Gun rights advocates, opinions?

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to z31maniac: Discount it however you like. But to deny that a very large population of armed citizens wouldn't give any enemy pause is silly. Many of them ARE cops, veterans, etc. The whole idea is to give that pause, to have to consider that to overthrow their way of life you would have to deal with resistance. It works as a deterrent in combination with other umm... rights? The people who worry about such things wouldn't be after the guns alone. They would go after the ability to freely assemble, speak freely, keep things private... have a speedy trial before your peers. Because while they have those things - it's very hard to get enough of a foothold to oppress them. Luckily, none of that has been going on here so this is all tinfoil hat stuff for the fun of discussion, right?

I completely agree. Unfortunately, I honestly believe it's too late. We have gone far enough down the road that we can't turn back.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Luckily, none of that has been going on here so this is all tinfoil hat stuff for the fun of discussion, right?

I've been stockpiling tin foil just in case. I lined my DirectTV dish with it so the brain waves can't travel back to the satellite.

Consider this, in WW2 the US honestly believed that each Japanese citizen would fight to the death against an invasion, using everything down to farm tools. It didn't deter the US from preparing an invasion with the assumption of massive casualties, and made "alternative" ideas start to seem reasonable...so projecting such an image to enemies is a double-edged sword at the very least.

VALHALLA!

GameboyRMH wrote: Consider this, in WW2 the US honestly believed that each Japanese citizen would fight to the death.

They must have thought that of their own citizens too.

Apexcarver wrote:

N Sperlo wrote: None of my guns are registered. I don't think it really does any good. Even if I did register them, I wouldn't care if people knew what I had. I'm not an NRA member.

Ditto

Double Ditto......I had a NRA rep ask me why I wasn't interested in their membership once. Lets just say he didn't like my answer explaining why as it included "Untrustworthy" and "Pathetic Sellouts" in regards to the National Firearms Act.

On the other note, while Firearms Registration is illegal on the federal level, their back door to this was requiring any FFL selling firearms to keep paper copies of the 4473 forms. Allegedly the ATF has been keeping records, and I wouldn't be surprised, but they aren't supposed to.

Seriously, though. Most states don't have an actual gun registry. However, your 4473s are still on file wherever you bought your guns. If a gun shop goes out of business, those files are turned over to the ATF.

Not that it matters. Google probably knows a hell of a lot more about the guns I own than the .gov. If you've ever bought ammo online, the info is out there.

Guns? What guns? I sold those years ago. Wife made me. She hates them.

In reply to Bobzilla:

Hell, all mine were lost in a tradgic boating accident on lake michigan(that damn lake must be completely lined with firearms from just indiana)

You know, I don't even remember who I sold them to anymore though. I'm sure it had to be at one of those gun shows. You know everyone buys illegal guns there.

1988RedT2 wrote:

JoeyM wrote: Everybody, please behave and don't flounder. Gentle Reminder: One of the reasons why RebelGTP created theoutdoorsman.us (a.k.a the "Guns and E36 M3" website) was to keep the gun discussions to a minimum. There are plenty of familiar GRM faces over on that site.

That has got to be the most polite "GTFO" I've ever heard!

Nah, just a reminder that if things get too heated, there's a way to carry on without annoying the kind hosts who provide us with this forum.

Do you guys all take your paranoia out for walks too....

oldeskewltoy wrote: Do you guys all take your paranoia out for walks too....

Yes, why?

the problem isnt paranoia, its relevance. being afraid of this happening isn't paranoia if its already 20 steps beyond the reference point of paranoia.

because the idea that the NSA is doing this monitoring was just basically writing on the wall since the late 90s internet boom.

the thing is that most people dont seem to realise that the NSA doesn't have a huge technology head-start. they only have a "time" head start.

this type of data collection & monitoring that they engage in can largely be done with off-the-shelf currently existing technology. the only thing slowing its spread is the cost of scale at the moment to capture things, not that the tech doesn't already exist.

so the real question becomes, who do you want to be the BEST at it?

Russia? North Korea? Google? or the NSA?

In reply to madmallard:

Google. If someone is going to have my info I would like to get something for it like Charmin coupons after a night of White Castles.

pick yer poison, i guess. google analytics will end up being used to build a credit profile on you in the future, i have little doubt of this.

