Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Lilly

Other side of gun ownership

464 posts in this topic

These basic safety courses only teach you the basics. In a controlled environment, no stress at all. I see no reason why these safety courses shouldn't be mandatory, even to just own.

Yeah ok. What other parts of my freedoms should be legislated ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

understand where you are coming from, but if an adult who kills was given access to guns as a child by a "responsible" parent, then surely it is OUR right to say they should never have had access in the first place.

Everyman has rights, but when there are potential innocent victims at the end of the barrel, then its a case of WHOS rights are more important.....saying that, we could easily go on all night in circles on this one.

Unless you have guardianship over someone else's child (or children), it is not your right (nor anyone else's, for that matter) to decide how they choose to raise them - unless they are breaking a law, at which point, it's still not your right to deicde anything unless you are the law.

It's not a matter of rights, in the instance you are talking about here, but rather an issue of one's own idea of how homes should be maintained and how children should be raised as opposed to someone else's. Maybe you are right, maybe you aren't. BUT, it's not YOUR call on anyone's home or family other than your own. When you start thinking you have a right to tell someone how they are supposed to live, then you are saying that it is okay for them to not have to have any kind of responsability, and should therefore be held accountable when they do something illegal. Do you want that? No, of course not. So stop thinking it's okay for stuff like this to happen.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all comes down to personal responsibility. But sadly it's becoming a dying idea. Just look to the investment bank bailouts for example. It's the same argument for gun control. It affects many but the problem was created by few. It's like a trend has formed.

Edited by acidhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your too sensible acid head. Please try the wall of text approach next time. Maybe then theyll understand what we been saying.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah ok. What other parts of my freedoms should be legislated ?

For you, all of them. Until you pass a comprehension test.

There is nothing about requiring a firearms safety course that infringes on your right to bear arms. If you think so, then I do strongly suggest you seek some sort of professional help - like from a Constitutional Scholar or lawyer.

Edited by MstrMsn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For you, all of them. Until you pass a comprehension test.

There is nothing about requiring a firearms safety course that infringes on your right to bear arms. If you think so, then I do strongly suggest you seek some sort of professional help - like from a Constitutional Scholar or lawyer.

You just make that up or can you back it with a link or some evidence ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. ONLY if it is a dealer or at a gun show. Private sales are not tracked or registered. It's not a matter of covering for anything.

Here is how I see it -

Manufacturer makes gun.

Manufacturer sells gun to dealer. (Tracked and recorded.)

Dealer sells to individual. (Tracked and recorded.)

Individual A sells to individual B. (No record)

Individual B sells to individual C. (No record)

Individual C is robbed. Gun that wasn't locked in safe is stolen. Gun used in liquor store robbery in another city.

How is the gun traced?

Nibs

Same exact way if it were stolen from you, after being bought from a licensed dealer. And don't think it's through ballistics, it's not. Only thing that ballistics CAN do, even if ALL firearms are registered is match it to a make and model(ish) - like they can say from the pattern of the rifling that the bullet came from a 9mm Glock, possibly even whether is was a 17L, 17 or 19. It CAN NOT tell that it came directly from you.

Now, they find the gun, and the serial number is readable, then they can trace that to the dealer, and from the dealer to you. Now, if you are as responsible as you say you are, when you found out one of your guns was stolen, you would report it to the police - make, model, caliber, AND serial number. That way, after they go to the dealer (with a warrant), and he gets the form that he is required to keep, and gives them your name... well, without that police report to back your claim, you'll have some serious explaining to do.

Now, say you sell it, the paperwork will send them to you. You tell them that you sold it. What do you think your odds will be in that situation?

Now, I don't know if an ATF form 4473 (or any other form) is required or not in your state for a private sale - at the moment as I am awaiting a reply from the CBI. However, YOU as the seller in a private sale CAN run a background check on the person you are selling to.

http://www.colorado....N/1251622197440

Edited by MstrMsn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just make that up or can you back it with a link or some evidence ?

Back what up? Please be more specific in your future conversations with people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just smell an agitator and nothing more. No I wont do your homework for you. But you can try reading this sometime.

Ill add this since your from Boston and obviously want to be educated properly. Heres how your city was founded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Winthrop

Edited by AsteroidX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes there is no time to pause...work is not life or death. What if the victim could have had access to a gun? Or do you think in family arguments both are the aggressor and no one is the victim?

There is no perfect solution that fits all. It's about reducing the damage and the risks. Enforcing stricter gun laws has been proven to reduce gun related crimes in the rest of the western world where it's been introduced. Don't know why it can't work in a civllised and progressive nation such as the US of A.

The good news is that the majority of Americans believe so too. Link

Edited by BlackRedLittleDevil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your seriously gonna throw up a CBS "news" poll as evidence ?

