National FOID?, gun law idea

So you now have to show ID to purchase a gun from your neighbor

Click to expand...

Yep.

It's not a bad idea imo. We have a right to guns. But guns are dangerous and easily abused.

Society has rights too, among them some assurances that people chosing to own guns aren't insane, and are minimally competent.

Please don't bother with the ball bat, cars, knife, bomb, or other dirvel. Guns ARE different. That's why cops and soldiers use them.

I'd do it simpler.

A permanent license to own firearms issued by Feds after background check, and training taken and passed. NRA will be happy to do this. (The DL idea may work too.)

This makes gun ownership a considered decision, as it should be, requires basic competency, discourages impulse ownership which is rarely a good idea, and requires some show committment and responsibility.

For you 2A diehards, no court will consider this a material infringement.

License and photo ID required to buy, whether private or dealer.

Confirmation that license is valid and issued to the ID shown is required for any sale, by the seller, private or dealer.

No renewals needed. No releasing of data by Gov't. No record of who owns what gun needed, although I doubt we'd get the current FFL record keeping changed.

If someone holding a license is convicted of those crimes for which gun ownership is forbidden, the license is cancelled and guns are removed from the person.

Posession without a license a crime. Providing a gun to unlicensed a crime. Child-safe storage required.

It could and should replace a lot of the existing hodgepodge of gun laws.

It's not perfect and it won't stop all abuse. But it will help, tending to keep guns where they should be and away from where they should not.

gbw said:

It's not a bad idea imo. We have a right to guns. But guns are dangerous and easily abused.

Society has rights too, among them some assurances that people who chose to own guns aren't insane, and are minimally competent.

Please don't bother with the ball bat, cars, knife, bomb, or other dirvel. Guns ARE different. That's why cops and soldiers use them.

I'd do it simpler.

A permanent license to own firearms issued by Feds after background check, and training taken and passed. NRA will be happy to do this.

This makes gun ownership a considered decision, as it should be, requires basic competency, discourages impulse ownership which is rarely a good idea, and requires some show committment and responsibility.

For you 2A diehards, no court will consider this a material infringement.

License and photo ID required to buy, whether private or dealer.

Confirmation that license is valid and issued to the ID shown is required for any sale, by the seller, private or dealer.

No renewals needed. No releasing of data by Gov't. No record of who owns what gun needed, although I doubt we'd get the current FFL record keeping changed.

If someone holding a license is convicted of those crimes for which gun ownership is forbidden, the license is cancelled and guns are removed from the person.

Posession without a license a crime. Providing a gun to unlicensed a crime. Child-safe storage required.

It could and should replace a lot of the existing hodgepodge of gun laws.

It's not perfect and it won't stop all abuse. But it will help, tending to keep guns where they should be and away from where they should not.

Click to expand...

Thank the Lord you can't fake an ID.

The last time I checked, you have to show a valid drivers license and do a NICS check on the spot. A FOID card is tantamount to registration which then leads to confiscation.

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!!!

Click to expand...

We can actually buy stuff like grenades, grenade launchers, and artillery.

They are NFA items. I can buy a current production LMT M203 for around what, $2K IIRC? and register it as a DD.

It's not a bad idea imo. We have a right to guns. But guns are dangerous and easily abused.

Society has rights too, among them some assurances that people chosing to own guns aren't insane, and are minimally competent.

Please don't bother with the ball bat, cars, knife, bomb, or other dirvel. Guns ARE different. That's why cops and soldiers use them.

I'd do it simpler.

A permanent license to own firearms issued by Feds after background check, and training taken and passed. NRA will be happy to do this.

This makes gun ownership a considered decision, as it should be, requires basic competency, discourages impulse ownership which is rarely a good idea, and requires some show committment and responsibility.

For you 2A diehards, no court will consider this a material infringement.

License and photo ID required to buy, whether private or dealer.

Confirmation that license is valid and issued to the ID shown is required for any sale, by the seller, private or dealer.

No renewals needed. No releasing of data by Gov't. No record of who owns what gun needed, although I doubt we'd get the current FFL record keeping changed.

If someone holding a license is convicted of those crimes for which gun ownership is forbidden, the license is cancelled and guns are removed from the person.

Posession without a license a crime. Providing a gun to unlicensed a crime. Child-safe storage required.

It could and should replace a lot of the existing hodgepodge of gun laws.

It's not perfect and it won't stop all abuse. But it will help, tending to keep guns where they should be and away from where they should not.

Click to expand...

With "friends" like this and several other posters here lately, who needs enemies?

And yeah I'm a second amendment diehard. We don't need any government poking it's nasty fat fingers into the gun pie. All this "reasonable" gun control measures is just a bunch of bull<deleted>.

