term concerns like climate change and pollution aren't worth worrying about[/QUOTE]
yknow what, you're totally right. we should regulate guns like we regulate pollutants!
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203421]How would background checks be enforced on private sales?[/QUOTE]
through registration presumably. If you register a gun to your name you'd go through a background check.
If you decide to forego registration and you're caught with unregistered guns then its off to prison.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203547]What if your planned activities with such firearms ultimately end in prison time?[/QUOTE]
I don't know what you mean.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203627]What if you're going to do something illegal with a firearm? Like murdering a certain someone(s)? You would end up in prison regardless.[/QUOTE]
But now it'll be harder to buy a gun if the seller also gets charged for selling a gun to a person that can't provide documentation on that they're legally permitted to own one.
Basically eliminating the grey gun market.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203627]What if you're going to do something illegal with a firearm? Like murdering a certain someone(s)? You would end up in prison regardless.[/QUOTE]
You could add a penalty to people who sell guns without forcing the buyer to register it. I.e. if a crime is committed and the gun is still registered to the previous owner they could pay a fine or something.
Of course someone could pass a background check and commit a crime, but after being convicted they wouldn't be able to pass the background check, so it would at least stop repeat offenders.
So I guess universal registration is really more about keeping better track of the movement of guns and to hold sellers responsible for not reporting transfer of ownership and initiating a background check.
If you want to stop first time offenders you'd have to basically outlaw the possession of guns, which I'm ok with but most people aren't.
A background check is useful to keep idiots and mentally unstable people from purchasing a gun and start another massacre. I only accept the removing of weapons from these types of people, but those who like to collect and as long as they don't harm anyone, i don't really mind.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203751]That would rely on our ability to know where the firearm originated from and would require registration to be put in place. The latter point is why I would never support such a measure.[/QUOTE]
And why is registration oh so bad?
And this time, no tinfoil hat grade baloney.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203786]It would make confiscation practical.[/QUOTE]
On what grounds?
If you're deemed unfit for owning a weapon because of either a serious mental condition or serious criminal activity, well then you damn well shouldn't own a weapon.
After all, since it can oh-so easily end a persons life in the wrong hands, it should damn well be considered a privilege.
And supplying someone without that privilege with a firearm should be a felony of high degree.
It's impossible for people to take guns seriously (which they should) if everyone demands them to be a god given right.
By that logic everyone should be allowed to carry a gun no matter what they're gonna do with it.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40203786]It would make confiscation practical.[/QUOTE]
its practical without registration too.
if you want to outlaw the possession of guns, all you have to do is arrest anyone who hasn't forfeited them. Eventually they'd weed out all the guns.
You could keep them locked up in your basement I guess, but it would essentially stop the manufacture and sale of guns regardless. You couldn't take your gun out target shooting or hunting without a proper license. Eventually after all the old geezers with guns hidden in their basements die off they'd be gone for good.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40204063]On legislative grounds, before you read any further into this I'm not saying "hur the gubberment will become hitler reborn this time next week." My concern is that as of now completely banning and removing guns from citizens is completely out of the ballpark. Debates about banning guns still consist of hoplophobes grinding their teeth over features that don't make a lick of a difference and background checks. There's most definitely people who are completely on board with "bustin' down ur doors and takin R goons" but they're faint and will probably remain that way for years to come. Secondly, there's tens and tens of millions of guns out there and having every one registered unlikely. If registration becomes standard on a federal level and all guns produced from then on are registered, there may come a day when a sufficient of guns in existence (and holy fuck what a number that would be by then) are registered that tracing every single one to an individual will be easy. If the crowd on the ban all guns boat somehow manages to grow to a large size, that will be one less thing stopping them.
In short, it has little to do with government uprising and everything to do maintaining a safe guard from from confiscation.[/QUOTE]
Ok, so you're gonna repeat tinfoil hat talk ad-nauseam.
Well then you're not worth wasting time on.
Go ahead and dance around the issue if that makes you feel good about your hobby.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40204238]So that's how it's going to be? Going into scoffing mode as an excuse to completely ignore me without challenging a single one of my arguments and fling attacks at my person. If there were a larger abundance of avatars like mine I would have thought this was a pony thread.
:words:[/QUOTE]
why do political fringes have pony avatars anyways
equally horrible are furjectivists
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40204278]...The same reason why anyone would have any other avatar?[/QUOTE]
Like on facepunch.
