[KMatch]

With all this focus on the 2A, magazines, ARs, and such, I wonder if we're thinking too much in the box. Obama made it clear he would use whatever measures to "make us safer". Are we focusing on the wrong ideas? What else can be on their agenda? Taxing? Microstamping? Ammo licensing? You can tax ammo like cigarettes and still be well within the 2A. Let's step outside the box here and wonder: OK, we're allowed to keep our guns. Will we be allowed to shoot them? What measures can be taken to prevent this?

[M-Cameron]

With all this focus on the 2A, magazines, ARs, and such, I wonder if we're thinking too much in the box. Obama made it clear he would use whatever measures to "make us safer". Are we focusing on the wrong ideas? What else can be on their agenda? Taxing? Microstamping? Ammo licensing? You can tax ammo like cigarettes and still be well within the 2A. Let's step outside the box here and wonder: OK, we're allowed to keep our guns. Will we be allowed to shoot them? What measures can be taken to prevent this?

their sole agenda is to totally disarm the public.....every move they make is just one step closer to achieving that.

they dont care about 'public safety', they dont care about mass shooting victims, they sure as hell dont care about our rights.

they care about themselves, and doing what is necessary to keep themselves in power.


what can we do to prevent this?, write your Representative....try to influence the regular joe public about firearms.....join the NRA......get active and stay active.

[Steve H]

You are right. There has been talk about government control (tax) on ammo for a long time. A gun without ammo is just another baseball bat.

[KMatch]

M-Cameron, I've actually done ALL of that (NRA, educating Joe, and such). Even got a reasonable response from Hutchison letting me know at least someone is reading the letters as the response hit on a few points directly, and in our favor. It's everything else you mention. They want it all. So, where do we need to step it up to counter that. That's my point above.

[psyopspec]

We can speculate the day away, but keep in mind that quickly hits a point of diminishing returns. Of course, one should always take (or more correctly, should have taken) resonable steps to prepare for the eventuality of increased regulation on guns and ammunition. But the most important contribution remains communicating with elected representatives, supporting pro-2A organizations, and keeping that communication open as new gun control efforts emerge.

Apply effort to the situation that exists, rather than one complicated by imaginary shadows.

[Sam1911]

Another "what could they do to us" wild speculation thread? Hmmm...they've said they want the same things they always want and have wanted for decades, but what ELSE could they have on that agenda of theirs???

Anything! Nothing? Something in between maybe? They could make it illegal to shoot guns with odd serial numbers on days of the week starting with "T." And make deuces and one-eyed jacks always wild. They could make it so every bullet sold has to come with a sticker on it that reads, "Please be nice -- Don't murder!" They could replace all the gunpowder with peanut butter. And oh yeah, I think EXTERMINATION is a very realistic worry. That and the hoards of flying monkeys, they're definitely going to do those. And a kind of "cap and trade" deal where for every box of ammo you buy, you have to agree to suck 3 liters of second-hand smoke out of the atmosphere, and for every gun you buy you have to get your cholesterol down 30 points.

And I think they might just plan to keep banging the same old drum so they can keep their names in the papers and on TV so their loyal constituents will carry on voting them into their sinecure jobs. But now I'm the one indulging in wild speculation!

[psyopspec]

Another "what could they do to us" wild speculation thread? Hmmm...they've said they want the same things they always want and have wanted for decades, but what ELSE could they have on that agenda of theirs???

Since we're going that direction, how about leash laws for unicorns? :confused:

[3twelves]

haha

[Lex Luthier]

I believe the best way to think right now is to stay calm and practice diligent observation. I wouldn't get within a hundred yards of a gun show right now. Stay back and watch while everybody else gets loud and shows their hole cards.

When this conversation comes up there are a range of responses depending on the eavesdropping crowd. At a particular event this weekend, when that will inevitably happen, I plan on deflecting as much as possible. Nobody's business.

