Ban on "assault weapons" and/or high capacity magazines?

[North Calaveras]

hypocrites, they always scream about not punishing the majority for the acts of the minority but they will fuck over gun-owners in a heart beat.

[Northern Dominus]

Oh I'm not paranoid about firearms. Nor am I vehemently against them. You're free of course to try and paint me in any other light of course, but just bear in mind I do best with fall colors so some version of red or orange if you please.

Instead I am of the mind that while the base rights accorded by the 2nd Amendment should be left intact, a perfectly reasonable and logical revision due to the advance of time, circumstance, and firearm technology has been hijacked by a small but very vocal and unnaturally well funded group of firearms fetishists, ones that elevate the firearm from a tool that makes the act of killing virtually effortless into an object of holy significance that is to be revered and never questioned in its majesty. This group, this Cult of the Gun, has turned any civil discussion regarding common sense firearms regulation into a hysterical clarion call invoking provocative, paranoid, and delusional language usually involving some sort of variations on the themes of "tyrrany" or a bastardization of what the founding fathers had in mind.

The advent of the automobile and the liscensing in order to operate one in a public sphere serves as the perfect example of what new firearms regulation can be based on. To wit: there is no law saying an individual can't own a car, and if they have the money they can buy as many as they want and keep them on their property. However, in order to operate one on a public roadway a person must demonstrate competence and skill in the operation of one, appropriate the nessecary vehicle idnetification, and continuallly renew both that certification of skill and that registry.

What exactly is the problem with applying that model to firearms? Without going into some paroxysm about "rights" or "big government tyranny" of course.

Right, and when those firearms still end up in the hands of street gangs that kill not only their rivals on the streets but innocent bystanders how exactly did those licenses help anybody?

If filling out paperwork to own a device that makes killing effortless is too much of a hassle for a person then clearly they don't have the maturity to handle such a device. Especially if that paperwork confirms that they're not a convicted felon or have a mental disorder that tells them to kill at random.

Just because a gun is registered doesn't mean it can't get stolen... or "stolen."

Besides, if a gun is used in a crime, they just run the serial number. Ask the manufacturer (if possible) what shipment that firearm was in, trace it back to the gun store it came from. The FFL (gun store) has to keep written records of every transfer with the persons name, date of birth, height, SSN, etc., etc., along with the firearms serial number. These papers (Form 4473s) can only be accessed if necessary for the investigation of a crime. Registering the weapon would make no difference other than the Government having to skip a middle man and kick in your front door, unannounced, not dissimilar from the Ruby Ridge incident.

I think that is a big reason why folks are against gun registration: they don't want their dogs to get shot.

Right, because no illegal firearms dealer EVER files the serial number down or grinds it off so it can't be traced. And nobody ever goes to gun shows, finds the sleaziest person there and buys up a lot of their guns with cash, then takes them to those aformentioned illegal dealers, ever. Nor are there doubly sleazy people selling firearms and accessories out of their trunks outside of the gun show to bypass the whole process and risk altogether in the first place.

Your little idea is already in place and it kills hundreds of people per day.

And Ruby Ridge was a tragedy and shouldn't have happened at all, but if Randy Weaver had thought "Hmm, maybe the laws apply to me just like they apply to everyone else", and had the proper license before buying up those short-barrel shotguns, maybe his family would be alive today.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

It's not that Ruby Ridge or Waco were raided, they deserved it.
It's the conduct shown during those raids that is of issue.

[Iowa the Nation]

http://www.city-data.com/top2/co8.html
http://www.city-data.com/top2/co9.html

Do you see a pattern?

Yes.

The counties in the top list are rural and those in the bottom are urban.

They also primarily happen to be dangerous cities. Washington DC is #2, the hellholes of Newark and Chicago make appearances. Meanwhile, areas with high gun ownership rates include the Boise area, Anchorage, and Rapid City.

[Spreewerke]

]Right, because no illegal firearms dealer EVER files the serial number down or grinds it off so it can't be traced.

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Yes.

The counties in the top list are rural and those in the bottom are urban.

They also primarily happen to be dangerous cities. Washington DC is #2, the hellholes of Newark and Chicago make appearances. Meanwhile, areas with high gun ownership rates include the Boise area, Anchorage, and Rapid City.

Have you ever considered that rural areas own more guns for far more purposes than defending one's home?

