M14 Forum

dwight55 · January 22nd, 2013, 08:11 PM

IF, . . . and I know that is a pipe dream, . . . but IF the singular act of somehow making sure a gun was never sold to a felon or a dribble brain, . . . was the end of the line for the gun grabbers, . . . I would support it 100%, . . . no questions asked, . . . no complaints or arguments.

PROBLEM: that is only their opening feint, . . . once every one is on board with "checks" then comes the registration thingy. They will just want to know Who has What, . . . so they can "insure" every one is complying with the checks.

ANSWER: tell the feds, . . . the Governor, . . . the mayor, . . . the congressman, . . . the senator, . . . the dog catcher, . . . and all the rest of the "Gubmint what's here to help", . . . to stuff it.

AND: stuff it back in their faces in November of 2014. I've got my eye on a bunch of dudes, . . . and I'm gonna be watching their votes, . . . and my health care, and a few other things can go suck eggs, . . . I spent 17 years of my life in direct application of defending the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, . . . I ain't quittin now.

now, . . . think I'll go take a blood pressure pill, . . . get some water, . . . and go to bed, . . . before I go into the back room and start reloading, . . . again.

Mayh God bless,
Dwight

Dredsen · January 22nd, 2013, 08:17 PM

why are all the m14 RA pics dead links?

i was going to make a thread about the m14RA asking what they are doing now to help with the battles.. but feared starting a sh!t-storm

Vos Parate · January 22nd, 2013, 08:18 PM

After reading a few posts about the virtues of "universal background checks" I am begining to understand why this country is going down the %$#^hole.

GARRARD · January 22nd, 2013, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dredsen

why are all the m14 RA pics dead links?

i was going to make a thread about the m14RA asking what they are doing now to help with the battles.. but feared starting a sh!t-storm

Yeah, let's let sleeping dogs lie.

PhrogRider · January 22nd, 2013, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NukMed

2. Allowing any Joe Citizen to run background checks? Really? What's to keep folks from abusing the opportunity to run background checks on just anyone for any reason they choose. Does nobody else have privacy concerns about this?

Whoa, whoa, whoa... as the Father of two teen-age daughters, we may be on to something here! I'm intrigued. If I'm allowed to expand the system to dig into the history of young Romeos I may be on board.

Kansasredneck · January 22nd, 2013, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NukMed

Two things:

1. Background checks for the purchase of arms are an unconstitutional infringement as they alert the government to a firearms purchase. They don't need to know what I buy or when, or collect any other information about me, unless conducting an investigation of me under reasonable suspicion of me having committed a crime.

2. Allowing any Joe Citizen to run background checks? Really? What's to keep folks from abusing the opportunity to run background checks on just anyone for any reason they choose. Does nobody else have privacy concerns about this?

Criminal convictions are a matter of public record. I think every state has a data base of felons. I don't want felons buying guns. That and theft are how the gangs get many of their weapons. My ex BiL lost several guns to theft back in 1980. One turned up in Kansas last year. 31 years after the crime. They were able to track it through several past owners, but did not catch the guy who stole it.
The government should be forbidden from keeping a record of background checks, and if that is done, I have no problem with the check. It is one of the few things I agree with, at least in part.

TheTurtle · January 22nd, 2013, 09:55 PM

The background check system here in CA has weeded out a lot of criminals trying to buy a gun from me. I do believe it does more good than bad. However, I believe there should be NO retention of information.

What we need is something linked to your ID that states you are eligible to own a firearm. Not that you do own one, but that you are eligible. This way, when I scan the customers ID to fill out the form it would either pass it through or red flag them as a criminal or mentally unfit.

Just an idea.

Kansasredneck · January 22nd, 2013, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shirley Temple

Close to what drx was saying and what I've proposed to a lot of people who have no say in it, is why not issue a card or driver's license endorsement to confirm that you have had a background check.

Here's how it would work. Every so often (let's say 2 years) you get your background check and fill out a form similar to what you have to do now, and if you pass you are issued a card that allows you to purchase- from a store, at a gun show, or from a private party. This card would be renewed from time to time, and attempting to buy without one or knowingly selling to someone without one would be a punishable crime.

At the time of purchase you simply present the card and that's it. No phone calls, no paperwork, nothing. The government would not know what you bought, how many you bought, where you bought, or even if you bought a firearm at all. All they would know is that for a 2 year period you were eligible to purchase a firearm.

And since you passed a check and were deemed responsible enough to own a firearm, there would be no restrictions on what you could buy.

I think this is a reasonable approach and we would come out ahead in the end. My 2 cents.

Make it a routine part of the drivers lic renewal. Just like other endorsements. Glasses, motor cycle, organ donor. Add GOA for gun owner approved or NFA for No Fire Arms.

Kansasredneck · January 22nd, 2013, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTurtle

The background check system here in CA has weeded out a lot of criminals trying to buy a gun from me. I do believe it does more good than bad. However, I believe there should be NO retention of information.

What we need is something linked to your ID that states you are eligible to own a firearm. Not that you do own one, but that you are eligible. This way, when I scan the customers ID to fill out the form it would either pass it through or red flag them as a criminal or mentally unfit.

Just an idea.

And all democrat politicians should be labeled mentally unfit.

Viking · January 22nd, 2013, 10:16 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/us...bama.html?_r=0

Quote:

N.R.A. Leader Denounces Obama’s Call for Gun Control
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
Published: January 22, 2013

WASHINGTON — Wayne LaPierre, the executive director of the National Rifle Association, angrily accused President Obama on Tuesday of demonizing law-abiding gun owners and of wanting to put “every private personal firearms transaction right under the thumb of the federal government.”