[USAF_Vet]

their sole agenda is to totally disarm the public.....every move they make is just one step closer to achieving that.

they dont care about 'public safety', they dont care about mass shooting victims, they sure as hell dont care about our rights.

they care about themselves, and doing what is necessary to keep themselves in power.


what can we do to prevent this?, write your Representative....try to influence the regular joe public about firearms.....join the NRA......get active and stay active.
Who is this mysterious "They"? I've always been under the impression that "they" are our legislators and government officials since I'm not a tinfoil hat wearing, Illuminati believing conspiracy theorist. So if "they" are who I think "they" are, what good is served in contacting "them" aside from our own feel-good sense that we did something worthwhile. If "they" want to disarm the populace for complete, unopposed control of the masses, what difference does it make to write letters, make phone calls, or get involved other than some form of bragging rights and I told you so's after the fact?

If "they" don't care about public safety, mass shooting victims or our rights, is my e-mail, letter or phone call going to make them change "their" minds?

M-Cameron, I'm not specifically targeting you in this reply. I'm simply wondering in text whether or not our so-called representatives actually care about representing their constituents, or if "they" are simply one head of this politically monstrous hydra.

[KMatch]

I'm not looking for anyone with a crystal ball. I simply wasn't paying attention to the 94 ban enough to have a clue, so, enlighten the clueless on what could be a possibility based on past experiences. That's what I'm kicking around here. If we build up a defense on bans, and they hit with something totally unexpected (out of the box), it would be hard to fight back. It would be nice to have some insight so us clueless folks can plan ahead a bit. Again, what are some "out of the box" political possibilities that might be approached?

And as an observation, I find it odd the MODS are the first to step away from The High Road in remarks. Seems to be happening a bit more here lately. If we're out of line, I expect to be called out on it, NOT ridiculed from a MOD of all people. Let's step it up, shall we?

[Sam1911]

Perhaps the Mods, of all people, see a LOT of the same trends, themes, threads, and worries over and over and hope to provide a little light-hearted reality check.

And I get the distinct impression from many Staff and long-timers that the current noise level is making it require a bit more of a strong voice to keep the ship on the tracks so to speak. Seems like ever 10th thread is another fairly recent member appearing to flip his wig about the panic, the coming revolution, how we all aught to brainstorm which rights to throw under the bus to appease the antis, or all of the above. A thousand new voices (and that's not an exaggeration!) yelling repeated badly misunderstood half-truth fears tends to wear down our saintly composure at times. Sorry if the raw nerves sometimes become visible. :)

Annnyway ...

Look, "they" (and "they" are the same old "they" they've been for a LONG time) have their agendas and talking points. It's not mysterious and there's very little proactive good that can be accomplished by trying to come up with lots of ideas "they" haven't put on the table yet. And if they DO come up with such, it isn't like its going to be a huge mystery how to fight them.

If you're just looking for pie-in-the-sky things you could possibly worry about, that's fine, but it seems like there's plenty of things to concern yourself and your representatives with fighting which are already being announced as part of the coming attack that it's probably safe to concentrate efforts on those for now.

If they do ignore the mag bans and new AWB and all the other nightmare fears and go for that no-shooting-on-Tuesdays-and-Thursdays thing? Well, the nutty fringe stuff seems to have even less of a chance of getting through Congress.

[poboy6]

The writing has been on the wall for many, many decades. We are well aware they don't care about safety or little kids dying in schools. They don't send the ATF to get guns out of the 'hood or keep guns from going to mexico. They shut down your local LGS because someone put "y" instead of "yes" on their form 4473.

They won't stop until they have an almost completely declawed populace. I'm not allowed to own the same firearms that men of my dad's generation could have. He was not allowed to have firearms that his dad was legally allowed to have.

I find it surprising that so many people don't seem to notice these things. "They" have already said they are looking at restricting or eliminating online ammo sales and in 1997 they were looking at putting some form of tracers in gunpowder.

It is what it is. It is mathematically impossible for "them" to retrieve all the guns in this country so "they" will do whatever they can to make things difficult.

To answer the original question, I believe that regulating or eliminating online sales will certainly happen in the near future. I don't really see an increase in taxing ammo although it certainly is possible. The WH wants to marginalize the NRA by working with other groups but I don't know what hunting groups will say "just allow us to have bolt-actions". I do think they could add "have you ever been prescribed anxiety medications" to the 4473 form. There will be a lot of upset people, but like always, they will either hide their weapons or be discreet in their usage of firearms.

