Responsible Firearms ownership

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:49 pm

Ruffshoter,

I like your thoughts, but here is what is wrong with your proposal:

It is an infringement.

Time. Many jurisdictions will make you wait hours.

Cost, it will be 5 - 10 times your $10.00

Won't help - all of the recent murders would have passed the background check.

What about family members?

It is just another step in a total ban, their end goal.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:33 pm

Neil:
I understand It would not stop the latest killings, but what it helps and I say helps is the purchase of weapons by criminals from us legal citizens, It may have some effect on the reduction of weapons purchased with out checks. I know the Chinese, Mexican and other places are smuggling fire arms into the country for use against us through gangs or groups, we as citizens wont affect that much. But we can help some and show we are somewhat reasonable.

Here in Maine we have a magazine where you put free private adds for most anything including guns, there is not way to tell who you are selling a gun to.

Right now back ground checks are free unless i am missing a line on my purchase invoices.

I think it may help stem the tide of all the uninformed people from demanding or supporting a total
ban on private firearms sales.

As far as family members we obviously should not sell or give a weapon to the mentally disturbed or criminals, and maybe they should.

What I do now for selling any firearms is to ask for a photo ID or a hunting license or concealed weapons permit. That does not do much but is what I have chosen to do. If one does not want to do this then they do not purchase a gun from me.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:04 pm

Ruffshooter wrote:I know the Chinese, Mexican and other places are smuggling fire arms into the country for use against us through gangs or groups, we as citizens wont affect that much. But we can help some and show we are somewhat reasonable.

If only. Maybe we should get the US Government out of the illegal trafficking of guns. Fast & Furious comes to mind.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:26 pm

NICS is free, but only available for those with a FFL, and is part of the license fee, and is not available to the public. You are proposing local law enforcement, and they will charge, and where they don't want you to have guns, they will charge a lot.

Seems like the Feinstine bill calls for a $75.00 FBI fee. I will check and get back to you.

I checked, Forbes estimates the fees to be $200 per purchase.

cohanzick creek · Post by **cohanzick creek** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:56 pm

NICS, is not free in New Jersey. Costs $15 dollars everytime i purchase a fire arm. And it is performed by local state troopers. I dont see anythign wrong with that kind of system, but for instant backround checks thats as far as I go. And Banning guns is not going to help the mentally ill, and crazies
, that want to kill you Gun Safety starts at home. Mom and Dad's have to know when they have mentally challenged children. Until loved ones can step up to the plate and realize guns dont belong at home that have the potential of using them against people
cc

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:24 pm

Ruffshooter wrote:
ACooper wrote:If you are a gun owner you should be a member of the NRA.

Nothing about registration sounds good, nothing at all.

I do think there needs to be some kind of solution to making it more difficult for criminals to get guns, granted I realize that they will find a way to get them no matter what we do. I do not have a problem with making it more difficult for them even if it is slightly more inconvenient for me.
What about something in this direction affecting private sales and gun shows/
Please be nice. I am very sensitive.
I am an NRA memeber have a dozen or so weapons etc.
What do you see that is inherantly wrong with this approach? Seriously.
Private Fire Arms Purchase Bill;
1) Premise of this Bill:
a. To reduce the incidents of illegal fire arms sales to criminals from private citizens.
b. To protect the seller of another’s illegal attempts to acquire legal weapons from legal citizens.
c. Right up front this will keep most intelligent criminals from trying to purchase firearms from private citizens thus protecting the public and the private citizen from being in contact with the alleged criminal.
Body of Bill:

