Gun rights advocates, opinions?

codrus wrote: 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.

I would actually disagree 100%. Law abiding gun owners are going to register where required. People who don't would be more suspect. Upon the believed confiscation day comes people who are on the NRA and have purchases that would be otherwise track-able would be issue #1. They won't stop at what is registered either.

If I was calling the metrics I would go after cover purchases first and then track-able purchases with no affiliation second, those are likely going to be perceived by the masses as gun "nuts".

With recognition software and the like, your purchases aren't going un-noticed. Just the fact you tried to make them not noticed.

But the government isn't trying to take our guns.

Years ago we had rifle teams and gun safety clases at the schools, and you were expected to bring your own .22 for the shoots and practices and classes. Today, no citizen is allowed to possess a firearm with 1,000 feet of those same schools. The government has taken those guns away.

My grandfather had a shooting range in his basement, in Washington DC no less. Today, that is all illegal. The government took the guns and the shooting range away.

Not that many years ago I used to walk into the airport with my gun over my shoulder, and check it in at the counter. It was carry on luggage. Today, I can barely prearrange to bring that same gun to go on a hunt. The government has taken it away.

There are many other ways the government has taken guns away. Requirements to keep guns locked and unloaded, child safety laws, noise air and water pollution, transportation requirements, etc.

I strongly disagree, based on empirical evidence, that the government is not trying to take our guns away. Except perhaps to say the government has taken many of our guns away.

foxtrapper wrote:

But the government isn't trying to take our guns.

Years ago we had rifle teams and gun safety clases at the schools, and you were expected to bring your own .22 for the shoots and practices and classes. Today, no citizen is allowed to possess a firearm with 1,000 feet of those same schools. The government has taken those guns away. My grandfather had a shooting range in his basement, in Washington DC no less. Today, that is all illegal. The government took the guns and the shooting range away. Not that many years ago I used to walk into the airport with my gun over my shoulder, and check it in at the counter. It was carry on luggage. Today, I can barely prearrange to bring that same gun to go on a hunt. The government has taken it away. There are many other ways the government has taken guns away. Requirements to keep guns locked and unloaded, child safety laws, noise air and water pollution, transportation requirements, etc. I strongly disagree, based on empirical evidence, that the government is not trying to take our guns away. Except perhaps to say the government *has* taken many of our guns away.

But remember, anyone with a gun is paranoid for no good reason. We're all just nuts.

In reply to Flight Service:

You say "believed confiscation day", you understand that it's already happened, right? New Orleans during Katrina. What would have been revealed if we didn't have the evil gun lobby to push the issue regarding the initial widespread denial that guns were seized?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina#Confiscation_of_civilian_firearms

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-08-nra-katrina_N.htm

And "law abiding gun owners are going to register..." See that's the problem, if gun owners don't register -they are now NOT law abiding - they are a criminal subject to prosecution and possibly having their firearms confiscated for good. Simply becuase they didn't play along and tell the state what they own. To me there is a vast difference between requiring the commercial sale of a firearm to be documented (which I understand its purpose) and requiring a citizen to report all guns owned to be indexed and tracked for future use as the state sees fit.

I think "extremest" on either side of the argument are "paranoid for no good reason". For our own judgement sake, it's just a matter of deciding who constitutes an "extremest".

I fall along the lines of "Sper". I own firearms but didn't like the, what I considered, "fear mongering" I saw from membership in the NRA.

That being said, I don't like the "fear mongering" I see in the extreme opposing parties involved either.

On the subject of gun rights/control: I think registration etc is just a bad idea. I don't trust the government enough to be honest/responsible about it. I think our current laws of firearm ownership (that is: no machine guns without license, no CCW without license, but any non-felon can own a gun, background checks on purchases) are great. I don't like infringements on those rules though (think DC, Chicago, etc).

I'm of the thinking that if we (as individual firearm owners) took more accountability towards our responsible firearm ownership then we could be more "safe" from firearms related incidents and wouldn't need more legislation.