Damn surrender monkeys...rushing to sign away our rights before Biden and Co. even get the chance to do so. I think I'm starting to understand what it was like to live in France under the Germans, what with collaborators falling all over themselves to ingratiate themselves with the enemy.

Society has a rights too, among them some assurances that people who chose to own guns aren't insane, and are minimally competent.

Click to expand...

You're wrong.
"Society" does not have any Right to any assurance that people who choose to own guns must be sane or minimally competent.

And just who gets to decide who is mentally sane and minimally competent?

Too many folks look to "the government" to make them safe.
Well guess what...a caged bird is safe....but he aint free!


There are already thousands of gun laws, and making more laws will accomplish nothing except to move us one step closer to total disarmament of the law abiding civilian population....which is exactly the goal of some folks in our government.

The last time I checked, you have to show a valid drivers license and do a NICS check on the spot. A FOID card is tantamount to registration which then leads to confiscation.

Click to expand...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not for private sales, at least not in many states.

Not wrong. Society has rights, and if they want any others, they can vote them no problem. It won't be perfect, but what is. That's a lame reason to reject everything.

If it gets to confiscation the fight is lost anyway. And I would not permit who-owns-what records.

A permanent license to own firearms issued by Feds...

Click to expand...

Do you even know what the Second Amendment is really about?

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to make sure that the people of this nation would never be denied the tools to overthrown the federal government.
And the tools, the ARMS, our Founding Fathers were referring to are weapons of war.

Asking the federal government for permission to own those tools defeats the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment!

And you've managed to misunderstand the whole issue.

Anyhow, had my say, I'm done.

gbw said:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not for private sales, at least not in many states.

Not wrong. Society has rights, and if they want any others, they can vote them no problem. It won't be perfect, but what is. That's a lame reason to reject everything.

If it gets to confiscation the fight is lost anyway. And I would not permit who-owns-what records.

Click to expand...

That assumes that gun control will prevent gun violence when we know that didn't happen in England or in Australia. The root problem is not allowing people the right to self defense in gun free zones.

England murder rates are a fraction of ours. No one mentions about Australia - they have had no mass shootings since they did their repeater confiscation more than a decade ago, and they had them before.

I'm not trying for gun control, nor do I want it. I do want responsibility, and to impede impulse first time ownership and people who should not have guns from getting them. It won't be perfect, but it will help.

Really am done now.

people who should not have guns from getting them.

Click to expand...

Dude I don't think you quite understand the issue. All your "solution" does is hassle law abiding gun owners.

If I wanted to commit a crime, I can go down to the street corner in the bad section of town and buy something from a thug no matter how many "checks" or "waiting periods" or what ever is done.

You DO want gun control because you are advocating for it in this thread.

Sorry, double.

And you've managed to misunderstand the whole issue.

Anyhow, had my say, I'm done.

Click to expand...

No, I understand exactly what you're saying.

You think the citizens of this nation should be forced to beg the federal government for permission to own a firearm.

And I agree with the Constitutional Second Amendment that clearly states that our Right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by the federal government.

Lost Sheep said:

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

Click to expand...

Hell no

gbw said:

England murder rates are a fraction of ours. No one mentions about Australia - they have had no mass shootings since they did their repeater confiscation more than a decade ago, and they had them before.

I'm not trying for gun control, nor do I want it. I do want responsibility, and to impede impulse first time ownership and people who should not have guns from getting them. It won't be perfect, but it will help.

Really am done now.

Click to expand...

Responsibility?

Yes, who is not against responsible gun ownership? Going back to the original intents of the 2A, the entire constitution was meant to govern responsible people and is wholly incapable of governing a people who will not govern themselves. John Adams so stated:

Because we have no government, armed with power, capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

Click to expand...

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Adams

Nevertheless, despite the fact that many in our country are no longer responsible people, the majority still have the right to self defense. We also have a God given right to protect ourselves from tyrannical governments which is the main purpose of the 2A in the first place.

Will removing guns in America make it gun free? Sorry, not a chance with the drug cartels going across our open borders. Instead of semi-auto rifles, we will have full auto coming across the border. Will that be a better and safer nation? Sorry, taking guns away from law abiding citizens or these other provisions will not fix the underlying problems.

People are still missing the point ... the federal government has no constitutional authority to legislate a federal FOID scheme. The whole POINT of the 2A was to prevent and prohibit the federal government from controlling citizens' access to firearms in the first place. Frankly, I believe even the NICS system falls outside the scope of Founders' Intent. If they knew that interstate commerce law was being used as a specious justification for federal gun control, I think they'd roll over in their graves.