1) Provide Law enforcement with the ability to institute a Federal and State Background check on the potential purchaser at the local governing law enforcement office.
2) The citizen would go to the local law enforcement agency and submit information for a back ground check.
3) Upon successfully passing the back ground check, the law enforcement agency would, hand the citizen, a certificate stating that the citizen that passed the back ground check.
4) The Certificate would be good for 21 days. This allows the citizen to find the weapon and make his or her deal to purchase the weapon.
5) When a legal citizen finds their desired weapons, The citizen must provide the seller with proper positive back ground certificate and two forms of ID one of which must be a State photo ID. The other a federal ID or Birth certificate.
6) Once the transaction is complete a copy of the Bill of Sale, certificate and the ID information will be submitted to the local law enforcement agency that will keep on hand for 90 days then will be destroyed.
7) The owner will keep their same records on hand for 90 days then destroyed.
A Fee of $10 dollars will be charged. $3.00 for Fed. $7.00 for the local law enforcement agency that instituted the Back Ground Check.
9) Gun shows should have Back ground checks or the purchaser could have this back ground check done in advance of a show.

Submitted by:

That is kind of the idea that I had. The issue would be what would it really cost?

kensfishing · Post by **kensfishing** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:54 pm

cohanzick creek wrote:NICS, is not free in New Jersey. Costs $15 dollars everytime i purchase a fire arm. And it is performed by local state troopers. I dont see anythign wrong with that kind of system, but for instant backround checks thats as far as I go. And Banning guns is not going to help the mentally ill, and crazies
, that want to kill you Gun Safety starts at home. Mom and Dad's have to know when they have mentally challenged children. Until loved ones can step up to the plate and realize guns dont belong at home that have the potential of using them against people
cc

The NICS calls are free to the dealer who is selling the firearm. They are charging you for their service. Sold guns for many years. It's up to the people who you buy your guns from. We never charged for someone who bought a gun from us, but charged for a gun transfer from someone else.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:59 pm

I missed number 9 above. All sales from a dealer at a gun show requires a background NOW! There is no such thing as a gun show loophole. Private sales do not, and should not.

You guys are falling for the left's lies. And that scares me.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:33 am

All firearms dealers must perform back ground checks for any firearm they sell.
Not sure but I am 99% sure if you are private citizen having a booth at a gun show you are not required to perform a Back ground check. Please understand, this is for discussion. And i am speaking of the current Instant back ground check.

You are right there is a cost for the back ground check, (I am not sure how it shows up) but what I should have said was we already are charged. I am looking at the additional cost.

Neil: I do not want to go down the slippery slope but there are more and more criminals and there are just not enough people that look past the almighty dollar and sell to anyone. Those (5%) are going to get everything banned.

I believe, Fast and Furious was intended as a set up to get more regulations on dealers and gun shows. It back fired when they were caught in the act and Americans died, although not much has happened to those involved or at least I have not heard of anything.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:06 am

Ruffshooter wrote:
I believe, Fast and Furious was intended as a set up to get more regulations on dealers and gun shows. It back fired when they were caught in the act and Americans died, although not much has happened to those involved or at least I have not heard of anything.

If that had been the case, the federal government would have a procedure in which could recover said guns...like in Wide Receiver (which USA worked in concert with Mexico). Fast & Furious' method of recovery was to recover them at crime scenes and did not have Mexico's help or blessing. People should be in jail, and I'm not talking about gun dealers, people from the highest branches of the US government. And much more than Americans died, the death toll in Mexican lives (~350) will continue to grow.

Vman · Post by **Vman** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:24 am

This written by the father of a Columbine victim. He certainly has a strong case.

COLUMBINE STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER!!

Guess our national leaders didn't expect this. On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.
They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness. The following is a portion of the transcript:

"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good &evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.
"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.
"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent
I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact.
What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws.
Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him.

