If There Were No Antis What Gun Laws Would You Have?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you'll accept an unsolicited piece of advice, be careful when making assumptions about the person behind the online personality. Over the last decade and a half I've adopted assorted online personas for use in various fora. The limited personal information I divulge is accurate in each case, but can be very misleading, sometimes by design. It's not always about privacy concerns. It's often just role playing. Attorneys in practice adopt a different persona in court depending on the case they are trying, and online discussion and debate is quite similar to that for me. I am not alone in that.
 
Over the last decade and a half I've adopted assorted online personas for use in various fora. The limited personal information I divulge is accurate in each case, but can be very misleading, sometimes by design.
The most interesting thing I have read in this thread.
 
Vern, I don't know why you luimp me in with the antis. I have a CCW, I carry every day, and I think everyone who can own a firearm should be able to carry concealed. My points about crime had nothing to do with CCW permits.
Hey, Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer have carry permits, too. Just like you, they only want to limit "who can own a firearm."

Do you intend to respond to my requests for citations, or shall we just dismiss your claims as unsupportable?
 
The Duke of Whatever said:
Over the last decade and a half I've adopted assorted online personas for use in various fora. The limited personal information I divulge is accurate in each case, but can be very misleading, sometimes by design.

And Walkalong replied:
The most interesting thing I have read in this thread.
Revealing, too.:p
 
The most interesting thing I have read in this thread.
Let's not blow it out of proportion

Do you intend to respond to my requests for citations, or shall we just dismiss your claims as unsupportable?
He cited a book. A book cite is still a cite. Just because it's not on the internet doesn't make it untrue or unsupported.
 
Walkalong: "The most interesting thing I have read in this thread."

Well, it should make sense that "Duke the Gun Nut" will act and talk differently than "Duke the Wine Connoissoir", "Duke the Journalist", "Duke the Civic Leader" or "Duke the Battlefield Excavator."
 
1. No sales of long arms to those under 18.

2. No sales of handguns to or possession by those under 21.

3. No sales to or possession by aliens illegally in the United States.

4. No sales to those prohibited by court order (subject to strict 2nd Amendment scrutiny) from possessing a firearm.

5. No sales to those adjudicated mentally incompetent, unless and until adjudicated mentally competent.

6. No sales to those renouncing their citizenship, unless and until citizenship restored.

7. No sales of full auto weapons without the purchaser paying a substantial bond and completing either an authorized extensive training course or military qualification.

8. No export of firearms without federal export license.

9. No import of firearms without federal import license.

10. No manufacture of firearms other than for personal use without federal manufacturing license.

11. No sale of firearms not meeting reasonable safety standards, said standards based solely on safe operation of firearm as designed, and NOT to include safety devices, locks, or specific features or designs.

12. Destructive devices subject to system similar to current system.

13. Firearms on airplanes must be checked and secured in baggage, inaccessible to passengers.

14. No sales to or possession by members of an organization dedicated to violence against the American people or their lawful representatives or agents.

15. No sales to or possession by agents of foreign governments, INCLUDING diplomatic personnel, except as provided by international agreement or military protocol.

16. No possession of, IN A PUBLIC PLACE, by persons otherwise prohibited from firearm possession of realistic non-guns. Realistic non-gun is defined as a non-gun likely to be mistaken for a genuine firearm by a non-expert. A rebuttable presumption that a firearm is NOT realistic is created by the addition of a conspicuous orange colored muzzle cap.

I just noticed that you'd have all of that but no FFL system. I take it buying a gun off the internet and having it shipped directly to my home is OK with you?
 
Well, it should make sense that "Duke the Gun Nut" will act and talk differently than "Duke the Wine Connoissoir", "Duke the Journalist", "Duke the Civic Leader" or "Duke the Battlefield Excavator."

Or "Duke the Schizoid off His Medication.":rolleyes:
 
Interesting question. I suppose so; the real issue is whether I support background checks performed by FFLs. Without them, the other provisions I support are incapable of much enforcement other than by draconian penalties, and without a background check, FFLs aren't all that useful to my preferred system. I'll have to think about that.

