National FOID?, gun law idea
- Thread starter ewlyon
- Start date
- Status
beatledog7
Member
Can you cite that law?
stonecutter2
Member
Are you serious? What is this, law school?
Here's the part about possession of nuclear materials:
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/39/831
Use your own google Fu for attack drone purchase/possession, and once again...please calm down.
WYOMan
Member
First thing that I did after moving here was to DESTROY my Illinois FOID card. It made me feel free again. I WILL NOT be made to have ANYTHING like it EVER AGAIN.
Lupinus
Member
Target practice?
WYOMan
Member
Nope. I sat on the porch, and relished every second that I chopped it up into tiny little pieces.
How about a background stamp on a DL or state ID that allows you to bypass NICS? Then require used sales to keep of record of DL number after a sale. Don't make a new system like Ill has which is a waste of money. Having a stamp of a background check would eliminate the need for FOID and that whole system, and would allow background checks for private sales and close the gun-show "loophole".
Lupinus
Member
How about no?
Why agree to more infringement? Why give ground on the private side? Why should someone who sells their gun need to maintain a government approved record?
beatledog7
Member
I'm gonna read all that? Not! A quick scan reveals a lot about stealing nuclear material and threatening with it, but prohibiting ownership? I'm innocent of violating any law until you prove I'm guilty.
Anyway, this is about principles, not picking nits. Rest assured, you talk compromise, you will get coercion. No, we must stand our ground, solidly and in lock step. Every gun owner that offers up a piece of some other gun owner's rights to protect his own is part of the problem.
WYOMan
Member
I hate that when you get into a debate about firearms, and people bring up grenades, grenade launchers, artillery, rockets, and nukes.
A little piece of information for the un-informed........THOSE THINGS ARE NOT FIREARMS.....THEY ARE ORDINANCE!!!!!!!
The people have the right to keep and bear ARMS....NOT ORDINANCE!!!
:banghead:
A little piece of information for the un-informed........THOSE THINGS ARE NOT FIREARMS.....THEY ARE ORDINANCE!!!!!!!
The people have the right to keep and bear ARMS....NOT ORDINANCE!!!
:banghead:ThatGuyHank
Member
I live in New Jersey and we have this FOID card nonsense. It literally does nothing more than what a background check at the gun store does. All it serves to do is to discourage those that aren't flag waving 2nd amendment advocates from buying guns. It's mainly just a big PITA.
easyg
Member
There should be NO background check.
We have already given away the right to be presumed innocent, which was the cornerstone of the U.S. justice system.
No.
I should be able to sell my private property to whom ever I desire.
And I shouldn't need government permission to do so.
Carl N. Brown
Member
When a federal court ruled that the Illinois handgun carry laws violated the Second Amendment and Illinois would have to join other 49 states in allowing some form of lawful handgun carry for self-defense, the gun control crowd was quick to rally and cry that part of federalism is to allow the sovereign states to adopt laws, such as gun laws, adapted to their particular situation and traditions, and its part of the noble experiment of federalism to have no carry for self defense in Illinois, blah blah blah.
OK, it is part of the experiment of federalism that most of the states don't have a FOID (firearms owners identification) card and don't want it.
When I point out that the State of Tennessee constitution declares the citizens of this state have the right to keep and bear arms, the state reserves the power to regulate with a view to prevent crime, the right primarily protected is self-defense and volunteer military service, the tradition lawful uses of guns (hunting, defending livestock, collection as curios or keepsakes) are not unprotected by the emphasis on defense. Tennessee had a permit to purchase a handgun with (potential) fifteen day waiting period; that was rejected when an instant background check system was put in place. And anti-gunners have told me that they don't care about Tennessee, once they get a National Sullivan Act federal law trumps state constitutions and state laws.
Anti-gunners are antifederalist pro-states rights to defend tough state gun laws, but turn into strict federalists if they see a chance to pass a federal law stricter than state law.
If you have a gut reaction of hating demon rum, reefer madness, smut magazines, "assault weapons", video games, any other scapegoat du jour, the only compromise is in the direction of more restriction, and each compromise leads to another.
OK, it is part of the experiment of federalism that most of the states don't have a FOID (firearms owners identification) card and don't want it.