To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"
- Darrell Scott

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:15 am

I agree that the NRA should not be used as a scapegoat, however, I do believe that the NRA has a lot of political power and has used that power to influence law making that I believe has been detrimental to our society. Things like the ATF director needing to be approved by congress, which resulted in no ATF director for almost a decade, or the ATF not being allowed to track gun sales or background checks needing to be destroyed within 24hrs or only being able to inspect gun shops once a year or even require gun shops to keep an inventory log as little as once a year. The ATF can't even require a gun shop to not sell a gun to a drunk person. It seems like the ATF can't do anything to keeping illegal guns off the streets. Most police forces are against these laws because it makes it practically impossible to stay on top of illegal gun trafficking on the local level. Now, does the NRA want these laws in place, yes. But it's not their fault they are in place, it's congresses fault for passing BS laws like this that make it easier for the 1% of gun stores that are practicing shady business to continue doing so. IMO, it's one thing to say it's our right to own firearms (which I do believe in and I do believe that is the core of the NRA) but it's a whole other issue when you are preventing the policing of illegal gun trafficking for political reasons (which the NRA has influenced and backed.) Again, it's not the NRA's fault these laws are in place, but the fact that they support them makes it difficult for me to send my money to the NRA.

MHWH · Post by **MHWH** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:32 am

I read some place the guard at Columbine was unarmed.

The only common thread to nearly all the killers since Columbine has been
prescription psych drugs. Mind altering drugs prescribed by doctors.

The politicians want to look at movies, computer games,and guns being more available.

I am 58 years old. We watched "Combat" and The rifleman and Gunsmoke every night on TV.
Someone was shot in every show, at times many people were shot. I like the people who say
kids see more murders now than they did back then. There are no network TV shows during
prime time that show people being shot like 30-40 years ago. We have cop shows NCIS, etc.
most of the time the shooting is not shown. The result, a dead body is shown. I don't see much
prime time network TV, but I believe we saw many more shootings in network prime time TV
back when I was young.

Then some want to say guns are more available now. Really? Every house had guns in them when
I was growing up. Many were loaded for home defense, coyotes, etc. I had a shotgun in the trunk of
my car during the hunting season when I went to HS every day. I stood in the parking lot of my HS looking
over a friends new shotgun when the truant officer came by and told us to get back to class. He did not
even mention the gun we were looking over.

If the drugs are an integral part of the problem what do we do? The Mom in Newton apparently left the guns
accessible to a young man who she knew was unbalanced. She bought these guns legally. Like others have said
you can't legislate common sense. She was stupid in the way she did this and lots of people are suffering because
of this. I don't know the answer to keeping guns away from people who have serious enough problems that they
need drugs which have the side effect of suicidal feelings. You know the TV ads, "If you have suicidal feelings after taking
XXX stop taking it and call your doctor."

I do know that the recent proposals are not going to do anything to stop this. We simply need to protect our children.
Armed police officers, and teachers, administrators, janitors, carrying concealed. The ones who want to, and are trained.
Then everyone should know this is the situation, but no one knows which staff members are armed. It is like the sky marshall
program, there may or may not be one on your flight, and if you knew you would not know which guy it is. It is a deterrent.

These killers are crazy not stupid which is why they choose gun free zones.

We have fire alarms and sprinklers in all schools. Good idea for the rare occurrence that there could be a fire.
Why are ideas to protect our children like the one stated above seen by some as the ideas of gun toting, un-educated,
rednecks. It is common sense, but then that rarely makes any progress in our political environment.

More than I ever posted here before, but it is a concern we all need to think about.

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:05 pm

New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:12 pm

cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj

College in Texas happening now.

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:31 pm

cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj

These things happen every day. The only reason you are hearing about them now is because of the Conn shooting. The media didn't care before.

Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia.

:roll:

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:12 pm

brad27 wrote:
cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj
These things happen every day. The only reason you are hearing about them now is because of the Conn shooting. The media didn't care before.

Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia.
:roll:

I'm not sure why you roll your eyes at that. Its a valid point and the fact that these things happen everyday only strengthens the point. The 2nd amendment states "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The argument could be made that a certain standard must be passed in order to exercise your right to bear arms. The Supreme Court has defined well regulated as proper discipline and training. There is still differing views as to how "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" should be interpreted. Obviously none of us wish for it to be defined as for militia use only, but there are justices that walk close to that definition. Some claim the absence of a phrase along the lines of "...for the defense of themselves," as many state constitutions include, shows that the founding fathers only intended arms for military use. Luckily we have District of Columbia vs. Heller in the history books to confirm that the right goes beyond military use. However it also says that the right to bear arms isn't unlimited and you can't just have any weapon and carry it where ever, however you please.

MillerClemsonHD · Post by **MillerClemsonHD** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:30 pm

You guys just don't get it. The drug dealers and those involved in gang activities are responsible for most gun violence. They are CAREER criminals not someone who makes a bad choice. You can pass as many laws as you want and they will not follow them. Their chosen profession drug dealing is ILLEGAL and that doesn't stop them. They will continue to commit crimes and use a gun to commit many of them. Outlaw every gun in the US and you know what they do CONTINUE to buy guns on the black market. Outlaw magazines and AR's, last time I checked there are a few already floating around in the US. One of these lunatics that are shooting up schools can't get a gun, maybe next time they will use a bomb. Wont be the first time in history that has happened.

Come back to reality. There has never been a law passed by the government that was able to prevent someone from breaking it. Go do some research and realize what a small percentage of deaths in the US are caused by guns and gun violence. We have much bigger problems!

Heart disease, cancer, car accidents all kill more than guns. Should we outlaw every cause of these things?

Should the gov require genetic testing (background checks) and licensing (CWP) for people to have children? Should the government hold the parents responsible for any actions of their children for their whole life since they are the ones who raised them? As we continue to infringe on the rights of some individuals where will it stop?

DogNewbie wrote:
brad27 wrote:
cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj
These things happen every day. The only reason you are hearing about them now is because of the Conn shooting. The media didn't care before.

Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia.
:roll:
I'm not sure why you roll your eyes at that. Its a valid point and the fact that these things happen everyday only strengthens the point. The 2nd amendment states "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The argument could be made that a certain standard must be passed in order to exercise your right to bear arms. The Supreme Court has defined well regulated as proper discipline and training. There is still differing views as to how "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" should be interpreted. Obviously none of us wish for it to be defined as for militia use only, but there are justices that walk close to that definition. Some claim the absence of a phrase along the lines of "...for the defense of themselves," as many state constitutions include, shows that the founding fathers only intended arms for military use.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:39 pm

MillerClemsonHD wrote:You guys just don't get it. The drug dealers and those involved in gang activities are responsible for most gun violence. They are CAREER criminals not someone who makes a bad choice. You can pass as many laws as you want and they will not follow them. Their chosen profession drug dealing is ILLEGAL and that doesn't stop them. They will continue to commit crimes and use a gun to commit many of them. Outlaw every gun in the US and you know what they do CONTINUE to buy guns on the black market. Outlaw magazines and AR's, last time I checked there are a few already floating around in the US. One of these lunatics that are shooting up schools can't get a gun, maybe next time they will use a bomb. Wont be the first time in history that has happened.

Come back to reality. There has never been a law passed by the government that was able to prevent someone from breaking it. Go do some research and realize what a small percentage of deaths in the US are caused by guns and gun violence. We have much bigger problems!

Heart disease, cancer, car accidents all kill more than guns. Should we outlaw every cause of these things?

Should the gov require genetic testing (background checks) and licensing (CWP) for people to have children? Should the government hold the parents responsible for any actions of their children for their whole life since they are the ones who raised them? As we continue to infringe on the rights of some individuals where will it stop?

What about the laws that make it impossibly difficult to track weapons bought legally and used in crimes, like over 50% of the guns use in crimes are. What about the laws that don't require gun shops to record lost or stolen weapons? What about the laws that prevent the ATF from sharing data with local police? Data that would help them track illegally trafficked weapons and give them info on how illegal guns are getting into their state. Why on earth would we ever pass these laws in the first place. It makes no sense.