Id find you poll of how well the American media is trusted but unfortunately CBS doesnt run those kind of polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just smell an agitator and nothing more. No I wont do your homework for you. But you can try reading this sometime.

Ill add this since your from Boston and obviously want to be educated properly. Heres how your city was founded.

http://en.wikipedia....i/John_Winthrop

The DOI isn't relevent in this situation. You should try reading the US Constitution, that's where this particular right is relevent. Also, you might want to do a little research on Supreme Court cases. Reynolds V. United States (98 U.S. 145) - Granted, this was a 1st amendment issue, however, the following is used to summarize that although rights are Constitutionally protected, they are not absolute - meaning, some restrictions can be made.... "Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order.”

But, since you brought it up, the DOI (as well as the US Constitution) does NOT preclude the state or federal government from making a firearms safety course mandatory. So, your little "argument" or theory is invalid.

A little background on me...

Medically retired from the US Army after 17 years of service. Three combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

I've held a concealed carry permit (LTC-A, here in Mass) for the last 9 years, and own several different firearms.

So, before you decide you want to accuse someone of being an "agitator", you should know who you are talking about.

Edited by MstrMsn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, since you brought it up, the DOI (as well as the US Constitution) does NOT preclude the state or federal government from making a firearms safety course mandatory. So, your little "argument" or theory is invalid.

Alot of things are not precluded. That doesnt make it right nor ok. Its about erosion of rights and not a gun class IMO. So maybe its just perspctive.

Thank you for your service. Honestly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your seriously gonna throw up a CBS "news" poll as evidence ?

Id find you poll of how well the American media is trusted but unfortunately CBS doesnt run those kind of polls.

So what poll does satisfy you? One from the NRA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alot of things are not precluded. That doesnt make it right nor ok. Its about erosion of rights and not a gun class IMO. So maybe its just perspctive.

Thank you for your service. Honestly.

How is requiring instructions on how to safely use something potentially dangerous an erosion of any rights?

You're welcome. And just so you know, I just really want to know why you have this outlook. Even if the safety course were mandatory, it doesn't keep you from exercising a right. Honetly, I think many classes should be mandatory - take freedom of speech. Too many people have a wrong understanding of what it means. Most people don't truly understand the meaning behind the Bill of Rights,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what poll does satisfy you? One from the NRA?

How about a poll from an unbiased source?

I've lived in the US my entire life (will be 39 in a few months) not counting my time in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have never once taken a poll about how I feel about guns.

What you need to understand is that these polls aren't made using the majority of the citizens here. The poll data is "of people surveyed" which could be 20 or 200, but NEVER EVER EVER the entire populace of the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a poll from an unbiased source?

I've lived in the US my entire life (will be 39 in a few months) not counting my time in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have never once taken a poll about how I feel about guns.

What you need to understand is that these polls aren't made using the majority of the citizens here. The poll data is "of people surveyed" which could be 20 or 200, but NEVER EVER EVER the entire populace of the US.

:unsure2: It's a poll, not an election. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look, The ABC also conducted a poll showing more gun control preferences,

Link

They must have "polled" the same people as CBS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And CNN as well (despite a drop in recent times). Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And just so you know, I just really want to know why you have this outlook. Even if the safety course were mandatory, it doesn't keep you from exercising a right. Honetly, I think many classes should be mandatory - take freedom of speech. Too many people have a wrong understanding of what it means. Most people don't truly understand the meaning behind the Bill of Rights

Actually I dont really disagree with the class thing. But a 2 hour class does not give one experience with firearms as Im certain you know. I know this doesnt support my opinion on altering the 2nd Amendment but Ill post it anyways to show how inadequate classes can be in the bigger picture. I guess then yopu have to ask what scenario are you training these people for. Home defense ? Self Protection ? Firearm safety ? CWP ? All of the above...Do you have to do multiple classes....Its good in theory but I see where some classes would be woefully inadequate if not misinformative and others would be costly and then yet others would be fine examples of the "class training" you mention.

At the beginning of the Civil War, neither the North or the South was nearly well enough prepared for war, and few people imagined the demands and hardships the war would bring. Just prior to the war the total peacetime army consisted of a paltry 16,000 men. Both sides issued an immediate call to forces from the militia, followed by the immediate awareness of an acute shortage of weapons, uniforms and trained officers. Among the available States' militia regiments there existed an uneven quality, and none had anything resembling combat training. The typical militia drilling at the time amounted to, at best, parade-ground marching. The militia units, from local communities, had never drilled together as a larger regiment. Thereby lacking in the extremely important skill, critically necessary for the war style of the time, to maneuver from a marching line into a fighting line. Yet, both sides were equally unready, and rushed to prepare.[24]

My view comes from living in rural America. Ive had deer get caught in fencline that had to be put down. Ive had cougar attack livestock and Ive got quite a nice herd of deer that like to migrate through apple orchard. Although I dont hunt them because Oregon deer are beautiful and its a small herd. In my life a gun is a tool to help maintain the land I live on and several neighbors I help out as well. It doesnt leave my property. Id be just as vocal if someone wanted to take my only beehive away too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And CNN as well (despite a drop in recent times).