In a fiery speech at a hunting conference in Nevada, Mr. LaPierre criticized Mr. Obama’s Inaugural Address on Monday when the president said Americans should not “mistake absolutism for principle.”

That reference, Mr. LaPierre said, was intended as an attack on the N.R.A. and gun owners who believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution provides an absolute right to bear arms.

“I urge our president to use caution when attacking clearly defined absolutes in favor of his principles,” Mr. LaPierre said. “When absolutes are abandoned for principles, the U.S. Constitution becomes a blank slate for anyone’s graffiti.”

Speaking on the same day that a gunfight on a Texas college campus left four people hospitalized, Mr. LaPierre gave voice to some of the resistance on Capitol Hill from Republicans who oppose efforts by the president to seek tougher restrictions on firearms.

That debate is likely to begin in the days ahead as Mr. Obama’s allies in Congress formally introduce legislation seeking a ban on assault weapons, limits on high-capacity magazines and an enhanced and expanded background check system for gun purchases.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader and a supporter of gun rights, said Tuesday that he would not stand in the way of such legislation and would make sure that gun-control legislation was allowed to come to the floor of the Senate.

But Mr. LaPierre angrily accused Mr. Obama of seeking to substitute his own beliefs for the absolute principles that the framers of the Constitution had established in the Bill of Rights.

He said there were only two reasons government would want to expand the background check system, which he said would collect the names of gun owners into a huge federal registry.

The reasons, he said: “Either to tax them, or to take them.”

Mr. LaPierre said that the president had twisted the definition of the word “absolutist,” turning it into the same as the word “extremist.” He said the president’s goal was to get guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, leaving them only in the hands of criminals and the wealthy.

“If the only way he can force you to give them up is through scorn and ridicule, believe me, he is more than willing to do it,” Mr. LaPierre said.

He also accused the president of protecting the wealthy like Mr. Obama and his allies — who he said have protection for their families — by taking the guns away only from those who cannot afford paid protection.

“We are told that wanting the same technology that the criminals and our elites are protected by for themselves is a form of absolutism,” Mr. LaPierre said. “Barack Obama is saying that the only principled way of making children safe” is making other people less safe, he said.

Clanjf · January 22nd, 2013, 10:35 PM

Just NO

As to the not letting felons own firearms: why not? They have "paid their debt to society" have they not? If they can't be trusted with a firearm, do you really want to trust them back out on the street at all?

Shall not be in fringed, NOT "shall be allowed if".

echo5papa · January 23rd, 2013, 03:45 AM

There is a procedure for felons to regain their gun rights in at least some states.

Many felons have not paid their debt to society. Many return to crime almost immediately.

I think the wait in VA is 5 years with a clean record and you can apply fro restoration of rights, and even then the nature of your crimes will be considered.

A person that has used a gun to commit a violent crime will likely never be restored.

cruciantime · January 23rd, 2013, 03:52 AM

Reread my post. I didn't judge you. I disagreed with you and your willingness to give up.

If you want to accept incremental defeat, go ahead. I mentioned its a free country. If you are upset because I won't go along with you? That's a personal issue you have to deal with on your own.

Going along with that attitude ain't gonna happen. You're on your own.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeGun

Crucian,

Judge Not Lest You Be Judged Yourself.

If you think for a Split Second that this Country is Free,, then take the Blinder's off and Open Your Eye's.

A whole lot of People in this country are incarcerated in the Jail House's for non violent crime's. On top of that Guess Who is paying for there keep ~ We Are.

Well we may have had a FREE Country At One Time,, but that was a long long time ago.

Over the year's,, more and more law's have been passed,, not less,, and the Freedom that this country once had,, is a whole lot less now than then.

There's lot of thing's that we are not FREE to do,, but Jumping up and down like an Elmer Fudd,, and pointing the Finger at someone else that doesn't see thing's the same as you,, is not going to make much change in the long run for more Freedom,, IMO. That's just Mob mentality,, and get's nowhere in the Long Run.

When I see the Barber,, I alway's say, "Its Just Not Like It Used To Be", and his Reply, "Joe, It Won't Ever Be Like It Used To Be".

Joe

cruciantime · January 23rd, 2013, 04:09 AM

I am not willing to have the train run down this track any longer. I think we need to turn it around and run it back about 80 years and return some meaning to the second amendment.

If someone commits a crime there are laws in place that will incarcerate them or end there life. They just aren't used fully. There are bad people in the world. The philosophy that "If we just talk to people they will understand and like us and everything will be unicorns and rainbows" should be put to bed.

I see this whole thing as a failed experiment with tossing around my morals and values. It hasn't turned out too well from where I'm sitting. Utopia is not an obtainable ideal. Worrying about background checks is like that precrime movie with Tom Cruise where they are trying to create a perfect society by stopping everything before it starts. Its a nice concept for a movie. But its a movie. Its not real.

We need to be real. Don't play around and compromise our morals and values.

RetiredNSmilin308 · January 23rd, 2013, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GARRARD

The state now has preemption over guns and ammunition so towns don't get to enforce gun control anymore. No more waiting periods for CCW holders.

GARRARD, I am glad Florida got that changed. It was a pain when I was there. Just another reason why the GF and I are going to move there once this freezing winter is over with. So far Melbourne is getting the nod.