[Grinning Dragon]

Where is the proof of this; helps track weapons and easy to identify?

This seems like asking for proof that a kettle boils water.

Helps track weapons: by registering each weapon to an owner the government can trace who rightfully owns what.
Easy to identify: checking the registration of a weapon against a database and identifying the owner.

A kettle doesn't boil water, heat causes water to boil, a kettle is just contains it.

Registration doesn't work, it is also costly to implement and maintain.
Criminals do not register their weapons, and the Supreme Court also ruled in U.S. v. Haynes, that it is a 5th Amendment violation for a criminal to register their weapon.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

They also primarily happen to be dangerous cities. Washington DC is #2, the hellholes of Newark and Chicago make appearances. Meanwhile, areas with high gun ownership rates include the Boise area, Anchorage, and Rapid City.

Have you ever considered that rural areas own more guns for far more purposes than defending one's home?

Rural areas tend to have lower homicide rates than cities.
This shows there is a problem within the cities, I think is his point.

[Vitaphone Racing]

]Right, because no illegal firearms dealer EVER files the serial number down or grinds it off so it can't be traced.

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

It's illegal to drive without licence plates, I think similar that an unidentifiable gun wouldn't be tradable and would have to be surrendered to authorities.

[Iowa the Nation]

They also primarily happen to be dangerous cities. Washington DC is #2, the hellholes of Newark and Chicago make appearances. Meanwhile, areas with high gun ownership rates include the Boise area, Anchorage, and Rapid City.

Have you ever considered that rural areas own more guns for far more purposes than defending one's home?

I live in one, so yes. Have you considered that just about any gun can be used for defense?

[Vitaphone Racing]

Have you ever considered that rural areas own more guns for far more purposes than defending one's home?

Rural areas tend to have lower homicide rates than cities.
This shows there is a problem within the cities, I think is his point.

I get his point, he's going to try and tell me that high gun ownership reduces crime. After a month of this shit, I can spot this argument a mile away.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

It's illegal to drive without licence plates, I think similar that an unidentifiable gun wouldn't be tradable and would have to be surrendered to authorities.

...
It's a felony to file off a gun's serial number though...
It's probably one to even possess a gun with a filed off serial number, regardless of circumstance.

"Driving without plates" is already highly illegal in relation to firearms. It still happens because (some) criminals don't give a fuck.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Have you ever considered that rural areas own more guns for far more purposes than defending one's home?

I live in one, so yes. Have you considered that just about any gun can be used for defense?

How many people concealed carry a rifle, really? The vast majority of rural guns are stored somewhere and not lying around the house in some attempt to fortify it, unlike guns intended to be used in self defence are.

[Iowa the Nation]

Rural areas tend to have lower homicide rates than cities.
This shows there is a problem within the cities, I think is his point.

I get his point, he's going to try and tell me that high gun ownership reduces crime. After a month of this shit, I can spot this argument a mile away.

Why wouldn't it? Who would you rather rob, a man with a gun or a man without one?

[Spreewerke]

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

It's illegal to drive without licence plates, I think similar that an unidentifiable gun wouldn't be tradable and would have to be surrendered to authorities.

It is already a felony to deface a firearms serial numbers and/or import markings.

EDIT: It would appear I have been ninja'd.

[Vitaphone Racing]

It's illegal to drive without licence plates, I think similar that an unidentifiable gun wouldn't be tradable and would have to be surrendered to authorities.

...
It's a felony to file off a gun's serial number though...
It's probably one to even possess a gun with a filed off serial number, regardless of circumstance.

"Driving without plates" is already highly illegal in relation to firearms. It still happens because (some) criminals don't give a fuck.

Apparently it is illegal to own a gun without a serial number, like I said...

[Vitaphone Racing]

I get his point, he's going to try and tell me that high gun ownership reduces crime. After a month of this shit, I can spot this argument a mile away.

Why wouldn't it? Who would you rather rob, a man with a gun or a man without one?

How do you know a man has a gun if it's concealed carry?

[Occupied Deutschland]

It's illegal to drive without licence plates, I think similar that an unidentifiable gun wouldn't be tradable and would have to be surrendered to authorities.

It is already a felony to deface a firearms serial numbers and/or import markings.

EDIT: It would appear I have been ninja'd.

You require more training, grasshoppa'

[Northern Dominus]

]Right, because no illegal firearms dealer EVER files the serial number down or grinds it off so it can't be traced.

