Only the Police and the Military Should Have Guns

Annachie wrote:Just quickly Panzer, by that logic anybody who cheats on their taxes breaks the law if they keep a copy of their tax records as is required by law.

I'm not familiar enough with case around tax returns to comment on that.

I based my argument that the mandatory recording of all firearms sales by persons convicted of on the case of Haynes v. the United States where the US Supreme Court held that a convicted felon cannot be convicted of possession of an unregistered firearm because that conviction penalized him for not incriminating himself by informing the federal government that he had unlawful possession of a firearm.

My argument is that an FFL holder is, by law, required to record what firearms that he gets and who or where he gets them. The FFL is then required to make those records available to the ATF upon termination of his FFL or once a year if an IOI shows up and says, "I want to look at your records."

My argument is that based on the regulations surrounding current firearms sales in the United States, a "universal background check" law is a situation that's somewhat similar to Haynes, but with a third party individual collecting the records on behalf of the government. The Haynes case is also why you see so many gun registration laws that essentially say, "This does not apply to criminals."

Panzer wrote:

Annachie wrote:Lol.

Claiming the gun show loophole doesn't exist then actually talking
about it happening is beautiful.

I mean, I guess it is a "loophole" in the sense that Joe Schmoe is allowed to trade is hunting rifle to a guy who wants to exchange money for it in a particular venue.

You may as well call it the "Wal-Mart parking lot loophole" or the "guy on the sidewalk loophole."

Personally, every sale, including private, should go through a licensed dealer. If only to enforce the paperwork.
For a fixed fee, but I think people wont mind the fee to know the paperwork and providence are OK.

Washington State passed I-594 that does just that. Amusingly, based on the state law as it was written at the time, it required people to buy nail guns and gun stores and turned Amazon into an illegal gun dealer.

If you're saying that every person in the United States who wants to transfer a firearm in instra-state commerce, has to locate an FFL, give the firearm to the FFL, and then have the FFL and transferee complete the ATF Form 4473, I'm not sure that such a law would survive a 5th Amendment challenge should the federal government elect to enforce that law against a convicted felon. Essentially in a case like that, the federal government would be penalizing a person for not committing a crime in front of a witness with a legal obligation to document the evidence of the crime. Basically, in that case, the federal government is requiring a felon to go up to an FFL and say, "Oh, hi. I want to sell this gun. Write down all of the information about this transaction in your record book so that the ATF can use it to arrest me because if I don't do this and I sell this gun, the government will send me to prison." In that case, the government has compelled the seller to create evidence of his violation of federal law because as a felon, he is not allowed to possess a firearm and he has created a record that is readily accessible to the federal government that shows that he possessed a firearm.

I think that what Panzer has successfully pointed out is that the whole subject is incredibly complicated, esp. with our gun culture here in US. I have my biases, but no real answers. What I really want are effective laws that shelter public safety. How to get there from here, I quite honestly don't know.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:I think that what Panzer has successfully pointed out is that the whole subject is incredibly complicated, esp. with our gun culture here in US. I have my biases, but no real answers. What I really want are effective laws that shelter public safety. How to get there from here, I quite honestly don't know.

Don

-

If you think that the lack of laws is the problem, I would refer you to this GAO report.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-440

In FY2017, there were 8-9 millions NICS transactions. 112,090 of them were denied. Of those denials, 12,710 were investigated. Of those investigations, 12 were prosecuted. If you're a prohibited person and you attempt to buy a gun and IF the ATF investigates, there's a 0.1% chance that they'll prosecute you. There's about a 10% chance that the ATF will investigate.

The NICS system is dependent on data that local agencies submit, so, basically, there are no consequences for prohibited people who try, and fail, to buy a firearm from a gun store. What's the point of passing another law if we don't enforce the ones that we have on the books?

I'd also refer you to the case of Joseph Roh. It's on CNN and made national news.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/11/us/ar-15 ... index.html

Panzer wrote:

n7axw wrote:I think that what Panzer has successfully pointed out is that the whole subject is incredibly complicated, esp. with our gun culture here in US. I have my biases, but no real answers. What I really want are effective laws that shelter public safety. How to get there from here, I quite honestly don't know.

Don

-

If you think that the lack of laws is the problem, I would refer you to this GAO report.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-440

In FY2017, there were 8-9 millions NICS transactions. 112,090 of them were denied. Of those denials, 12,710 were investigated. Of those investigations, 12 were prosecuted. If you're a prohibited person and you attempt to buy a gun and IF the ATF investigates, there's a 0.1% chance that they'll prosecute you. There's about a 10% chance that the ATF will investigate.