But I support private sales, and the state line restrictions exist only to allow states to enact stricter laws, which I do not support. So if every state is the same, there is no need for FFLs in a world of private sales, unless you want to control guns generally. As I do not, well, let's say that on a preliminary basis I'd support abolishing the FFL system and background checks.
 
If you don't want background checks then.
1. No sales of long arms to those under 18.

2. No sales of handguns to or possession by those under 21.

3. No sales to or possession by aliens illegally in the United States.

4. No sales to those prohibited by court order (subject to strict 2nd Amendment scrutiny) from possessing a firearm.

5. No sales to those adjudicated mentally incompetent, unless and until adjudicated mentally competent.

6. No sales to those renouncing their citizenship, unless and until citizenship restored.

14. No sales to or possession by members of an organization dedicated to violence against the American people or their lawful representatives or agents.

15. No sales to or possession by agents of foreign governments, INCLUDING diplomatic personnel, except as provided by international agreement or military protocol.

Are all unenforceable.
 
Enforcement would be by sanction against the buyer and seller. Compliance rates might fall, though. It's like income taxes before wage withholding.
 
Vern: "Or "Duke the Schizoid off His Medication.""

Again, taking the high road, eh?

Suppose I am a thorazine-chugging homicidal psychopath. Do you really think it wise to make fun of emotional disturbances?
 
How could you hold the seller responsible if there is no background check? They have no way to know if someone falls into one of your forbidden classes. For example if I sell a gun to some guy in the classifieds here I don't know if he has a court order against him.
 
Are all unenforceable.

Checking a valid drivers license would take care of items 1 - 3. (Assuming that illegal aliens aren't legally permitted to get a drivers license)
 
Just because we get rid of FFLs doesn't mean we can't hold sellers accountable. NICS could be available for private sales, at the option of the seller, with consequences to the seller for illegal sales whether he uses NICS or not. Essentially he'd sell out of his car trunk, but at his peril.
 
jf: "So you'd basically require background checks on person to person sales."

Not at all. I specifically said, "at the option of the seller."

I thought you were the one who hated prevention, and preferred to wait until someone commits a crime to punish them.

If a seller wants to use NICS, he may sleep easier if he is selling to strangers by using NICS. But if he is selling to his son, he probably won't bother to use NICS. If he's a rugged individualist and a risk taker, he can sell to anyone he likes without NICS -- at his peril. He may never make an illegal sale, and may never get into trouble.
 
JD: "The most amazing thread in the short history(12-24-2002) of THR, without a doubt.I said in post #113, "100 more posts and you will not budge him one inch(the Duke)."Now ,we are up to #375 and the verbiage is still flowing.Love him or hate him ,troll or patriot,my hat has to be off to the Duke.
As Irving Berlin always said,"the most important thing is 'That it's entertainment'."And ladies and gentlemen,it has been."


Thanks, JD. Of course, I do this sort of thing for a living.
 
What would stop someone from doing background checks on people who WEREN'T buying a gun from them? Oh and without a yellow sheet getting filled out how would you prove who sold the gun in the first place? Take the criminals word for it?
 
JD: "The most amazing thread in the short history(12-24-2002) of THR, without a doubt.I said in post #113, "100 more posts and you will not budge him one inch(the Duke)."Now ,we are up to #375 and the verbiage is still flowing.Love him or hate him ,troll or patriot,my hat has to be off to the Duke.
As Irving Berlin always said,"the most important thing is 'That it's entertainment'."And ladies and gentlemen,it has been."

DOD:
Thanks, JD. Of course, I do this sort of thing for a living.

God help your clients. They will need it during the sentencing when the get the maximum.
 
jf: "What would stop someone from doing background checks on people who WEREN'T buying a gun from them? Oh and without a yellow sheet getting filled out how would you prove who sold the gun in the first place? Take the criminals word for it?"

Nothing. You can do a background check on anyone you like, right now.

As to the chain of title, that's an issue with every private sale, today. I'm not a utopian, unlike some.
 
Titan: "God help your clients. They will need it during the sentencing when the get the maximum."

What the heck is this all about?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top