No more 'reasonable compromise', no further capitulation. A federal FOID would be unconstitutional and I refuse to accept such a notion.

This is what they meant = ARMS!. Cannon from the home of George Washington;

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?

Click to expand...

No, that's not necessary. All you have to do is not know, or have reason to know, that the person is not a resident of your state or a prohibited person. You aren't required to check or verify anything.

And that's as it should be. At least until we get GCA '68 repealed and all this silly interstate business gets trash-canned.

I've got a better idea.
How about we repeal the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the 1986 Hughes Amendment, the 1989 Bush import ban, the 1994 Brady Act, and then immediately disband the "BATFE" and re-integrate them with the DEA or FBI as just another investigative branch focusing on tobacco and alcohol tax crimes?

evan price said:

I've got a better idea.
How about we repeal the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the 1986 Hughes Amendment, the 1989 Bush import ban, the 1994 Brady Act, and then immediately disband the "BATFE" and re-integrate them with the DEA or FBI as just another investigative branch focusing on tobacco and alcohol tax crimes?

Click to expand...

Best idea I've heard yet.

Once there, we can start talking about "compromise".

Sam1911 said:

No, that's not necessary. All you have to do is not know, or have reason to know, that the person is not a resident of your state or a prohibited person. You aren't required to check or verify anything.

And that's as it should be. At least until we get GCA '68 repealed and all this silly interstate business gets trash-canned.

Click to expand...

So, you are OK with "Don't Ask Don't Tell" as a way to prevent prohibited folks from acquiring firearms through private sales?

I am with you on the silly interstate stuff.

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.

Click to expand...

You would never see a court.

You'd be lucky to see the drone.

evan price said:

I've got a better idea.
How about we repeal the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the 1986 Hughes Amendment, the 1989 Bush import ban, the 1994 Brady Act, and then immediately disband the "BATFE" and re-integrate them with the DEA or FBI as just another investigative branch focusing on tobacco and alcohol tax crimes?

Click to expand...

absolutely best idea yet

Illinois is impossibly broke. They could just raise the price on FOID cards to about $5000.

What? You still have all your rights. Stop complaining. Then next year it will be $6000. It would really help to keep all those troublesome lower classes in line.

To hell with a whole bunch of FOID cards!

Tennessee state constitution 1870 protects the citizen's right to keep and bear arms and reserves the power of the Legislature to regulate with a view to prevent crime (court rulings hold that regulation cannot unduly restrict any of the traditional lawful uses of arms).

Now, if regulation with a view to prevent crime is OK, that regulation must impact crime, not impact lawful ownership or use.

Would a National FOID impact crime, and would the cost exceed the benefits? REMEMBER people CANADA abandoned the national long gun registry because it cost too much and did too little, and for the 2.7 billion they spendt over 17 years on that fiasco, they could have fielded an addition 2,000 policemen fully funded for each of those 17 years. With a practically guaranteed impact on law and order and crime reduction.

Would an FOID impact crime?

OK, how do criminals acquire guns?

James D. Wright and Peter Rossi, "Armed and Considered Dangerous", (Aldine 1986, 2nd ed 2008, ISBN-13: 978-0202362427), the NIJ Felon Survey 1,874 felons convicted of armed crime, 18 prisons, 10 states. The felons surveyed "obtain guns in hard-to-regulate ways from hard-to-regulate sources. . . Swaps, purchases, and trades among private parties (friends and family members) represent the dominant pattern of acquisition within the illicit firearms market." Criminals simply are less likely to go to legal sources, such as gun shops, sporting goods stores or pawnbrokers. Authors' summary at: http://www.rkba.org/research/wright/armed-criminal.summary.html

Of gun using felons,
50% expected to unlawfully purchase a gun through unregulated channels within a week of release from custody: friends (mostly fellow criminals), from "the street" (used guns from strangers), from fences or the blackmarket or drug dealers (who often run guns along with drugs);
25% expected to be able to borrow a gun from a fellow criminal,
about 12% expected to steal a gun for personal use.
7% cited licensed gun dealers and 6% cited pawnshops (usually through a surrogate buyer, a family member or lover).

40% of the felons surveyed reported stealing firearms mostly for resale.
Sources stolen from included:
37% stole from stores,
15% from police,
16% from truck shipments,
8% from manufacturers.
At most 21% from individuals.

My home town and home county were dry until 1968. I was 17 in 1965. I knew the locations of seven bootlegging joints. Some of the bootleggers ran guns as a sideline. So I have no faith in prohibition, and I view banning or restricting legal X as creating a black market in X. My gut feeling is a national FOID would have little benefit, high costs, and unintended consequences.