The NICS system is dependent on data that local agencies submit, so, basically, there are no consequences for prohibited people who try, and fail, to buy a firearm from a gun store. What's the point of passing another law if we don't enforce the ones that we have on the books?

I'd also refer you to the case of Joseph Roh. It's on CNN and made national news.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/11/us/ar-15 ... index.html

There is a difference between laws on the books and effective laws. Laws that are simply ignored undermine the rule of law. In which case er need to figure out why the laws are being ignored or come with a better more enforceable set of laws.

Don

-

Last week a young man in Sioux Falls was shot while home delivering a pizza. He wasn't robbed. No evidence of a quarrel. The thing was completely random as far as we know. Just shot with no witnesses after which the shooter cleared the neighborhood. This is a bit personal since we know the family because they are members of a local Lutheran Church here in town. He was known as a caring young man who was interested in people and good at making friends. His mom described him as a "good soul." He was an only child who was still trying to find his way.

This is a bit emotional, I know. But when are we going to get serious about effective gun control... Not the complete answer, I know. Laws alone won't do it. We won't make progress until society stops being tolerant of violence in all its forms.

As a retired pastor, I wish that many church members would take their faith a bit more seriously and come to grips with what love of neighbor is all about.

Don

-

I'm VERY Liberal in most things, down right "commie" by American standards
But not in all things
liberty and the genuine Public good are complex issues

The type of weapon, bar some (explosives etc!) is not really the issue, because often such things are BS and used by politicians for their own agendas as easy targets
That's a foolish thing folk get wrapped up in.

It's like one of my major peeves with sort of military issue, the sickening hypocrisy about banning expanding bullets and projectiles over a certain size, or folk whinging about napalm and not realising white phosphorous is a hell of a lot worse.

Military doesn't use expanding bullets for many practical reasons, but it doesn't matter, they are NOT "inhumane"
WAR is the very definition of inhumane, for God's sake, be honest and admit it!
the only out right wars we should ever fight are ones to the death where napalm etc are necessary to survive.
only a few things, like WP and mustard gas (because they are sadistic slow killers), WMD, devices that imperil innocents after conflicts end (antipersonnel mines etc though they DO have some legit uses) etc should be banned

I know for a damn fact a lot of folk in the military and police are either corrupt, have major mental issues, or are not trained that well
and so NO they damn shouldn't be the only ones with weapons at home!!

Big difference between a military police officer and a logistics officer, for example, and the MP's training is far more applicable to safe use of a firearm as a civilian, than a squaddie (who's training is way different)

The bigger issues with weapons in society are:

ensuring only trustworthy folk have them

that society and government are NOT so screwed up they make problems worse...or are tyrannical

Sorry, USA is in general, a mentally SICK country
every culture has serious problems, oh I know, but...look at the mass shootings etc, USA has become a culture obsessed with ownership of goods and not much damn else
"cultures", not "Individuals" is oft the problem...many decent wonderful folk everywhere on Earth


VERY few people have the training AND the mentality to carry a firearm safely and responsibly for self defence in public
anyone who says otherwise, is very ill informed
see history, crimes, Human nature etc
Some do though, but to earn that right folk should go through stringent checks, and training updated every year

I have no worries about a sane, competent enthusiast having a belt fed machine gun, why would I?
same if he had an oxy torch for art or mechanics
a horizontal milling machine
or other dangerous things, because as long as they are properly used...there's no beef

I am scared s****** of morons, scumbags and psychopaths with ANY tool!
With good reason and experience, ick

Just make checks harder and harder for more deadly tools
focus on sane moderate control, not jingoism

average civilian doesn't need an AR15 for home defence, maybe a gold prospector in the desert, but otherwise they SUCK for defence for civilians
want an AR15 as a collector, enthusiast etc that's another matter

showed time and again ye old double (or triple!) barrel shotgun, or a revolver/lever rifle in .357 or .44 magnum are best *practical* weapons for home defence and other *useful* purposes...and cheaper, more reliable
Jeesh a good AR15 and optics etc is hell of an expensive!

practical weapon, for REAL people and REAL use, is very different from the ludicrous garbage some folk spew about needing to defend from entire gangs of psycho Mexican death cult gangster sects, lol

real home defence you'll usually be facing 1 or 2 thugs, maybe drugged, often dumbasses and thus dangerously stupid
you will only have time for 2 to 4 shots, as they or you will either be dead, incapacitated or running

"tactical" 2 or 3 barrel shotgun will do the job, and very cheap, VERY reliable, can get dinner with it, kill vermin, clay pigeon shoot if want
and it isn't a heavy piece of long barrelled dead weight to lug around, ugh

my 2 cents

SNIP

n7axw wrote:...Not the complete answer, I know. Laws alone won't do it. We won't make progress until society stops being tolerant of violence in all its forms.