[Sam1911]

The writing has been on the wall for many, many decades. We are well aware they don't care about safety or little kids dying in schools. They don't send the ATF to get guns out of the 'hood or keep guns from going to mexico. They shut down your local LGS because someone put "y" instead of "yes" on their form 4473.Oookay. If you can point me at a shop that was shut down for that, I'll accept it. Many of the shops that have been shut down for book-keeping errors have been pretty darned bad about it, repeatedly. I'm not a big fan of the BATFE, but I don't like to see a whole lot of hyperbole tossed around as though it was fact. We have a lot of FFL dealers here and almost every one of them reports the ATF compliance folks to be quite helpful and pleasant to deal with. And most of them also say, if you can't keep your books straight, you probably shouldn't be in the business.

I'm not allowed to own the same firearms that men of my dad's generation could have. He was not allowed to have firearms that his dad was legally allowed to have. Oh really? Which firearms are you not allowed to have today that your dad was allowed to have? I'll grant that if your grandpop was buying machine guns in the '30s (not very many people were) that second part is at least kind of true.

"They" have already said they are looking at restricting or eliminating online ammo sales and in 1997 they were looking at putting some form of tracers in gunpowder. And in the 16 years since then, while the population of active RKBA advocates has soared and gotten more cohesive, and the number of guns sold every year has hit unfathomable highs, how's that worked out for "them?"

The WH wants to marginalize the NRA by working with other groups but I don't know what hunting groups will say "just allow us to have bolt-actions". Oh, there are one or two Quisling groups like AHSA that will pretend they represent gun owners, but no one believes them at this point.

I do think they could add "have you ever been prescribed anxiety medications" to the 4473 form. Do you know what the legal hurdles would be to adding that to the list of prohibited persons...and forcing someone to divulge medical information? If not, you should research that so you know what's involved in what you're suggesting "they" could just decide to do.

[KMatch]

And there ya go! All it took was a little extra nudge to get the ball rolling a bit. I'm not "the sky's falling" type at all, yet I do understand many are and see it daily as well. But, I AM known for gathering info, such as here, so I have a better idea what I might come up against. Like I had said, I slept through the 94 ban as my gun collection was nil. MY CZ75 a bit after came with 10 rounders and I thought it was a lapse in judgement from a manufacture and promptly bought some 16 round mags. Why? I hate reloading! Still, I had no clue about bans.

Even then, I'd never consider giving up ANY freedoms - it's not in my nature - ask my MIL! But, a clear head full of information never hurt anyone.

As for LGS's getting shut down over paperwork, I doubt it as well, unless it was a habit. On the other hand, as a state inspector (car inspections), I can say some of the office clerks can be ridiculous. I had a VI30 form (inspection verification the car owner sends to court for a title transfer) returned for what looked like a P converted to an R. You read that right! A P is made into an R if you write in English, but due to my adding the dropped line slightly off, it kicked the VI30 back. So, there just may be some clout to a LGS getting some flack over paperwork.

Back on track, I keep seeing online sales might take a hit. Again, while I don't take to loss of freedom, how could that hurt folks here? Personally, I rarely buy online, but I reckon some folks don't buy anywhere else. Would it make ANY difference for "their" cause or simply another "feel good" measure? I'm thinking some of the mental cases might not buy in public, so there's some "ammo" for the left.

[poboy6]

Sure, Sam. I'll chalk your sarcasm up to ignorance and give you a brief history lesson.

Oookay. If you can point me at a shop that was shut down for that, I'll accept it. Many of the shops that have been shut down for book-keeping errors have been pretty darned bad about it, repeatedly. I'm not a big fan of the BATFE, but I don't like to see a whole lot of hyperbole tossed around as though it was fact. We have a lot of FFL dealers here and almost every one of them reports the ATF compliance folks to be quite helpful and pleasant to deal with. And most of them also say, if you can't keep your books straight, you probably shouldn't be in the business.

http://www.wnd.com/2007/06/42287/
The government is using paperwork errors as small as the abbreviation of a city name to shut down some of the nation’s longest-serving gun shops, and 2nd Amendment advocates fear the right to bear arms will mean little if there’s no way to obtain a gun.

