National FOID?, gun law idea

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

I'm guessing you are anti gun rights, and came onto the forum not to learn but to instead push your libral agenda. You didn't want to listen to the 4 pages of comments you received on your brilliant idea.

Now report back to the Obama commission. Go ahead hurry, you won't get this through without continued panic.
 
This is not a national application of the FOID law, this is the idea of a nationally recognized Firearms Card showing that the person holding it has been checked out and does not face the ownership hurdles.
But thank you for your replies and it

What if you had to have a National Right to Speak Card just to post on this forum.

You know, the government needs to check your background and make sure you aren't promoting any sort of inflammatory or illegal behavior. You wouldn't be able to use the internet or a telephone without a NRS Card...

Or maybe, unless you have a background check to make sure you are ok, the Police ought to be able to walk into your home and check around without a warrant. Maybe they ought to do it on a weekly basis.
 
What if you had to have a National Right to Speak Card just to post on this forum.

You know, the government needs to check your background and make sure you aren't promoting any sort of inflammatory or illegal behavior. You wouldn't be able to use the internet or a telephone without a NRS Card...

Or maybe, unless you have a background check to make sure you are ok, the Police ought to be able to walk into your home and check around without a warrant. Maybe they ought to do it on a weekly basis.
When people open their mouths to speak their minds, people don't fall over dead as a result of them being irresponsible. There is a notable difference between free speech and owning a gun.

Having a means of proving someone should legally be able to purchase a gun would be nice...however I think that should remain as a background check by an FFL, not necessarily some card everyone has to carry around.

I have an Illinois FOID. It's never caused me an ounce of trouble. It did take awhile to get it after i sent my application in...which I certainly could feel like it infringed on my rights - and as long as it took, yeah it was not cool. But since receiving it, it's not been an issue. It's just a stupid card that is a revenue stream for the state.
 
When people open their mouths to speak their minds, people don't fall over dead as a result of them being irresponsible. There is a notable difference between free speech and owning a gun.


Yet, people speaking their minds have led to millions of deaths.

Irresponsibility can cause harm without firearms being involved.

It is pretty sad that so many people who are supposedly pro gun, are so willing to give in to madness and stupidity like gun registration and ID cards. Things which will not stop the violence, and things which are only a step away from outright bans.

It is pretty sad that people think it is ok to strip away rights as a preventative method, when the actual criminals are dealt with so haphazardly, and when there are so many other preventative measures which could be taken which would not strip away rights. All of it fueled by cowardice and ignorance.
 
So, you are OK with "Don't Ask Don't Tell" as a way to prevent prohibited folks from acquiring firearms through private sales?
Yes. That's how it is and that's how it should be, until we managed to dump GCA '68 and the whole thing becomes a moot point anyway.
 
Yet, people speaking their minds have led to millions of deaths.

Irresponsibility can cause harm without firearms being involved.

It is pretty sad that so many people who are supposedly pro gun, are so willing to give in to madness and stupidity like gun registration and ID cards. Things which will not stop the violence, and things which are only a step away from outright bans.

It is pretty sad that people think it is ok to strip away rights as a preventative method, when the actual criminals are dealt with so haphazardly, and when there are so many other preventative measures which could be taken which would not strip away rights. All of it fueled by cowardice and ignorance.

Where did I say that it was okay to have gun registration and ID cards? I called the Illinois FOID card stupid (at best it's a revenue stream, at its worst it's an infringement on my rights), and I said specifically I did NOT want some card everyone had to carry around. I am in fact in favor of all legal transfers to occur through dealers, with a background check (I know some aren't, but I am - if you can legally own a gun, you have nothing to fear from a background check except the fee to conduct the transfer).

Free speech may lead to millions of deaths, but it is still not the immediate threat of someone with a gun intent on harm. Free speech is not the same thing as the right to keep and bear arms, they are wholly separate rights each with their own issues.
 
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!
Don't give them any ideas!

This does show just how slippery of a slope the ID card notion really is, though.
 
if you can legally own a gun, you have nothing to fear from a background check except the fee to conduct the transfer
Criminal background checks violate the presumption of innocence (which was once the cornerstone of the U.S. justice system.
And such checks violate the privacy of the citizen.
And such checks violate our Constitutional Right against unwarranted search and seizure.

Besides, there have been so many laws written over this nation's history that practically every citizen is a criminal (often unknowingly)....

Have you ever exceeded the speed limit?
Have you ever jay walked?
Have you ever cursed in public or spit on the sidewalk (illegal in many places)?
Have you ever parked illegally?
Have you ever taken some medicine prescribed to someone else, like you had a migraine headache and a buddy gave you one of his prescribed migraine tablets?
Have you ever taken mail from your neighbor's mailbox while they were on vacation?
Have you ever connected to a wifi spot without permission from the wifi provider?
Ever used an alias when registering on a website, like on this forum?
Ever post a pic that you didn't personally take or get permission to post from the owner of that pic?
Ever play cards, or golf, or shoot some billiards for some money (illegal in many places)?

The list goes on and on...
These days it's a very rare man who is not a criminal.
 
you have nothing to fear

Really now, the whole "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" line is quite overused in the justification of tyranny under the guise of "security"
 
Free speech is not the same thing as the right to keep and bear arms, they are wholly separate rights each with their own issues.

They are both rights...and both need to be protected.

Neither of them should be violated in order to protect against danger.

You can say they are nothing alike all you want, but we have seen too often people who are all too willing to make excuses for why one or the other should be violated.
 
ewlyon said:
Hey all I wanted to know what you think of an idea that I have been thinking about for a while.
I think that it is time for a national set of comprehensive gun laws to be adopted to replace most state gun laws as well as the relevant federal laws. I also think that the best way to make this happen in a way that would benefit everyone involved would be to introduce hurdles to ownership that the individual could have removed. I do not like the idea of restricting what can be owned, and believe that it is important to protect the rights of the person who owns 1 gun and the person who owns 100.
So what I am thinking about is a national FOID system. This would differ from the IL system in that people without FOIDs would still be able to purchase firearms, but may have to deal with waiting periods and certain other hurdles to ownership, so long as they are reasonable and do not allow room for bureaucratic ownership restriction.
Individuals with FOIDs would be able to purchase firearms without the hurdles, however the application process for the FOID would be on the order of a few months and acceptance would be based on all current criteria for legal gun ownership as well as having a record clean of substance abuse indicators such as DUIs and possibly a drug test. In addition they would have to notify their CLEO (notify only), and keep a record book of transfers. Basically it would be similar to getting a C&R but it would apply to all firearms. This would also possibly allow a change in the laws so that modern firearms could be shipped to the license holders home.
The Oxford English Dictionary doesn't have enough expletives to express my feelings towards this one. I'm sure plenty of other posters have expressed the same reasons that I have for saying:

No.
 
perhaps instead of eating time playing a game of how to compromise or rights, would be better off contacting elected representatives to voice disapproval of any further endorsements on a basic civil liberty.

Heck, we haven't even heard what the action proposals are yet, and some of you are ready to give away the farm, sight unseen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top