Personally, I'm a "law and order" kind of person. If you want to eliminate unnecessary gun violence, then stop coddling those who are violent. Enough with this "rehabilitation" CR$% er... Stuff.

You break into someone's house and you've got a gun in your possession? Death sentence carried out within one week.
You're a gang banger who shoots someone in Southeast DC or Baltimore? Death sentence within one week.
You brandish - or even possess - a gun and commit a rape? Death sentence within one week.

No appeals. None of this "oh I had a hard life and my dad beat me." None of this "diminished capacity" business. Use a gun in the commission of a crime... ANY crime. And my opinion is that your genes should be removed from the human race.

Look at all the money we'll save by not needing the prisons.

Harsh? Perhaps. But perhaps a bit of harsh is what we need.

Am I opening myself up to trolling? Almost certainly. Do I care? Not a whit. So long as we have policymakers who are unwilling to do what's necessary - to establish and uphold draconian standards of conduct, we'll continue to have this problem. And yes, I own firearms. And yes, I absolutely am responsible with them. And... Wait for it... I'm prepared to defend myself and my family with them.

I am pleased to report that this crime has been solved. It turn out to be a botched robbery. Corey is still gone, but at least we know that there was a point to it..even if that point was selfishly twisted and perverted. A guy wanted money to support a drug habit. There it is.

I don't find my views on gun laws changing. I want a rationalized set of enforceable laws to keep the guns out of the hands of felons and crazies.

I am in favor of a ban on assault weapons. Most of the time when we have had mass shootings in schools, shopping malls and theatres, an assault weapon has been involved. I understand that is only a tiny percentage of the total number of homicides. But there is really no place in a civilized country for such weapons.

Don

-

WeberFan wrote:SNIP

n7axw wrote:...Not the complete answer, I know. Laws alone won't do it. We won't make progress until society stops being tolerant of violence in all its forms.

Personally, I'm a "law and order" kind of person. If you want to eliminate unnecessary gun violence, then stop coddling those who are violent. Enough with this "rehabilitation" CR$% er... Stuff.

You break into someone's house and you've got a gun in your possession? Death sentence carried out within one week.
You're a gang banger who shoots someone in Southeast DC or Baltimore? Death sentence within one week.
You brandish - or even possess - a gun and commit a rape? Death sentence within one week.

No appeals. None of this "oh I had a hard life and my dad beat me." None of this "diminished capacity" business. Use a gun in the commission of a crime... ANY crime. And my opinion is that your genes should be removed from the human race.

Look at all the money we'll save by not needing the prisons.

Harsh? Perhaps. But perhaps a bit of harsh is what we need.

Am I opening myself up to trolling? Almost certainly. Do I care? Not a whit. So long as we have policymakers who are unwilling to do what's necessary - to establish and uphold draconian standards of conduct, we'll continue to have this problem. And yes, I own firearms. And yes, I absolutely am responsible with them. And... Wait for it... I'm prepared to defend myself and my family with them.

You are probably a bit extreme on this one. I understand your impulse, but can't follow you all the way...

It comes down to how to draw the line and civil rights for a**holes. As for the line, capital punishment for murder and rape. As for civil rights, if we are not scrupulous about civil rights for a**holes, the civil rights of everybody else is also at risk.

As for jails, reserve them for violent offenders. Release non-violent offenders who are a danger to no one. Deal with them by fines, house arrest, etc. Your prison population would really shrink. My impression is that a majority of inmates are nonviolent.

Don

-

WeberFan wrote:So long as we have policymakers who are unwilling to do what's necessary - to establish and uphold draconian standards of conduct, we'll continue to have this problem.

I find it disgusting how the 'progressives' scream "RAAACISSST!!! OPPRESSOR!!!" when we propose applying draconian measures to criminals, but are perfectly fine with applying draconian measures to the innocent.

n7axw wrote:Release non-violent offenders who are a danger to no one.

Fraud, embezzlement, voyeurism, and shoplifting are non-violent offenses. Crooked contractors can steal hundreds of thousands of dollars and wreck your house. I don't think leaving such criminals on the loose would be good for society.

Bernie Madoff stole more money than 20,000 average people make in their lifetimes. Dying in jail is too good for the bastard.
———————————
Some folks believe ‘Soylent Green’ had a happy ending.