Glaber has that pony avatar for whatever reason, and he's a political fringe guy.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40204238]So that's how it's going to be? Going into scoffing mode as an excuse to completely ignore me without challenging a single one of my arguments and fling attacks at my person.[B] If there were a larger abundance of avatars like mine I would have thought this was a pony thread. [/B]
:words:[/QUOTE]
So now you're adding victim complex to the mix?
Well ain't that just grand :allears:
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;40204322]So how about challenging those arguments and maybe taking a break from personal attacks? Yes? No?! ...Maybe?[/QUOTE]
Pretty much all of it was (frankly) bullshit wrapped in tinfoil.
Yet you didn't address at all how to stagnate the black market for firearms, nor how to prevent malevolent individuals from purchasing from a unsuspecting person.
You're already in the register as a person, what's the difference between that, and being listed in a register as a person who owns that set of weapons.
Do you really believe the government can just kick your door down and take them all without some sort of shitstorm going down?
Also they can't confiscate them all on a large scale at once without some being alarmed before it happens to them, and with the wonders of social medias, it'll quickly escalate to a media disaster that can be measured on the Richter scale.
Sweet jesus tittyfucking christ on a creepy cracker, that's some nutty shit you'd have to believe if you think gun registration is p.bad.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40204979]Sweet jesus tittyfucking christ on a creepy cracker, that's some nutty shit you'd have to believe if you think gun registration is p.bad.[/QUOTE]
The fact is that it could potentially be abused, even if the risk is minor. But when a registry offers no tangible benefits, as has been shown time and time again, it's a small loss in security at public cost for no practical benefit.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40204979]
Sweet jesus tittyfucking christ on a creepy cracker, that's some nutty shit you'd have to believe if you think gun registration is p.bad.[/QUOTE]
Canada, 1995. Universal gun registration is enacted.
Canada 1995-2011. Gun registry used to arrest people simply because their firearms license lapsed, also used as an excuse to arrest otherwise innocent people for not having a piece of paper with their gun.
Canada, 2011. Registration of rifles and shotguns abolished because it was a useless waste of money, but not before it is used to confiscate thousands of rifles arbitrarily reclassified as prohibited, not by parliament, but by the police.
Gun registration is p.bad and p.useless too, which makes it a p.stupid idea and a p.big waste of money, IMO and the O of millions of North Americans, as well as the O of the only peer-reviewed study on the effects of gun control in Canada since the '70s.
[quote=Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo][url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nyregion/cuomo-says-he-will-outline-gun-measures-next-month.html?_r=0]“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.” [/url][/quote]
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;40208342]Canada, 1995. Universal gun registration is enacted.
Canada 1995-2011. Gun registry used to arrest people simply because their firearms license lapsed, also used as an excuse to arrest otherwise innocent people for not having a piece of paper with their gun.
Canada, 2011. Registration of rifles and shotguns abolished because it was a useless waste of money, but not before it is used to confiscate thousands of rifles arbitrarily reclassified as prohibited, not by parliament, but by the police.
Gun registration is p.bad and p.useless too, which makes it a p.stupid idea and a p.big waste of money, IMO and the O of millions of North Americans, as well as the O of the only peer-reviewed study on the effects of gun control in Canada since the '70s.[/QUOTE]
"This happened with registration once in Canada, and was not a strictly necessary result of the registration of firearms, therefore it will likely happen in any other case of firearm registration."
That's your argument. Do you like it?
[QUOTE=Megafan;40210431]"This happened with registration once in Canada, and was not a strictly necessary result of the registration of firearms, therefore it will likely happen in any other case of firearm registration."
That's your argument. Do you like it?[/QUOTE]
It's a pretty compelling argument against the idea that Western democracies would use gun registration purely to stop crime, and that a registration alone would not negatively impact gun owners. Given comments made by Cuomo, Feinstein, and others, it's a fairly serious concern.
[QUOTE=Megafan;40210431]"This happened with registration once in Canada, and was not a strictly necessary result of the registration of firearms, therefore it will likely happen in any other case of firearm registration."
That's your argument. Do you like it?[/QUOTE]
If anything it shows how it's not supposed to be done.
Learn from the mistakes made (police confiscating over (hopefully) minor things) instead of going full out fear mongering.
Also I'd like some sources on this:
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;40208342]Canada, 1995. Universal gun registration is enacted.