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

And how do you suppose it got to that state, being virtually untraceable and having a body attached to it?

Odds are it was bought via straw purchase at a gun show from a "private seller" who didn't feel any moral responsibility to run any sort of check regarding who they were selling to and instead went for the quick buck. Repeat a thousand times over and you start to have the gist of the problem at hand.

This is where making a background check mandatory for every single transfer of firearms ownership, either from private individuals or from registered firearms dealers, comes into play. It makes the mass buying of firearms that much more cost prohibitive, tamps down on straw purchases made by people under investigation for firearms trafficking, and makes the unscrupulous immoral bastards at the gun shows that help flood streets with untraceable firearms legally culpable for the murder they aid.

If somebody is THAT worried about the "big evil government" tracking their firearms purchases, then what exactly are they worried about? What are they trying to hide? What do they have planned that they need to make secretive purchases of firearms for, and that I might have to be worried about?

[Grinning Dragon]

...
It's a felony to file off a gun's serial number though...
It's probably one to even possess a gun with a filed off serial number, regardless of circumstance.

"Driving without plates" is already highly illegal in relation to firearms. It still happens because (some) criminals don't give a fuck.

Apparently it is illegal to own a gun without a serial number, like I said...

Not entirely true, weapons made before 1968 do not have to have serial numbers, the same goes for homemade firearms for personal use.

[Spreewerke]

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

And how do you suppose it got to that state, being virtually untraceable and having a body attached to it?

Odds are it was bought via straw purchase at a gun show from a "private seller" who didn't feel any moral responsibility to run any sort of check regarding who they were selling to and instead went for the quick buck. Repeat a thousand times over and you start to have the gist of the problem at hand.

This is where making a background check mandatory for every single transfer of firearms ownership, either from private individuals or from registered firearms dealers, comes into play. It makes the mass buying of firearms that much more cost prohibitive, tamps down on straw purchases made by people under investigation for firearms trafficking, and makes the unscrupulous immoral bastards at the gun shows that help flood streets with untraceable firearms legally culpable for the murder they aid.

If somebody is THAT worried about the "big evil government" tracking their firearms purchases, then what exactly are they worried about? What are they trying to hide? What do they have planned that they need to make secretive purchases of firearms for, and that I might have to be worried about?

If you make every purchase go through an FFL, like I have suggested in pretty much every gun thread I have been in ever, then there really is no need for registration whatsoever. You can just re-trace it as we do now and since the 4473 has the new owner's name on it due to the FFL transfer, it goes to them. The person holding it isn't the owner? Arrest them and the previous owner for an illegal transaction (unless proven stolen). Registering wouldn't do anything but let the government know who has it when they really don't need to. They can just find out after it has been used in a crime pretty easily, and if the numbers are gone, then even a registered handgun/long gun would be untraceable anyway.

[Northern Dominus]

And how do you suppose it got to that state, being virtually untraceable and having a body attached to it?

Odds are it was bought via straw purchase at a gun show from a "private seller" who didn't feel any moral responsibility to run any sort of check regarding who they were selling to and instead went for the quick buck. Repeat a thousand times over and you start to have the gist of the problem at hand.

This is where making a background check mandatory for every single transfer of firearms ownership, either from private individuals or from registered firearms dealers, comes into play. It makes the mass buying of firearms that much more cost prohibitive, tamps down on straw purchases made by people under investigation for firearms trafficking, and makes the unscrupulous immoral bastards at the gun shows that help flood streets with untraceable firearms legally culpable for the murder they aid.

If somebody is THAT worried about the "big evil government" tracking their firearms purchases, then what exactly are they worried about? What are they trying to hide? What do they have planned that they need to make secretive purchases of firearms for, and that I might have to be worried about?

If you make every purchase go through an FFL, like I have suggested in pretty much every gun thread I have been in ever, then there really is no need for registration whatsoever. You can just re-trace it as we do now and since the 4473 has the new owner's name on it due to the FFL transfer, it goes to them. The person holding it isn't the owner? Arrest them and the previous owner for an illegal transaction (unless proven stolen). Registering wouldn't do anything but let the government know who has it when they really don't need to. They can just find out after it has been used in a crime pretty easily, and if the numbers are gone, then even a registered handgun/long gun would be untraceable anyway.

