gun laws and info

[Tracker]

its fox news, and of course i apologize for that ;), but the information contained inside.. its pretty cool.. its always nice to see the the facts that require a big bowl of crow to be eaten by those that "enact laws that are best for us"

i know this is surprisingly right handed talk from the "designated forum lefty" but not all of my views are socialistic.. and as far as gun laws.. i am a gun owner, so that should say plenty..

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/media-silence-is-deafening-about-important-gun-news/

do i feel that SOME firearms can be deemed as "excessive" or "unnesscary" yes, i do, but given a choice between a partial ban, that might involve some un-intented earmarked collateral, and no ban.. i see nothing wrong with the current system of gun ownership on the FEDERAL level.. once again, i want to stress federal, some of the STATES like CA, and MA, have really made a mess of their gun laws

Tracker

[wetwrks]

It shows that sayings have a lot of truth to them...this would apply:

an armed society is a polite society. :D

[RogueFactor]

FOX NEWS ROCKS!

[hill160881]

its fox news, and of course i apologize for that ;), but the information contained inside.. its pretty cool.. its always nice to see the the facts that require a big bowl of crow to be eaten by those that "enact laws that are best for us"

i know this is surprisingly right handed talk from the "designated forum lefty" but not all of my views are socialistic.. and as far as gun laws.. i am a gun owner, so that should say plenty..

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/media-silence-is-deafening-about-important-gun-news/

do i feel that SOME firearms can be deemed as "excessive" or "unnesscary" yes, i do, but given a choice between a partial ban, that might involve some un-intented earmarked collateral, and no ban.. i see nothing wrong with the current system of gun ownership on the FEDERAL level.. once again, i want to stress federal, some of the STATES like CA, and MA, have really made a mess of their gun laws

Tracker

Really? So its ok for the ATFE to issue letters ordering gun stores, without law, to issue suspious activity reports to the FBI any time someone buys two or more riffles or a hand gun?

http://static.infowars.com/2011/07/i/rotator/29ATFs1.jpg

http://static.infowars.com/2011/07/i/rotator/29ATFs2.jpg

What about issuing a letter telling gun stores it is ilegal to sell to a medical marijuana license holders? But its fine if you are a drunk °°° pill popper.

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2011/09/092611-atf-open-letter-to-all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf

I have more but these are the most recent

These letters from the ATFE are pretty rich considering the whole fast and furious thing right now. lol. For those who dont know that is where the ATFE got caught running guns into mexico. lol.

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

Federal regulation is becoming oppression quickly. So if you buy a hand gun you need to be in an FBI suspious person database, and if you prefer weed to opium to kill your pain you should not ever own a gun. Ya good federal regulating.:wthumpup:

As to that fox news piece, its nice to see that this news did not totally fall through the cracks.

[Tracker]

Really? So its ok for the ATFE to issue letters ordering gun stores, without law, to issue suspious activity reports to the FBI any time someone buys two or more riffles or a hand gun?

http://static.infowars.com/2011/07/i/rotator/29ATFs1.jpg

http://static.infowars.com/2011/07/i/rotator/29ATFs2.jpg

What about issuing a letter telling gun stores it is ilegal to sell to a medical marijuana license holders? But its fine if you are a drunk °°° pill popper.

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2011/09/092611-atf-open-letter-to-all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf

I have more but these are the most recent

These letters from the ATFE are pretty rich considering the whole fast and furious thing right now. lol. For those who dont know that is where the ATFE got caught running guns into mexico. lol.

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

Federal regulation is becoming oppression quickly. So if you buy a hand gun you need to be in an FBI suspious person database, and if you prefer weed to opium to kill your pain you should not ever own a gun. Ya good federal regulating.:wthumpup:

As to that fox news piece, its nice to see that this news did not totally fall through the cracks.

given the system as how it is.. or how it could be.. ill take the system as it is.

as far as gun stores being ordered to send suspicious activity letters for people that buy multiple firearms.. they are trying to make their live easier.. last time i checked. you dont need 2 AR-15's an AK47, and a glock to go deer hunting.. people that go on mass shooting sprees dont generally do it with a rossi break barrel. if you were on the other side of your argument, and worked for the FBI would you be so against the same regulations?

and though i do agree that not being able to buy a gun with a medical marijuana license is BS, you also have to remember, that just because its legal in the state of california, doesnt make it legal federally.. its been gone over many times that regardless of how many STATES make it legal, the federal government will still prosecute it as a crime.. had the DEA not pulled that little chicken°°°° maneuver and decided to agree to "states rights" then you know damn good and well marijuana would be legal in CA from the last election

the primary difference between a drunken pill popper and a medical marijuana guy, is that on the federal level, the pill popper isnt doing anything illegal if he has a prescription. consumption of alcohol is totally legal. and whatever pills he has been prescribed arent on the list of schedule 1 substances (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_I_controlled_su bstances)
its a °°°°ty and stupid loophole. but if pot ever makes it off the schedule 1 list, then it should be a different story.. of course then it wouldnt make illegal to own with a prescription...