“No good deed goes unpunished,” Larry Pratt, of Gun Owners of America, told WND while confirming that as recently as 15 or 20 years ago, there were 250,000 licensed gun dealers in the United States.

Today, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told WND, there are 108,381, and if more cases involving dealers such as Red’s Trading Post of Twin Falls, Idaho, develop, that number will plummet quickly.

Ryan Horsley, a spokesman for Red’s, which has been in business 71 years, said the store has been battling over its license because of rules infractions such as a missing poster for more than six years.

Tom Gresham has an excellent weekly podcast (http://guntalk.com/site.php) and he often mentions gun shops getting shut down for infractions as silly as someone filling out "y" instead of "yes" on form 4473.

I personally know the owner of a former gunshop who was forced to close over paperwork issues. I was not privy to the details so maybe it was something egregious. He did say that the ATF was shutting down other local shops over "silly reasons".

Oh really? Which firearms are you not allowed to have today that your dad was allowed to have? I'll grant that if your grandpop was buying machine guns in the '30s (not very many people were) that second part is at least kind of true.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blguntime.htm

1927
Congress passes a law banning the mailing of concealable weapons.

1934
The National Firearms Act of 1934 regulating only fully automatic firearms like sub-machine guns is approved by Congress.

1938
The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 places the first limitations on selling ordinary firearms. Persons selling guns are required to obtain a Federal Firearms License, at an annual cost of $1, and to maintain records of the name and address of persons to whom firearms are sold. Gun sales to persons convicted of violent felonies were prohibited.

So during this period the Feds have begun regulating 'gangster weapons' like machine guns, short-barreled shotguns and silencers.

If my grandfather were so inclined, during this period he could still purchase anti-aircraft cannons like a Lahti (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/L39.jpg/300px-L39.jpg) or a 20mm Solothurn (http://www.beltfedshooters.com/photopost/data/591/Big_Sandy_March_2010_064.jpg) and have them DELIVERED TO HIS DOORSTEP.


1968
The Gun Control Act of 1968 - "...was enacted for the purpose of keeping firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence." -- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms The Act regulates imported guns, expands the gun-dealer licensing and record keeping requirements, and places specific limitations on the sale of handguns. The list of persons banned from buying guns is expanded to include persons convicted of any non-business related felony, persons found to be mentally incompetent, and users of illegal drugs.

This is when we really began to deem certain people unfit to bear arms. Basically all men are created equal, but some men are more equal than others.
"They" used emotions to mandate at what age your children could possess the firearms that you already own. Instead of keeping criminals locked up for a long enough period of time they simply reduced the rights of individuals upon release. If you are a menace to society then in my humble opinion you have no business on the streets. If you are out of jail, then the 2nd Amendment still applies and Constitutionally you have every right to bear arms as the rest of us. The feds do not see things this way and the Supreme Court said barring felons from owning guns is Constitutional (Lewis v. U.S. (http://www.constitution.org/ussc/445-055a.htm)). They also tell us "[T]he Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.'"

Gun Control Act of 1968 (http://www.enotes.com/gun-control-act-1968-reference/gun-control-act-1968)
In 1968 President Johnson and his administration intensified their efforts. Johnson began using the bully pulpit of the presidency to chide Congress publicly to enact his gun control policy. In his 1968 State of the Union address, Johnson exhorted Congress to pass a gun control law that would stop "mail order murder." And months later, President Johnson conveyed to Congress, in no uncertain terms, his desire for crime legislation that required national registration of every gun in America and licenses for all gun owners.

Thankfully President Johnson did not get everything he wished for.

Anyway, after GCA68 people of my father's generation had many more restrictions placed on them than his father. Note that we are not merely talking about the types of firearms available for purchase but the growing numbers of people exempt from being able to exercise 2A.