My opinion for what it's worth,

I don't really have an issue with registering firearms like having a title to a car. Like someone said earlier, do you really think the NSA or ATF doesn't track purchases of firearms or bulk ammo? I've got nothing to hide.

Background: Owned and built AKs and ARs among other "scary black rifles", used to be a NRA member(broke right now), have purchased and sold weapons privately, first time I shot a weapon was in boot camp(USMC), and was a 8531 USMC Marksmanship Instructor as a secondary MOS.

Flight Service wrote: Many, I would dare to say most, gun right advocates are members of the NRA and are also not in favor of registering their firearms for they fear Government confiscation. NSA recently released that they can hack almost any system in the world. NSA uses NRA to get Government list of gun owners without ever passing a law. Thoughts?

A registration list is substantially more dangerous than an NRA membership list from a confiscation standpoint. The registration database isn't just a list of people -- it also identifies the make, model, and serial number of the firearms that people on the list own. This means that in the event of a hypothetical government confiscation campaign, one can't just hand over a cheap handgun, say "that's it!" and keep the others hidden.

As for the paranoia question, the anti-gun activists use the same tactics as the anti-abortion pro-life movement. Their ultimate goal is an absolute ban, but they know that that's politically impossible with today's society. As a result, they chip away at the edges, adding "reasonable" restrictions here and there, and generally making it harder and harder to actually get the thing they're trying to ban. The goal hasn't changed, merely the tactics.

Flight Service wrote: Many, I would dare to say most, gun right advocates are members of the NRA and are also not in favor of registering their firearms for they fear Government confiscation.

Not me, man. I own tons of guns and I am in no way, shape, or form, affiliated with the NRA. In fact, when I borrow my dad's truck, I put black tape over his NRA stickers because I don't want to be affiliated with them.

NSA recently released that they can hack almost any system in the world. NSA uses NRA to get Government list of gun owners without ever passing a law. Thoughts?

Possibly, but even the NSA knows that correlation does not prove causation. Not everyone in the NRA owns a gun, let alone a handgun, or an assault weapon. For instance, you can be a member of the NRA when you are 12, but it is not possible to register a handgun to a minor. Therefore all of the NRA members who are 12-17 would be a dead end.

By the way, it is my opinion that the NSA made that announcement so they could monitor the security changes in suspect systems.

Kinda like if you wanted to know which one of your friends killed someone, you email all of the suspects with "hey, why are the police asking me questions about you" and then watch which friend buys a plane ticket to Mexico.

I feel like codrus's abortion analogy basically just fulfilled Godwin's Law.

Anti-stance wrote: My opinion for what it's worth, I don't really have an issue with registering firearms like having a title to a car. Like someone said earlier, do you really think the NSA or ATF doesn't track purchases of firearms or bulk ammo? I've got nothing to hide.

While I agree in theory, its too much information. We have to register our cars so that if we are in a hit and run it ties the car to us. But the government isn't trying to take our guns.

Part of me would love to follow your (apologies) naive ideals. I would love it if they used that big master list to solve crimes, prevent violence, or know how to approach a house based on what arsenal they believe is inside... but we know that is not a logical use of the information. That information is only helpful in solving crimes once they attain the firearm that caused the assault... and even then, what good does the serial number do if its filed off, or not fired by the owner? Ballistic forensics is far superior to just matching a numberr to a name on a list.

I believe that their reasons for wanting registry is for control, not safety.

In reply to nocones:

I feel it holds a decent amount of truth, both groups are more or less hell bent on full implementation of an illogical and impossible goal. Though that's not to say some of the opposition doesn't hold a similar belief.

i'm all for everyone being able to carry whatever kinds of weapons they want on them whenever they want.. but every time i see one of Ted Nugent's almost incoherent rambling facebook posts on the subject, i just want to tell him that he's not helping his own cause and it would maybe be better to just shut up and play his guitar..

oldtin wrote: the privacy ship sailed quite a while back with a nice public send-off. There's a fairly long history of folks willing to cash in perceived rights for perceived security.

im late on this, but my sig is still appropriate.

-J0N