Tracker

[hill160881]

So lets say i buy multiple guns for any reason other than a shooting spree.(look at the appreciation of firearms and ammo, its an investment that has never taken a loss) The fact that someone may do something is not sufficient reason to make it illegal. According to the constitution anyway.

You seem to think that a federal law trumps the constitution. It may in operation but only because the masses are to afraid to take care of themselves and they give up freedom to feel safe. So because of what someone mite do we make it a law instead of a choice, like a law is a impenetrable wall that saves us. It seems that when left to our own devices we do just fine, as your article suggest.

So a FBI agent may feel safer with my name on a watch list because I bought 3 ar-15s, but I dont feel so safe knowing my investment is on file with the government, and there record of observing the peoples constitutional rights is pathetic. Not to mention they are known to take investments and firearms in bad financial times.

The funny thing about the article in the OP is that you could compare it to what would happen if the war on drugs were called off and we went back to a time before the drug problem, when getting your drugs was as easy as going to the local drug store. You know, before they were made illegal, violating personal ability to medicate yourself without seeing a doctor for a pimple. :sstorm:

[Tracker]

So lets say i buy multiple guns for any reason other than a shooting spree.(look at the appreciation of firearms and ammo, its an investment that has never taken a loss) The fact that someone may do something is not sufficient reason to make it illegal. According to the constitution anyway.

You seem to think that a federal law trumps the constitution. It may in operation but only because the masses are to afraid to take care of themselves and they give up freedom to feel safe. So because of what someone mite do we make it a law instead of a choice, like a law is a impenetrable wall that saves us. It seems that when left to our own devices we do just fine, as your article suggest.

So a FBI agent may feel safer with my name on a watch list because I bought 3 ar-15s, but I dont feel so safe knowing my investment is on file with the government, and there record of observing the peoples constitutional rights is pathetic. Not to mention they are known to take investments and firearms in bad financial times.

The funny thing about the article in the OP is that you could compare it to what would happen if the war on drugs were called off and we went back to a time before the drug problem, when getting your drugs was as easy as going to the local drug store. You know, before they were made illegal, violating personal ability to medicate yourself without seeing a doctor for a pimple. :sstorm:

the only kind of drugs i would like to see continued to be banned are the synthetic kind. mainly methamphetamine's, if it doesnt occur naturally, then it shouldn't be used.. do i think they should be regulated.. yeah, but not anymoreso than cigarettes, yes, i am saying that coca leaves, pot and opium should be less made less illegal, however, thats not the point of this original discussion

and you neglected to answer my last question.. if you were an FBI agent, would you feel safer knowing who is buying firearms in unusual quantities?


theres a give and take system here. there always was.. for us to allow people to be elected in office to represent us, we were surrendering a certain level of personal freedom. as soon as you put someone in power, you loose a little bit of your ability to operate autonomously, this country was founded because we were unhappy with the way england was running us, so we said "screw you england, we will start our own country based on what we want and believe in".

your views seem to conflict with the governments in a few ways, you cant have everything you want, and act indignant when they say "well now youve gotten what you want, now this is what we need in return",
thats just the way of the world. show me any unified system of government, on the world, or throughout history where people get everything they want, and surrender nothing in return. or what they do give up is inconsequential enough that they dont notice it.. you want the cake, but you need to play by the rules to get the cake..
your only 2 choices around it is to live "off the grid" to include not having an ID, social security card.. or citizenship, or start your own country.

im not saying its right, but its the way it is

Tracker

[abizdafuzz]

Its pretty simple if you ask me, not that you have...

You can't trade or be selective with certain rights/freedoms for other ones.

You either enjoy and respect them all or you hand over your life to the feds and lose them all. Its your choice, but I like all of my freedoms and chose to not let them have any of them to say what's best for me...

[hill160881]

Ya, reality is a a,,,,,,,,, sometimes.

And to answer the question. No, because there is no way to know who is buying them in large quantities off the record, and these laws encourage off the record purchases.:D Just having a state record that you bought it is not being resisted so much as a national FBI/DCT(domestic counter terrorism) database of suspects. See the difference? The feds need to just back off and leave it to the state. Or I think so anyway.

[Mann]

So lets say i buy multiple guns for any reason other than a shooting spree.

I am not sure about other states, but tn charges you iirc 30-50 dollar fee on every firearm purchase for a background check. I usually purchase my firearms in "groups" to minimize this cost. Last year I purchased 2 handguns at the same time, this spring I purchased 2 handguns at the same time, and this winter (before November) I am planning on purchasing 3 or 4 at the same time. It is not uncommon at all around here to buy more than one firearm at a time. Then again its not uncommon to see gas guzzling, environment killing, baby seal beating, pickup trucks either.

just my :twocents: from my 3/4 ton pickup with 3 ton of rock in the trailer while eating lunch.

[Tracker]

Ya, reality is a a,,,,,,,,, sometimes.

And to answer the question. No, because there is no way to know who is buying them in large quantities off the record, and these laws encourage off the record purchases.:D Just having a state record that you bought it is not being resisted so much as a national FBI/DCT(domestic counter terrorism) database of suspects. See the difference? The feds need to just back off and leave it to the state. Or I think so anyway.

i agree wholeheartedly

Tracker