I'm so glad you helped pay for mine. I'm gonna get some more from you as well. I'm erecting a 500kw system soon. Thanks in advanced!
Knowing what happens to legal guns and how they get into the hands of criminals is trackable. Right now, I can go and buy a firearm and sell it for an inflated price to a criminal. This happens frequently. But with registration required, if I wanted to sell to someone, we would both need file that sale, and if a felon was on the purchasing end, they could be arrested. I remember a story from I think it was South Carolina and Florida a while back, where huge amounts of guns that were being legally sold in One of those states kept ending up in the other, and they were able to determine that it was a whole organized system of legal buyers in one location selling to felons. Point is, knowing and tracking the how and where the holes are that allow felons and non-citizens to keep getting guns can allow, over time, a big reduction in illegally owned firearms. The second amendment. That is still the law of the land. I am talking about registration, not infringement. I think it comes down to you having an unrealistic fear that has been brought on by overzealous NRA spokesmen and fearmongers. There is a lot to stop those that might want to take your guns. For one, there's you, for two, there's me, for three, there is probably 275,000,000 Americans. Sure, many want to limit certain areas, clip size for example, but I never hear of anyone proposing we actually confiscate guns that are out there. I never hear of anyone suggesting a full eradication of gun rights, I just hear some wanting limits and those who are gun owners blowing the fact that some want limits into something much grander. I'm sure you can find a person here or there that might want to take guns away, just like you could find a person here or there that thinks we should be able to buy grenades and rocket launchers. The the government can't just go bug nutty against what the vast majority of Americans want, especially in the realm of an amendment, and expect anything short of their total downfall.
If you read what I read, I said "but only he and his wife will use them, than the # that matters is 2". Sure they could hand them out. Some people would, some wouldnt. My point was that no matter how they hand the firearms out, the important number is not the total number of firearms but the number of people who get to use those firearms and have the ammo to use them. So it might be 2, 20, 200 or perhaps they find a full 500 people, but whatever that number is, that's the constraint along with ammo.
It is all part of the slippery slope. And it is not accidental. Obamacare is not constitutional. Yet that bastard child of a law was partially upheld by the Supreme Court by being rewritten. What was NOT a tax, magically, poof, the Supremes declare a tax, and voila, the law stands. Relying on the Supreme Court to uphold the constitution in its plain meaning was a HUGE mistake that many Republicans made in not fighting hard enough against it when it passed. They assume an obviously unconstitutional law would be overturned. It is all part of the plan. It is part of the written plans of Progressives to "fundamentally change" this country. When they can get change in big chunks they go for it. When they can't do that, they will take little chunks. As for guns, the anti gun crowd (and make NO mistake, these people want guns GONE. They openly admire Australia's big gun grab (google it) and countries like Japan that have virtually no private gun ownership) knows that these little chunks - more registration, limits on magazines, limits on ammo, "assault" weapon bans, really whatever, won't do JACK SHIT. None of these ideas will have any noticeable, measureable impact on the headline grabbing incidents that start all this crap - mass shootings, gang killings, whatever. Thus, as part of the plan, "failure" (as defined by the gun grabbers and the corrupt and compliant mainstream media) will be assured. These folks wait for the next incident, and the ratchet of the slippery slope is tightened further again. "Waaaaahhh, another mass shooting. We need more laws, more government power, more control, we hate those red state rednecks for ruining this country, why do they want their guns, it is all their fault, why do they hate grandmothers and children?" It is so predictable, so boring, so stupid. I am surprised you can't see it when it is so blindingly obvious. Not to be a big dick about it but those that support Federal laws that nibble at guns with small "reasonable" regulations are either closet gun grabbers pushing down the slippery slope, or dupes of the former, or delusional and naïve folks wasting everyone's time. If you are really interested in doing something about mass shootings, we need to change this country's mental health system. If you are really interested in cutting down on the gun murder rate in this country, we need to start by attacking the gang culture, arresting more violent criminals and putting them in prison.
Registration is infringement. So is banning full auto weapons. Did you know they actually did not banning full auto weapons because that is an infringement? Instead they require you to get a license that for years they just ignored when you apply. I don't really know if they will in fact give you the license today if you apply. http://www.ehow.com/how_6742869_fully-automatic-gun-license.html
Right you are Masbee, the penalty for not buying Obama care was ruled a tax because Congress has the power to tax not penalize citizens for not buying something. However, what that Chief justus left out, that still leave the bill still in violation of the Constitution, is the fact that if it is a tax, then it is a "direct tax". Direct taxes are taxes levied on individuals and they are specifically prohibited. That is why the 16th amendment was passed, to make legal the income tax on individuals. The amendment does so by modifying the prohibition against direct taxes by allowing the tax on income but that will not cover the bastard tax in Obama care. This needs to be challenged in court again where it should fail the final test.