I would hope people have at least a few memories of the laws that have come about since 1968.

1998 - November 30
Permanent provisions of the Brady Act go into effect. Gun dealers are now required to initiate a pre-sale criminal background check of all gun buyers through the newly created National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) computer system.

So now, instead of merely making possession of a firearm by a felon a crime, EVERY person who wants to purchase a rifle through an FFL must go through this background check. Sure, it's a great way to catch felons, but it also means law-abiding citizens must now get PERMISSION before buying guns.

Of course, we have certainly had some wins on our side in recent years. And yes, gun ownership has soared, but the number of households containing guns has apparently been declining (although not after last month, I'm sure).
Gallup Poll (http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/Self-Reported-Gun-Ownership-Highest-1993.aspx)
Since 2000, Gallup has asked respondents with guns in their households a follow-up question to determine if the gun belongs to the respondent or to someone else. On this basis, Gallup finds that 34% of all Americans personally own a gun.
Here is a chart denoting the percentage of households containing firearms. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-ownership-declining1.png)



So thanks to Clinton and now Obama, people of my generation are flocking to the field of firearms whilst the people of my father's generation contained many hippies and urbanites who had far less experience with firearms than the previous generation. This renewed interest in guns is certainly refreshing.

[Sam1911]

Ahh yes. Ignorance is usually my problem. I'll try to keep it in check. ;)

The government is using paperwork errors as small as the abbreviation of a city name to shut down some of the nation’s longest-serving gun shops, and 2nd Amendment advocates fear the right to bear arms will mean little if there’s no way to obtain a gun.

“No good deed goes unpunished,” Larry Pratt, of Gun Owners of America, told WND while confirming that as recently as 15 or 20 years ago, there were 250,000 licensed gun dealers in the United States....
Ok...so show me proof of what you said. I like Larry Pratt, but he's got a job to do, and delivering complete and utter solemn fact isn't necessarily part of that job. "No good deed goes unpunished?" What does that even mean? "Errors as small as...?" Let me put it this way, that one error is NOT enough to shut down a gun shop or even try. That minor error may have been pointed out in their report, but a gun shop that had ONE error like that on their books would be an ATF exemplar of perfection in record-keeping.

Tom Gresham has an excellent weekly podcast (http://guntalk.com/site.php) and he often mentions gun shops getting shut down for infractions as silly as someone filling out "y" instead of "yes" on form 4473."Infractions as silly as...?" Again, nothing specific here. It sounds good to the faithful, and I'm not going to argue they aren't tougher than we'd like them to be, but the stories we tell ourselves are rarely very complete.

I personally know the owner of a former gunshop who was forced to close over paperwork issues. I was not privy to the details so maybe it was something egregious. He did say that the ATF was shutting down other local shops over "silly reasons".Oh...so no details? How many shops get shut down and the owner comes out and says, "Yup, they totally had me dead to rights! I was such a slacker..." Of course he told you the reasons were silly.

[Sam1911]

Oh really? Which firearms are you not allowed to have today that your dad was allowed to have? I'll grant that if your grandpop was buying machine guns in the '30s (not very many people were) that second part is at least kind of true.So really, the answer to my question was "none?"

I'm pretty cognizant of the gun laws passed since the '30s, and firmly believe that they should all be repealed. Every single one.

However, as I said before, we should try to speak factually, not wildly and inaccurately about these things. So as long as you are not a felon, or belong to one of a very few other categories, you can purchase ANYTHING your grandfather or father could -- and quite a bit that was never available in their day.

And the funny thing is you DID know the facts, or at least could Google enough of them to present them clearly! You don't like the paperwork and the restrictions, and neither do I, but let's not be so sloppy in how we discuss our grievances. It just makes us look foolish and robs us of our focus.

[poboy6]

So really, the answer to my question was "none?"

I can be snarky too, but it's pointless. I mentioned and linked pretty pictures to 2 guns I cannot buy (they were outlawed in 68, before I was born).

The rest of your last 2 posts simply say "do you have the occular proof that these shops were shut down for only 1 infraction"? Well, no. Of course not. Only the ATF and the owner of the shop in question would be able to answer that.