When I point out that the State of Tennessee constitution declares the citizens of this state have the right to keep and bear arms, the state reserves the power to regulate with a view to prevent crime, the right primarily protected is self-defense and volunteer military service, the tradition lawful uses of guns (hunting, defending livestock, collection as curios or keepsakes) are not unprotected by the emphasis on defense. Tennessee had a permit to purchase a handgun with (potential) fifteen day waiting period; that was rejected when an instant background check system was put in place. And anti-gunners have told me that they don't care about Tennessee, once they get a National Sullivan Act federal law trumps state constitutions and state laws.
Anti-gunners are antifederalist pro-states rights to defend tough state gun laws, but turn into strict federalists if they see a chance to pass a federal law stricter than state law.
If you have a gut reaction of hating demon rum, reefer madness, smut magazines, "assault weapons", video games, any other scapegoat du jour, the only compromise is in the direction of more restriction, and each compromise leads to another.
My thought is that something quite the opposite would work. Adding a restriction notice to all state issued ID for those who are prohibited. It would take a few years to be fully effective as currently issued IDs are typically valid for 4-5 years. It would require the confiscation and reissue of ID when someone is convicted of a prohibiting offense. It would not be foolproof, as duplicate ID could exist.
It preserves private sales with no extra background check required.
It preserves private sales with no extra background check required.
ewlyon
Member
Thank you gondorian and Bhesler. Some of the first posts to take this thread as intended. I really like the idea of marking the identification of those prohibited to own and of using current identification cards as the host.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
So you now have to show ID to purchase a gun from your neighbor? 
Putting a line in the coding on your DL that flags an FFL that you're prohibited is probably less of an intrusion than all the other suggestions, but what's the point? He's calling you in anyway!
Putting a line in the coding on your DL that flags an FFL that you're prohibited is probably less of an intrusion than all the other suggestions, but what's the point? He's calling you in anyway!
So you now have to show ID to purchase a gun from your neighbor?
Putting a line in the coding on your DL that flags an FFL that you're prohibited is probably less of an intrusion than all the other suggestions, but what's the point? He's calling you in anyway!
While you and your neighbor might know each other well enough to be certain that they are not prohibited, many people cannot. In all other FTF transactions, you should be checking an ID to be sure that they are residents of the same state, correct?
As for an FFL, they can inform people that they would be/ or already have committed a felony by lying on the 4473. Or they can have a policy of ID'ing all people browsing/purchasing guns, to cut down straw purchases. Ranges can also check IDs to make sure prohibited people are not using their facilities.
breakingcontact
Member
FOID card plus a bunch of other restrictions have stopped the crime in Chi..., never mind.
Lost Sheep
Member
Universal Firearms Owner's Rights?
How about this idea?
Everyone who wants one can get a Firearms' Owner's ID card. No questions asked, no requirements, no hurdles, no qualifications. If you are a legal resident/citizen of the U.S., you are authorized (per the Second Amendment) to own firearms. Anything you like can be purchased upon presentation of the card to the seller. No waiting period, no background checks except for the verification of the card's authenticity.
Only those convicted of specified crimes or adjudicated prohibitions would lose their cards.
What do you think?
I have one problem with this proposal. It is a big one and if you don't know what it is, you will probably never.
Lost Sheep
How about this idea?
Everyone who wants one can get a Firearms' Owner's ID card. No questions asked, no requirements, no hurdles, no qualifications. If you are a legal resident/citizen of the U.S., you are authorized (per the Second Amendment) to own firearms. Anything you like can be purchased upon presentation of the card to the seller. No waiting period, no background checks except for the verification of the card's authenticity.
Only those convicted of specified crimes or adjudicated prohibitions would lose their cards.
What do you think?
I have one problem with this proposal. It is a big one and if you don't know what it is, you will probably never.
Lost Sheep
Lost Sheep
Member
Sorry, the Second Amendment does make reference to a militia. That kind of implies an exclusion to flippancy.
Now, I DO have a problem with anyone who would set themselves up at the arbiter of what is flippant and what is not. I think the founding Fathers would, too.
Lost Sheep
So you now have to show ID to purchase a book from your neighbor?
What could possibly be wrong with that?
- Status