MillerClemsonHD · Post by **MillerClemsonHD** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:00 pm

Yeah ATF and DOJ has proven they are very competent at tracking weapons!!

What good does tracking a gun legally purchased? A very small % of crimes are committed by the person who legally purchased the gun. Stats I saw around 6% not 50. If someone breaks into my house (they already broke laws) and steals guns from my house that then up being used in a crime I in no way should be held responsible for what is done with them after I report them stolen. Why do they need to track all of these guns? Is that so they have a complete list of where to go come confiscation time? None of that will make anyone any safer.

The point you are missing is there is no reason to punish law abiding citizens. Criminals will break laws no matter what you do.

DogNewbie wrote:
MillerClemsonHD wrote:You guys just don't get it. The drug dealers and those involved in gang activities are responsible for most gun violence. They are CAREER criminals not someone who makes a bad choice. You can pass as many laws as you want and they will not follow them. Their chosen profession drug dealing is ILLEGAL and that doesn't stop them. They will continue to commit crimes and use a gun to commit many of them. Outlaw every gun in the US and you know what they do CONTINUE to buy guns on the black market. Outlaw magazines and AR's, last time I checked there are a few already floating around in the US. One of these lunatics that are shooting up schools can't get a gun, maybe next time they will use a bomb. Wont be the first time in history that has happened.

Come back to reality. There has never been a law passed by the government that was able to prevent someone from breaking it. Go do some research and realize what a small percentage of deaths in the US are caused by guns and gun violence. We have much bigger problems!

Heart disease, cancer, car accidents all kill more than guns. Should we outlaw every cause of these things?

Should the gov require genetic testing (background checks) and licensing (CWP) for people to have children? Should the government hold the parents responsible for any actions of their children for their whole life since they are the ones who raised them? As we continue to infringe on the rights of some individuals where will it stop?
What about the laws that make it impossibly difficult to track weapons bought legally and used in crimes, like over 50% of the guns use in crimes are. What about the laws that don't require gun shops to record lost or stolen weapons? What about the laws that prevent the ATF from sharing data with local police? Data that would help them track illegally trafficked weapons and give them info on how illegal guns are getting into their state. Why on earth would we ever pass these laws in the first place. It makes no sense.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:13 pm

MillerClemsonHD wrote:The point you are missing is there is no reason to punish law abiding citizens. Criminals will break laws no matter what you do.

Punishment may not always rise to the same definition for everyone.

Good to also remember that not all law-abiding folks remain law-abiding.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:26 pm

MillerClemsonHD wrote:Yeah ATF and DOJ has proven they are very competent at tracking weapons!!

What good does tracking a gun legally purchased? A very small % of crimes are committed by the person who legally purchased the gun. Stats I saw around 6% not 50. If someone breaks into my house (they already broke laws) and steals guns from my house that then up being used in a crime I in no way should be held responsible for what is done with them after I report them stolen. Why do they need to track all of these guns? Is that so they have a complete list of where to go come confiscation time? None of that will make anyone any safer.

The point you are missing is there is no reason to punish law abiding citizens. Criminals will break laws no matter what you do.

How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it.

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:56 pm

brad27 wrote:
cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj
These things happen every day. The only reason you are hearing about them now is because of the Conn shooting. The media didn't care before.

Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia.
:roll:

So does this mean shootings shouldn't be news worthy and should be ignored. All the guns above with the possible exception of one were legal and owned by law abiding people until they decided to shoot someone or had a accident..
Incidentally, I do get it very well. What some people don't seem to get is that there is a problem and if you just bury your head in the sand and pretend there is not, sooner or later the antis will win. What do you think the headlines I posted sound like to someone whom is neutral or leaning toward anti gun sentiment.
There is also a lot of talk about not allowing prayer in school, but if amendments give you the right to have a gun they also give you the right not to be subjected to somebody elses religion. Either you believe in the amendments or you don't, you can't pick and choose Cj

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:56 pm

DogNewbie wrote:
MillerClemsonHD wrote:Yeah ATF and DOJ has proven they are very competent at tracking weapons!!