As to the "no good deed goes unpunished"... What that means is that people complied with the law in good faith and gun shops have been shut down (for repeated offenses if you so desire) for misspelling the name of a town.

What is your take on this - 15 or 20 years ago, there were 250,000 licensed gun dealers in the United States.

Today, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told WND, there are 108,381,

That is 141,619 gun shops shut down in less than 2 decades. It's easy to speculate, but it would appear that owners of gun shops are apparently the absolute worst capitalists ever. You really think it's because these people constantly skirt the rule of law?

You don't have to wear a tin foil hat to see what has transpired. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to grasp. So what is your explanation of 7,080 gun shops shutting down each year for the past 20?


You said you would keep your ignorance in check then immediately violated that promise. Tsk, tsk.

[Sam1911]

You CAN buy those guns. Not as plentiful maybe as in some other decades, but they're out there and available to buy as a citizen. Plus, if you blow the $30 on a C&R FFL license, you can actually have either of those shipped right to your door once the transfer paperwork clears!

Or, go the other way and buy one of Anzio Ironworks' much nicer 20mms, which weren't available in your dad or granddad's day.

What's my take on the reduction in FFLs? Surely some were driven out for not dotting "i"s (or other and more serious violations if you don't believe every last drop of the hype), but the biggest enforcement/administrative change was the BATFE's tightening the policy on "kitchen table" gun dealers. That's not to say you can't be a kitchen table FFL -- you CAN, and you won't get hassled for it -- but the license is for folks who are actually "in the business of..." and not just for folks keeping the license to make it easier to trade in guns for their personal collections.

But by far the biggest reason was a broader change in American society during those decades, and the shift from every corner gas station and general store selling guns up into the 70s and 80s to guns being somewhat less ubiquitous in society and thus those shops not wanting to keep up the hassle of the license just to sell a couple shotguns a year. Remember, even K-Mart and Woolworths used to sell guns. There was a bad time in the '80s and early '90s when stores like that came under a lot of heat for selling guns, and many, many general merchandise type stores caved to the public sentiment and quit.

I used to be able to walk into just any local store and see a couple shotguns and a deer rifle on the wall for sale. Now, I have to drive 15 or 20 miles to be able to hit maybe only 10 places that sell firearms (not counting pawn shops and the kitchen table guys) but in months when a panic isn't on, I can choose from hundreds or even thousands of guns of all types right there on their display racks -- many of which were literally NOT available 10, 20, 50, 80 years ago.

Honestly, I'm happier NOW.

[mg.mikael]

So what is your explanation of 7,080 gun shops shutting down each year for the past 20?

Capitalism......businesses can fail due to mismanagement or lack of funds, owners die and the business closes up shop, owner realizes he doesn't want to be in the business, owner retires, a bigger chain store comes to town and shuts down the small store. The list goes on and on why businesses close.

Most businesses close within the first two years.....so why do you find it amazing that stores simply shut down.

[Sam1911]

Just for an example, last year i stopped in for lunch at a dusty old, pretty ramshackle, postage-stamp sized small-town diner and general store not too far from here (in relatively gun-un-friendly MD, no less!) and among the faded trinkets and off-brand toothpaste left over from the '70s (wait...was "Prell" a toothpaste or a hair-care product? Well, I digress...) were two used rifles, a shotgun, and a muzzle-loader on a rack in the back. The shop's FFL was framed behind the lunch counter, a little splattered with old fry grease.

Anyway, it was nostalgic to see a little hole-in-the-wall place like that still keeping their license up, but they're very anachronistic these days. Heck, diners and lunch counters on small town main streets ... well, for that matter, small town main streets themselves! ... are anachronistic and unusual these days. But they used to be EVERYWHERE.

Times change. Doesn't mean there's a conspiracy against them.

[USAF_Vet]

Also, regarding the 7000+ licensed dealers that have been "shut down" every year for the past 20 years, how many if those were kitchen table FFLs and C&R license holders who simply did not renew due to lack of available products? How many of them were low volune LGSs that were crushed under new legislation and forced to close their doors? How many we're little mom and pop shops that retired because they couldn't cpete with the big box store across town?