Actually they prolly all just got there information from the same for profit telephone survey group that chose a specific demograpic within a certain region to poll from. And this is darn near bigger then an election so please dont come at us with some lame poll that really says nothing but I can dial a preselected phone number and get paid from multiple news agency for handing them what they requested. A poll that shows what the news agencies asked for.

Just saying thats biased polling your reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you have guardianship over someone else's child (or children), it is not your right (nor anyone else's, for that matter) to decide how they choose to raise them - unless they are breaking a law, at which point, it's still not your right to deicde anything unless you are the law.

It's not a matter of rights, in the instance you are talking about here, but rather an issue of one's own idea of how homes should be maintained and how children should be raised as opposed to someone else's. Maybe you are right, maybe you aren't. BUT, it's not YOUR call on anyone's home or family other than your own. When you start thinking you have a right to tell someone how they are supposed to live, then you are saying that it is okay for them to not have to have any kind of responsability, and should therefore be held accountable when they do something illegal. Do you want that? No, of course not. So stop thinking it's okay for stuff like this to happen.

I was talking about a more widespread problem than an individual family, hence the reason for gunlaws, in England it is illegal to have guns the same way you have them in the States, so my point is that it is our right has been proven as they CAN NOT carry guns here because of OUR say so to OUR rights. The law did not decide this on its own, the people asked for it.

I do not have a right to tell anyone how to live, but when their lifestyle starts affecting mine, then I have everyright to say something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually they prolly all just got there information from the same for profit telephone survey group that chose a specific demograpic within a certain region to poll from. And this is darn near bigger then an election so please dont come at us with some lame poll that really says nothing but I can dial a preselected phone number and get paid from multiple news agency for handing them what they requested. A poll that shows what the news agencies asked for.

Just saying thats biased polling your reading.

OK so media polling is not good enough for you. How about the recently elected US President calling on Congress to toughen gun control and ownership.

I mean, you would have to be pretty obtuse not to realise that the elected elite wouldn't be putting "their foot into it" and proposing a Constitutional amendment to Congress unless they had enough support from the electorate. They usually get this support via polls.

Edited by BlackRedLittleDevil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Id be willing to put my house up that if the election were held today you would not have the same result. Just saying.

But your in Auz so you dont know whats going on here everyday in the streets, stores, restaurants and bars. People talk. And they are unhappy. And its not just about guns.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same exact way if it were stolen from you, after being bought from a licensed dealer. And don't think it's through ballistics, it's not. Only thing that ballistics CAN do, even if ALL firearms are registered is match it to a make and model(ish) - like they can say from the pattern of the rifling that the bullet came from a 9mm Glock, possibly even whether is was a 17L, 17 or 19. It CAN NOT tell that it came directly from you.

Now, they find the gun, and the serial number is readable, then they can trace that to the dealer, and from the dealer to you. Now, if you are as responsible as you say you are, when you found out one of your guns was stolen, you would report it to the police - make, model, caliber, AND serial number. That way, after they go to the dealer (with a warrant), and he gets the form that he is required to keep, and gives them your name... well, without that police report to back your claim, you'll have some serious explaining to do.

Now, say you sell it, the paperwork will send them to you. You tell them that you sold it. What do you think your odds will be in that situation?

Now, I don't know if an ATF form 4473 (or any other form) is required or not in your state for a private sale - at the moment as I am awaiting a reply from the CBI. However, YOU as the seller in a private sale CAN run a background check on the person you are selling to.

http://www.colorado....N/1251622197440

In my state I don't need anything to buy or sell to an individual. I don't have to register or anything else.

So if everyone who ever touched the gun admits it to the police then great, it can be traced. If I bought it from some guy at a garage sale and we have no idea who each other are, then tracing it might be tough.

CSI can tell you what kind of gun a bullet came from but always where the gun came from.

Personally, we DO NOT sell our weapons to anyone and if we purchase a weapon from an individual we get a copy of their driver's license. We also have provided a list of our weapons and serial numbers to the Sheriff (who didn't really want them) for insurance purposes.

IMO if everyone registering their guns and having to do background checks for even personal sales and it takes ONE gun away from a loon, then it's worth it.

I'm not saying that anything they are instituting or want to institute is a good idea or will solve all the problems but even solving one tiny problem would be great.

Nibs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.