What good does tracking a gun legally purchased? A very small % of crimes are committed by the person who legally purchased the gun. Stats I saw around 6% not 50. If someone breaks into my house (they already broke laws) and steals guns from my house that then up being used in a crime I in no way should be held responsible for what is done with them after I report them stolen. Why do they need to track all of these guns? Is that so they have a complete list of where to go come confiscation time? None of that will make anyone any safer.

The point you are missing is there is no reason to punish law abiding citizens. Criminals will break laws no matter what you do.
How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it.

So when the bad guys knock on the door and ask permission to enter, I'll ask them to wait...I gotta get my StreetSweeper outaa the safe. :roll:

dreamerofdreams · Post by **dreamerofdreams** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:16 pm

Registration is required for tracking. Registration has also, historically throughout the world, been a prelude to confiscation.

Additionally, tracking via registration Does Not Work. See Canada, see California, see any number of examples. It does not prevent crime and is not effective at solving it either.

Those of you seeing lots of shootings on the news need to remember all the defensive gun uses that never make the news.

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:24 pm

cjhills wrote:
brad27 wrote:
cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj
These things happen every day. The only reason you are hearing about them now is because of the Conn shooting. The media didn't care before.

Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia.
:roll:
So does this mean shootings shouldn't be news worthy and should be ignored. All the guns above with the possible exception of one were legal and owned by law abiding people until they decided to shoot someone or had a accident..
Incidentally, I do get it very well. What some people don't seem to get is that there is a problem and if you just bury your head in the sand and pretend there is not, sooner or later the antis will win. What do you think the headlines I posted sound like to someone whom is neutral or leaning toward anti gun sentiment.
There is also a lot of talk about not allowing prayer in school, but if amendments give you the right to have a gun they also give you the right not to be subjected to somebody elses religion. Either you believe in the amendments or you don't, you can't pick and choose Cj

Whats the problem? People killing people with guns? We've always had that problem and will always have it ( even if the government decided to outlaw every gun and demand people turn them over. ) PEOPLE WOULD STILL DIE FROM GUNS. Our problem in this country isn't the guns, it's the people.

Is it strictly a body count number for you that you have a problem with? I can think of a few things that kill more people per day then guns.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:29 pm

Wyndancer wrote:
DogNewbie wrote:
MillerClemsonHD wrote:Yeah ATF and DOJ has proven they are very competent at tracking weapons!!

What good does tracking a gun legally purchased? A very small % of crimes are committed by the person who legally purchased the gun. Stats I saw around 6% not 50. If someone breaks into my house (they already broke laws) and steals guns from my house that then up being used in a crime I in no way should be held responsible for what is done with them after I report them stolen. Why do they need to track all of these guns? Is that so they have a complete list of where to go come confiscation time? None of that will make anyone any safer.

The point you are missing is there is no reason to punish law abiding citizens. Criminals will break laws no matter what you do.
How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it.

So when the bad guys knock on the door and ask permission to enter, I'll ask them to wait...I gotta get my StreetSweeper outaa the safe. :roll:

I wager that most people who have a gun for protection have it in their bedroom. I'd wager that most burglary situations when people are home is at night. If you hear someone, what's the difference between grabbing the gun in the drawer or punching in a code and grabbing the gun. 5 seconds? Most people have their home defense weapons in a small safe already. :roll:

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:42 pm

I have a gun within a few feet of me wherever I am in the house. and often on my person. I questions the government's or your right to tell me I cannot, either legislatively or civil.

Yes, seconds matter, the bad guys do not send abvance notice. All can do as they wish, you will have to live if it proves wrong, but please don't advocate putting my family at risk.