I dunno. Just my $.02

In reply to Hungary Bill:

I want a time machine to go back to 1986.....and ask what the justification was for ending "New production full auto" for civilian use. There had been a handful of events between the end of the gangster era and '86 that involved legally owned F/A weapons. I'm sure it was "Because they're scary"

Hell, keep the rules the same as they are now for obtaining NFA stuff, but allow new production. I want a Glock 18 and lets be honest, there really isn't any good reason I shouldn't be able to own one.

As far as the fear mongering on either side, they can both go to hell. The whole registration thing would never work though, I am sure I'm not the only one with 90% of their collection not tied to my name.

I register my guns. I put it under the same "meh" category as everything else. Who cares if someone in the government knows that I have a few guns? I feel certain that they are more interested in who has a Barrett .50 under their bed and a copy of Mein Kampf on their Kindle. In fact, those two data points and access to a bell tower should result in a visit from the men in black Suburbans.

pinchvalve wrote: I register my guns. I put it under the same "meh" category as everything else. Who cares if someone in the government knows that I have a few guns? I feel certain that they are more interested in who has a Barrett .50 under their bed and a copy of Mein Kampf on their Kindle. In fact, those two data points and access to a bell tower should result in a visit from the men in black Suburbans.

I really hope that was meant as sarcasm. If not, it really highlights a serious issue in this country.

Ban black Suburbans.

PHeller wrote: Ban black Suburbans.

Dat's Wasis

ah, what the heck. I'll bite:

z31maniac wrote: I'm still not even sure why this is such a huge worry for people. Have people watched Rambo so many times they think themselves and their neighbors with a few a rifles and handguns are going to stand a chance against a SWAT team or a unit of Marines that wants their guns? /misanthropy

As a Marine, I must ask you, have you not paid any attention to what as been going in in Iraq and Astan?

And those poor bastards have way less access to information than the average American.

ronholm wrote:

z31maniac wrote: I'm still not even sure why this is such a huge worry for people. Have people watched Rambo so many times they think themselves and their neighbors with a few a rifles and handguns are going to stand a chance against a SWAT team or a unit of Marines that wants their guns? /misanthropy

As a Marine, I must ask you, have you not paid any attention to what as been going in in Iraq and Astan? And those poor bastards have way less access to information than the average American.

Yeah, but thems der people are TARRISTS!

pinchvalve wrote: I register my guns. I put it under the same "meh" category as everything else. Who cares if someone in the government knows that I have a few guns? I feel certain that they are more interested in who has a Barrett .50 under their bed and a copy of Mein Kampf on their Kindle. In fact, those two data points and access to a bell tower should result in a visit from the men in black Suburbans.

thank you for so eloquently stating how you are a part of the problem in this country- the old "if you're doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about" defense...

go back a few posts and read the post about the various ways some guns have already been effectively taken away from law abiding citizens..

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.

You've got nothing to hide TODAY. What about tomorrow? I'd say based on the last wave of kneejerk reaction laws, the government has no qualms making you into a criminal.

Dun.

yamaha wrote: In reply to Hungary Bill: I want a time machine to go back to 1986.....

You and me both man. Late 80's and early 90's = bad time for gun owners (Brady bill etc).

Gun control on new production seems like the "long road" in terms of stopping violence (if that was the effect you were after). I really don't think people, as a general rule, purchase new firearms with the intent to commit crimes.

"Yo dude, lets go rob a liquor store"

"Oh good idea! Cabela's has that .45 on sale, we can use that!"

I think people who are intent on committing a crime would be more apt to find an illegal way to buy a firearm, or to use a firearm that wasn't bought through the usual chains (which is why I usually sell my "scary" firearms to vendors).