When you think Chief Justice John Roberts is part of the liberal conspiracy, you may be playing too deep in right field. barfo
Well, like the license on automatic weapons, $200 bucks to apply and it never happens. That is infringing the hell out of the right to bare arms. The $200 dollar tax when imposed in 1934 was a huge infringement. Still is today if imposed on a person to register a couple dozen firearms at 200 bucks a piece.
I am willing to allow the US government to exclude Nuclear weapons from my right to bare arms just so long as they also exclude the Iranians from the same.
How is registering to vote infringement? People fight laws requiring a voter to produce an ID, even if the ID is free to get.
All weapons fall under the uninfringeable 2nd amendment, but those wars were all lost by the US even though the enemies fought primarily with simple guns, homemade bombs, rocks and pointy sticks.
My take = very few military would desert or refuse to fight. The fact that they willingly signed away most of their freedoms to join tells me they don't place much value on the concept. Real Americans who have many weapons would share them with their unarmed neighbors. There would be no unarmed citizens. Roundups and internments would come before all out war eventually broke out in revolt. "Natural" disaters and forced evacuations would be the initial premise. There are 300 million "legal" guns in America. I'd guess at least that many more "illegal" guns.
Which also gives the government the ability to take them from legal owners at their whim. The government can't take the guns until they know where they are. Step 1, registration. What do you base that on? Do you have any evidence that criminals get their weapons legally? Besides, that's not a business for the faint of heart. There are lots of felons that think the money you would like for you gun is worth more to him than your life is. Even though some of that goes on, why is it that you think the solution is to infringe on the constitutional right of hundreds of millions of legal gun owners? Why the hell would a felon go buy a gun that is registered, when all he has to do is by a stolen gun, or steal one himself? Buying a registered gun, and registering that gun himself puts him in jail. Felon = bad guy....not necessarily stupid guy. How does that happen, when the felons are using stolen guns? As a side note, wouldn't it be cool if the administration could close the hole that allows them to sell thousands of weapons to Mexican drug cartels? Those guns have killed plenty of innocent people. Where is your demand for controlling the gifting of fully automatic weapons to hard core criminals? Or, how about some control over gifting thousands of automatics to Al Fucking Qaeda in Syria? Those are ok, because they are 'over there' (for now)? Registration is infringement. Fuck, Further, it's like you have amnesia or something. You don't remember the legislation they tried to push through six months ago in this very state? Go re-read the thread on House Bill 3200, then come back and tell me that there aren't plenty of politicians, in OUR OWN STATE, that want to take my guns. I get so damned tired of people telling me that the government doesn't want to take the guns, when it is clear to anyone that is paying attention that they do. I provided a long list of politicians that said things like, citizens should not have access to guns, in a much earlier gun discussion. I'm not that great using the search feature, but it's there. If you really believe what you just said, you ether have you head in the sand, or you are afraid to face the truth. How many do you suppose told their Australian buddy that they shouldn't worry, nobody wants their guns? Go Blazers
Like they even need the Army... You'll see this thing running up on you. [video=youtube;wE3fmFTtP9g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE3fmFTtP9g#t=71[/video]
Before I get into this, I just want to make a couple notes. First, thanks, this is well presented. Second, I'm going to try and give my opinions without sounding too certain, because this has never been an issue that I have paid close attention to. I read an article here and there, but that's about it. The biggest problem I have with your post has nothing to do with the guns. There are other threads for the obamacare, but bringing that up as an example of unconstitutional laws passing to me seems nonsensical because I believe it's completely constitutional. But that's a whole different thread. As far as the goal being to totally get rid of guns, I honestly think you live in a right wing world where stories and beliefs are amplified that make you think people want to take your guns. I'm not doubting there are some here and there, but mostly the whole issue of guns, like other hot button issues from abortion to religion in schools are amplified far beyond where they should be by politicians looking to dazzle their constituents with a little dazzle dazzle. But I work in a very liberal place, academia. And I have talked many times on this topic with bunches of liberals, and not one of them has ever suggested that we should ban guns. I have heard them say, it's too bad there are 300M guns out there because now we are stuck with them, can't take pee out of the ocean. But mostly I hear them talk about closing loopholes like gun show and private sales of guns to keep them out of the wrong hands (criminals). I think it's mostly the media and politicians fault for using scare tactics going both directions, but that the issue itself is not that hard to handle with a few laws that have nothing to do with restricting guns or ammo, but are just designed to do a few things. 1) better healthcare, especially mental healthcare in schools. 2) better education for parents to recognize and treat dysfunctional youths. 3) better education for students, teachers and the public about mental issues and overprescribing of meds. 4) better education for gun owners who have children on how to safely store their weapons and make sure kids with access are well observed. 5) close gun show loopholes and require private sales to be facilitated by a licensed trader or gun store. 6) require guns to be registered. Require their resale, theft or destruction to be filed. If we did this, I'd be fine with no more restrictions beyond what already exist. Let the guns, ammo and mags be. Ok, so those are my thoughts.