And what would go into obtaining this Federal Firearms License exactly? What standards would a person be held to in order to obtain this license?

[Occupied Deutschland]

Is a registered gun somehow made of diamonds? Once that serial number is gone and filed off, it does not matter if it is registered or not. You can't trace a number that no longer exists.

And how do you suppose it got to that state, being virtually untraceable and having a body attached to it?

Odds are it was bought via straw purchase at a gun show from a "private seller" who didn't feel any moral responsibility to run any sort of check regarding who they were selling to and instead went for the quick buck. Repeat a thousand times over and you start to have the gist of the problem at hand. (1)

This is where making a background check mandatory for every single transfer of firearms ownership, either from private individuals or from registered firearms dealers, comes into play (2). It makes the mass buying of firearms that much more cost prohibitive, tamps down on straw purchases made by people under investigation for firearms trafficking, and makes the unscrupulous immoral bastards at the gun shows that help flood streets with untraceable firearms legally culpable for the murder they aid (3).

If somebody is THAT worried about the "big evil government" tracking their firearms purchases, then what exactly are they worried about? What are they trying to hide? What do they have planned that they need to make secretive purchases of firearms for, and that I might have to be worried about?

1) OR, and bear with me here, just as likely (if not more so) you had a private seller who was/is supposed to base his entire purchase around an ATF-certified 'Does this guy seem legit to you?' and failed because he isn't psychic. Private people have no way of checking on whether the person is actually legally able to own a firearm, no way of telling whether he told the truth when he said he wasn't a felon, no way of telling if when he checked the box that said "I am of sound mind" on the sale papers he was ACTUALLY of sound mind. They're just supposed to KNOW. This is the problem.

2) I believe Spree has proposed just that...

3) Umm...Knowingly selling a firearm to someone that can't possess one (or to a 'straw' purchaser) is already illegal. People at gun shows and everywhere else private sales occur are already legally accountable for that and could theoretically even be held as an accomplice or an accessory to the crime.

4) I find the underlined portions of the final paragraph rather humorous, as one would be ripped to shreds for it were this a debate about the first amendment./notimportant

[Occupied Deutschland]

If you make every purchase go through an FFL, like I have suggested in pretty much every gun thread I have been in ever, then there really is no need for registration whatsoever. You can just re-trace it as we do now and since the 4473 has the new owner's name on it due to the FFL transfer, it goes to them. The person holding it isn't the owner? Arrest them and the previous owner for an illegal transaction (unless proven stolen). Registering wouldn't do anything but let the government know who has it when they really don't need to. They can just find out after it has been used in a crime pretty easily, and if the numbers are gone, then even a registered handgun/long gun would be untraceable anyway.

And what would go into obtaining this Federal Firearms License exactly? What standards would a person be held to in order to obtain this license?

How to become an FFL...

[Spreewerke]

If you make every purchase go through an FFL, like I have suggested in pretty much every gun thread I have been in ever, then there really is no need for registration whatsoever. You can just re-trace it as we do now and since the 4473 has the new owner's name on it due to the FFL transfer, it goes to them. The person holding it isn't the owner? Arrest them and the previous owner for an illegal transaction (unless proven stolen). Registering wouldn't do anything but let the government know who has it when they really don't need to. They can just find out after it has been used in a crime pretty easily, and if the numbers are gone, then even a registered handgun/long gun would be untraceable anyway.

And what would go into obtaining this Federal Firearms License exactly? What standards would a person be held to in order to obtain this license?

The same ones as they have now:

• Physical not-your-house storefront/brick-and-mortar store
• Business license because it's a commercial property
• BATFE-approved inventory system
• BATFE-approved security system
• BATFE-approved safe (see above)
• Insurance for all inventory items
• All FFL types required for your specific type of business: they range from basic "put two AR halves together" manufacturing (FFL01) to "I'm building machineguns post-1986" (SOT).

Now just try to imagine how much it would cost to buy/build/rent the building, pay for the insurance, pay for the metal bars over every door and window, pay for the security system, pay for the safe (hint: $5k+), have the appropriate inventory system, obtain your business license, purchase an FFL application (yes: you have to purchase the application), and then stock $50,000 worth of inventory before you even open the doors to the public.

Your background check has to be squeaky-clean to get accepted for an FFL, and if it is ever denied or revoked for any reason whatsoever, you may never reapply for one again.