If I were a concerned citizen I think I'd be more apt to go after punishing those who participate in illegal purchases (straw-buyers etc) rather than trying to further regulate those who go to stores/gun shows.

ronholm wrote:

z31maniac wrote: I'm still not even sure why this is such a huge worry for people. Have people watched Rambo so many times they think themselves and their neighbors with a few a rifles and handguns are going to stand a chance against a SWAT team or a unit of Marines that wants their guns? /misanthropy

As a Marine, I must ask you, have you not paid any attention to what as been going in in Iraq and Astan? And those poor bastards have way less access to information than the average American.

Do you mean the contrived, perpetual War on Terror? The desire to re-stabilize and allow American oil companies to invest and get the Iraqi oil fields flowing again like the Imperialist tendencies of the West?

I'm sorry, I'm going to need you to be more specific.

klb67 wrote: In reply to Flight Service: You say "believed confiscation day", you understand that it's already happened, right? New Orleans during Katrina. What would have been revealed if we didn't have the evil gun lobby to push the issue regarding the initial widespread denial that guns were seized? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina#Confiscation_of_civilian_firearms http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-08-nra-katrina_N.htm And "law abiding gun owners are going to register..." See that's the problem, if gun owners don't register -they are now NOT law abiding - they are a criminal subject to prosecution and possibly having their firearms confiscated for good. Simply becuase they didn't play along and tell the state what they own. To me there is a vast difference between requiring the commercial sale of a firearm to be documented (which I understand its purpose) and requiring a citizen to report all guns owned to be indexed and tracked for future use as the state sees fit.

Circular logic aside about law abiding gun owners, I live in the Big Easy. Plenty of gun owners here.

In reply to Hungary Bill:

Most criminal organizations buy new.....there is always a reason they keep people with squeaky clean records around.

Granted, those same criminal organizations are much more different than the typical drug dealer/gang banger, who normally get the weapons(sometimes stolen, yay junkies) as trade for their product or steal them. Some of them purchase new while they don't have any red flags though.

There isn't really any good way to combat either of those occurances, but that doesn't slow down people who cannot begin to comprehend reality.

For example, I know people who are completely convinced that you don't have to have a background check for anything at a gun show.....let that soak in a bit. That same viewpoint is held almost unanimously by those who want MORE restrictions on everything.

Oh I completely don't see the problem there[/sarcasm]

I thought criminals who wanted to buy "new" had the option of buying directly from the ATF

I have members of my family who are convinced I own "machine guns" (Washington state = no Class 3), who also think gun shows don't have background checks, and who are absolutely astonished (complete with "deer in headlights look") when I show them proof otherwise.

To quote one of those family members "Well, you don't see them kicking down MY door..."

to which I usually reply "yet"

Those same family members (husband and wife) were quick to raid my gun safe when they found out there was a house in their neighborhood raided for drugs. Then it was "Teach me everything you know about firearms".

They ended up borrowing no less than 5-different firearms, of which they kept three pistols until the tenants of the house were eventually evicted. Now, they're back on the "gun control" bandwagon.

In reply to yamaha:

I remember my first gunshow, where I realized most of the tables selling guns were full blown FFLs, often actual gun shops, which have to run background checks and fill out the paperwork no matter where they are operating.

It's been so long since I went to my "first gunshow". I was probably 14 or 15 at the time. Been to so many since then. The next talking head/moron that spouts "gunshow loophole" I might pop them in the mouth. Their ignorance shows everytime they open their pie-hole.

Kenny_McCormic wrote: In reply to yamaha: I remember my first gunshow, where I realized most of the tables selling guns were full blown FFLs, often actual gun shops, which have to run background checks and fill out the paperwork no matter where they are operating.

Yep, there are a very small small percentage of customers who might sell/purchase a weapon from another customer(private party) while at the show. All gun shows here require the booth to have an FFL if selling firearms.

I cannot fathom why that is so hard for people to comprehend. Some might not know, but you'd expect those who think they're horrible and want them banned know.....still doesn't stop them from trying.