Canada 1995-2011. Gun registry used to arrest people simply because their firearms license lapsed, also used as an excuse to arrest otherwise innocent people for not having a piece of paper with their gun.
Canada, 2011. Registration of rifles and shotguns abolished because it was a useless waste of money, but not before it is used to confiscate thousands of rifles arbitrarily reclassified as prohibited, not by parliament, but by the police.[/QUOTE]
Preferably not from sources affiliated with the NRA, since they're literally in bed with weapon manufacturers.
[QUOTE=Van-man;40211241]If anything it shows how it's not supposed to be done.
Learn from the mistakes made (police confiscating over (hopefully) minor things) instead of going full out fear mongering.
Also I'd like some sources on this:
Preferably not from sources affiliated with the NRA, since they're literally in bed with weapon manufacturers.[/QUOTE]
For the peer-reviewed study, here's the testimony before the Senate of the researcher who conducted the study:
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mha9JsHwvwA[/url]
Confiscation:
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QBZ-95#Civilian_variants[/url] Note, the RCMP never openly demonstrated [i]how[/i] they converted it to full auto, and actually refused to demonstrate it to the importer, telling them they could send a gunsmith and he'd be shown, but he wouldn't be able to ever tell anyone else.
[url]http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2012/01/05/19207001.html[/url] Note, this little gun (Armi-Jager AP-80) shares nothing in common with the AK except looks, yet it was banned as a variant some 20 years after AKs were banned.
More on the AP-80 and also the Walther G22:
[url]http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/01/10/government-to-gun-owners-we-made-a-mistake-fix-it-for-us-or-go-to-prison/[/url]
The Walther was legal here for years, sold in stores for ages, and then the RCMP decide it's banned because it's a bullpup, which since it's manufactured as a bullpup, it's supposed to be perfectly legal. This one isn't even a "converted to full auto" or "variant of another gun" case, the G22 is literally banned for absolutely no reason, and it was decided by the RCMP, not by parliament.
As for the continued confiscation between 1995 and 2011, there's not many sources I can provide, because not all of them made the news. It was, however, illegal to be in possession of a rifle without a registration certificate, and you could be arrested if you failed to provide the registration certificate when requested, even though there was a central electronic database of registered firearms. As for the license lapsing, that's due to [url=http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-42.html#docCont]Section 91 of the Criminal Code of Canada[/url], which was made in 1995 along with the current gun control laws, and rather than being a charge levied against gangsters and criminals, it is largely used to arrest people when their license expires and charge them with unlawful possession of a firearm.
As well, while I can't find a news source now, since the Firearms Act didn't come into force until 1998, between 1995 and 1998 people could still buy guns that would become prohibited. However, the government demanded all prohibited firearms purchased between those years be surrendered for destruction, despite the fact that the act had not fully come into force yet. Largely, these were pistols that the government wanted destroyed, as they designed the act to ban approximately half of the pistols in Canada at the time, with the intent on banning the rest later after public outrage had subsided at the banning of guns arbitrarily by name and the enactment of a gun registry.
Then there's the following quotes from politicians at the time:
[quote=Alan Rock, Former Justice Minister at the time C-68 was enacted]I came to Ottawa last year, with the firm belief that the only people in Canada who should have firearms are police officers and the military.[/quote]
And a former Senator who was heard at a conference saying:
[quote=Sharon Carstairs, Former Senator appointed by Jean Chretien, Liberal]C-68 has little to do with gun control or crime control, but it is the first step necessary to begin the social re-engineering of Canada.[/quote]
[url]http://whyfor.com/firearm/carstairs.txt[/url]
[url]http://whyfor.com/firearm/carstairs-alert.txt[/url]
[url]http://www.lfpress.com/comment/2012/02/09/19362021.html[/url]
[url]http://openparliament.ca/debates/2011/11/1/scott-armstrong-4/only/[/url]
[url]http://blogs.canoe.ca/lilleyspad/contributor-columns/column-lilley-bureaucrats-gunning-for-rifle-owners/[/url]
[url]http://www.lufa.ca/confiscation.asp[/url]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40204246]why do political fringes have pony avatars anyways
equally horrible are furjectivists[/QUOTE]
Just because someone has an avatar of a certain character doesn't make them a brony, or a furry, most furries/ bronies only like furry/brony stuff and nothing else.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40204246]why do political fringes have pony avatars anyways
equally horrible are furjectivists[/QUOTE]
Because you definitely have no history of putting odd things in your avatar.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.