I can't believe our laws!

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jedidiah

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
12
I just picked up a Bersa Thunder on Friday that I purchased from my local FFL and told him that on Monday he should be receiving a Glock that I am receiving in trade from someone and that I would be in to start the paperwork.

He then informed me that even though it's used, and from a private party, since it's being mailed to him first it's just like a dealer transaction and falls under my "one every thirty days limit".

How unfreakinbelievable is that?:cuss:
 
What state?

Just vote for better gun laws.;)

Heck, my wife get's ticked off if I buy 3 or four guns a year, I can only imagine how mad she'll be if I have to buy at least twelve!:D

I wonder if that law applys to people who don't buy their guns legally?
 
Last edited:
True, I forgot the fact that if I did purchase more than one in a months time the second one would, by itself and without my prompting, lead me to commit heinous crimes against the civilian populace. Now that you mention it I am glad that the government has designed laws that will keep me from becoming a victim of my own arsenal.
 
TITLE IV SEC 23(g) "No sldfdn shall klsidfm without first lksdfjjas."

Who said laws/regs had to make sense?

As someone uses for their sig line, "What's the sense of having a waiting period if you already own guns?"

How about the idea that removal of the bayonet on an SKS 59-66 makes it more dangerous? (According to what I've read, this kind of operation takes it out of the Curio and Relic category, since it would no longer be in "as issued" condition.)
 
Last edited:
Lol, thanks for the welcome. Sorry to make my introduction on such an angry note.
 
dmack is right

Law abiding citizens do not need more than one handgun. :p
 
Don't blame the politicians, blame the electorate that put those lawmakers into office. If the people didn't want it, it wouldn't happen.
 
Shaggy,

Does that mean that if the people didn't want you to wear blue pants then they could make it illegal by voting?

Just a rhetorical question because I know this is thread drift and will get locked.

Outlaws, you beat me to it!
 
It's frustrating I know. I've learned deal with the frustration by accepting the fact that the majority of humans are basically stupid. It works like this: Gun laws are purposely designed to create the illusion of security. The politicians who make these laws count on the fact that the majority of people, being stupid, are unable to see beyond this illusion. Until a cure for idiocy is found we must just learn to live with it ...
 
Most of the people who make gun laws have no idea about guns. And it seems they are unfamiliar with the laws on the books so they just enact new ones irregardless if their is 1 law or 100 laws out there addressing the same issue.
 
{PONTIFICATION]
Naw, it's part of the inevitable culture drift that occurs in every society.

Many causes: urbanization, settlement of wild areas, media bandwagon-jumping and yellow journalism (must not touch the First Amendment!), lousy history education, Momism (coined by writer Philip Wylie in the 40s), and, not finally, rapacious politicians who're (pun intended) more interested in campaign money and votes than in Principles --and the democratization (I don't mean the party) of the political process, whereby everyone thinks this country should be governed by mass popular voting with one's belly instead of one's brain..

This list is not exhaustive.

{/PONTIFICATION}
 
Last edited:
The idea behind the one-gun-a-month BS is that the criminal element couldn't supply their entire gang with firearms-at least not quickly. Of course, the logic is, well, not there. The most erroneous assumption is that such criminals would actually buy firearms legally from a dealer. From there, the logical fallacies just snowball.

As with all other gun legislation, the creators have propogated the illusion that such laws actually affect the lawless.

But since when are our representatives interested in doing anything that really helps people or even makes sense?
 
pacodelahoya remarked:

Does that mean that if the people didn't want you to wear blue pants then they could make it illegal by voting?
Click to expand...

"First they came for those wearing blue pants, but I didn't wear blue pants, so I kept quiet. Then they came for people who ate meat, but I didn't eat meat, so I didn't care. Then they came for the cigarette smokers, but I smoke cigars, so I ignored it. Then they came for me, but there was nobody left to speak up for me."


http://www.hoboes.com/html/FireBlade/Politics/niemoller.shtml
 
Be sure and keep those guns apart. You wouldn't want to start a shoot out situation. :) The gun a month law is stupid!!!
 
Believe me, I'd love to move out of state. The wife just isn't wanting to move away from her family and when the main reason I'm wanting to move is because of gun laws it doesn't really go far in convincing her.

I think I just need to start changing my tactics and bring up concerns like: better schools, better communites, less crime. Since we have two daughters that may just work. I'd hate to play on her fears to better my own situation. But, it's for her own good isn't it???:)
 
FWIW, the dealer is correct. Once the gun is in his hands, the transfer to you must be done under the applicable federal laws, as well as local and state laws, whether that is one gun a month, or licensing, or an FOID or whatever. If he violates those laws, he loses his license and his business. Note the word "transfer", not "sale." You already bought the gun, but it had to go through a dealer for transfer to you.

Jim
 
You never told us what state you live in. VA has a one handgun a month limit, but it doesn't apply to anyone with a concealed carry license. I've purchased as many as four handguns in one month with no problem. It adds a few minutes to the approval time as the state police has to verify that you have a CC license before giving approval for the transfer.
 
Laws like that make me GLAD I live in TEXAS.
Click to expand...

Texas: where CCW permits cost 3X-4X more than in Seattle, and it's illegal to carry switchblades because they're, well, umm, extra-pointy or something.

-MV
 
Most of the people who make gun laws have no idea about guns
Click to expand...

Well said. Is anyone any safer because of a one handgun a month law? Bayonet studs are an "assault rifle" feature. I would like to see the number of murders that were committed in the past 30 years with a bayonet mounted on a rifle. This reminds me of Janet Reno at a press conference (just after Colombine I think) calling for more gun laws. One reporter asked her how does she respond to those who say we should just enforce the laws we have. Her response was, "it doesn't make a difference if we enforce them we just nee more laws".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Question on out of state pistol purchase
Replies
2
Views
387
461
4
C
  • Locked
FFL is trying to steal my father in laws pistol
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
5K
Sam1911
S
H
  • Locked
Gunbroker question
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
M
  • Locked
Is this a scam....
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
4K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
N
  • Locked
Does the seller have to receive a signed copy of the FFL before shipping?
Replies
15
Views
3K
waterhouse
W
Back
Top