There may be fewer licensed gun dealers in the country today, but we don't have the breakdown of demographics showing who was shut down and for what reason. Certainly not all were shut down because if a few minor infractions.

[Sam1911]

There may be fewer licensed gun dealers in the country today, but we don't have the breakdown of demographics showing who was shut down and for what reason. Certainly not all were shut down because if a few minor infractions.Absolutely right. And one of the things "we" tend to do as badly as "them" is to point at numbers and say, "see what the bad men are doing to us!?!" without any evidence of causality.

Sort of like when the other side says, "[i]there's millions of guns in this country and we have too many killings! See what the bad gun nuts are doing to us!?!"

In truth, WalMart, Cabelas, Bass Pro, Dicks, and other places like that may very well have done more to reduce the total number of FFLs than the BATFE ever did. And I'm not even ready to say that's a decidedly negative thing. I certainly have no difficulty in finding places to buy my guns and ammo, and see no coming crisis there, either.

[poboy6]

Also, regarding the 7000+ licensed dealers that have been "shut down" every year for the past 20 years, how many if those were kitchen table FFLs and C&R license holders who simply did not renew due to lack of available products? How many of them were low volune LGSs that were crushed under new legislation and forced to close their doors? How many we're little mom and pop shops that retired because they couldn't cpete with the big box store across town?


I would be very interested in finding the answer to this myself. I guess I am alone in thinking that almost 20 LGS shut down every single day over a 20 year period seems a bit odd. Also, I don't think C&R counts, as that is not FFL.

Of course many of them were smaller places that possibly bought stuff from the chains and just marked up price. But when you see the stories of the guys in business for a long time telling us that the ATF considers a misspelled word "willfully" disobeying the law and hence is reason to lose their FFL, I just think that is terrible.

Oh well. I apologize for derailing this thread.

[USAF_Vet]

Also, I don't think C&R counts, as that is not FFL.

You sure about that?

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

The C&R license is a Type 03 Federal firearms License, one of 11 different types of Federal firearms licenses available.

[joeschmoe]

No. The power to tax is the power to prohibit. They can't prohibit arms. They can't pass a prohibitive tax either. Nor can they tax your right to vote, speech, pray, etc.

"Well-regulated" means to "keep in good working order". Like a fine watch or printing press. Anything that prevents you from keeping your arms in "good working order" will not pass Constitutional challenge.

I'm surprised to see so many gun owners peeing their pants because Feinstien and Biden are foaming at the mouth. So what?
The government does not have the power to abolish your fundamental right to arms.

[USAF_Vet]

The government does not have the power to abolish your fundamental right to arms.

They have whatever power we as voters give them, and whatever power we as voters allow them to take without repercussions. It's not the way it should be, but that is the way it is. They know they can pass unconstitutional legislation and get away with it as long as they are unopposed and can convince people they are right.

thankfully there are folks who aren't sheep, and are willing to fight tooth and nail for their rights. It seems though, that we are becoming a minority group.

[joeschmoe]

They have whatever power we as voters give them, and whatever power we as voters allow them to take without repercussions. It's not the way it should be, but that is the way it is.


No. That would be "mob rule". That is why we are a Republic, not a pure democracy. Important difference. In a pure democracy the majority can vote for anything it wants, including eliminating the rights of the minority. We are a Constitutional Republic with a government of limited, specifically enumerated powers. The 2nd is one of the specific limits.
SCOTUS has repeatedly upheld the 2nd and limited the governments attempts to infringe it.
The Constitution is not dead and the government cannot vote itself any powers it wishes. When it tries, it gets knocked back down to size by the SCOTUS or the ballot box.
The government does not have the power to abolish fundamental rights. At least the SCOTUS has had the balls to say so on more than one occassion.

[theotherwaldo]

Look.

1. The Revolution cannot begin while the wrong people are armed.

2. Everything is an excuse to do what you whant to do - AKA, never let an emergency or disaster go to waste.

Those are the rules that apply in this case..