Brazosvalleyvizslas · Post by **Brazosvalleyvizslas** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:56 pm

I have one in reach at all times also. I even have them in most rooms and only my target and recreational guns go in a safe. I wanna see a person get into a safe in 5 seconds when the adrenaline dump hits.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:07 pm

DogNewbie wrote: I wager that most people who have a gun for protection have it in their bedroom. I'd wager that most burglary situations when people are home is at night. If you hear someone, what's the difference between grabbing the gun in the drawer or punching in a code and grabbing the gun. 5 seconds? Most people have their home defense weapons in a small safe already. :roll:

So you've practiced "punching in a code" in total darkness?

How much you willing to wager?

http://www.recorder.com/home/2655685-95 ... -break-ins

Alarms Mean The Difference Between Daylight Savings & Losses
Of the residential burglaries reported in 2006, a staggering 63.1 percent occurred during the daytime. These numbers debunk a common misconception that homes get broken into mostly at night.

source: http://homesecurity.lifetips.com/faq/13 ... index.html

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:29 pm

cjhills wrote:New Mexico 15 year old shoots mother, father and siblings, Five injured in drive by shooting in New Orleans, Five people wounded accidentally at gun shows. Texas man shoots two shots into a car in which his 16 months old son is a passenger. Just a few incidents from the weekend. Does this sound to anyone like a well regulated militia. Cj

Funny how the news media doesn't cover all the murders and violent crimes stopped every year because somebody is armed. Or the person who wants to purchase a handgun for self protection because of threats made on their life and is murdered during the five day waiting period. People should read More Guns less Crime by John Lott to get the real picture on guns and the effect they have on crime.

All the laws we pass will only be followed by law abiding citizens and have no effect on crime rates but in todays world a lot of people want to make laws base on emotions not logic.

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:08 pm

I agree Dan.

And more funny that the people who sit in congress dont need to pass a back round check. heck you dont need a back round check to be president. How bads that

Garrison · Post by **Garrison** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:02 pm

Dan Buchman wrote:
brad27 wrote:
How many of you think that a Hunters Safety certificate or an educational gun course should be required to buy a firearm?
On Thursday Garrison and I headed to the local training ground to run some dogs. He got there a half hour before I did and had a story for me when I arrived. When he got there some guy showed up with what looked like a brand new shotgun. This guy proceeded to shoot every "bleep" bird he saw next to the road. He then shot across the road at a hawk and killed it. Do I think some kind of training should be required to purchase a firearm?..............
For idiots like this, yes.
That person gives us all a black eye and should have been turned into the Game Warden. Thats the only way we can stop people like that.

Wish I was able to, I saw this guy and his family when I pulled up, waited until he stopped firing and took my dogs as far away as I could get. I was up on a hill when I heard the gun shot and saw the hawk fall. The car was gone before I could get a plate number. I guess they do things a little different in the part of the world these folks came from.

Post by **ezzy333** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:46 pm

How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it

The point is well made with this statement, I believe. That doesn't make it right. I don't believe so now we are at a stalemate. I base my believe on my experience since I grew up in a household much like every rural home in the country where a gun was hanging over a door in the kitchen or maybe in the barn or hog house, where ever it was needed. And it never entered our head to use it to shoot someone. My kids and now my grand kids have grown up with guns in the house and not locked up. I spent the time to show the kids what the guns were and the dangers they presented and the kids made no effort to do anything with them since they were just a tool that had to be respected and they didn't need to wait for us to be gone so they could sneak around to see how this dreadful tool was all bout because they weren't allowed to see, handle, or shoot this tool when we were home. But the basis of the respect for a gun is taught at home and so many don't take the time to do that or take the time to teach how they are to be used. When you tell a kid they can't do something I can almost guarantee they will try to find out why and how the minute you aren't there to control the situation. Just takes some education, experience, and most of all a respect for life and we have taken it all away so now we live with the rewards of our actions and blame the tool.

Do you remember when the government wanted to do away with SUV's because they used too much gas and weren't fair since in a collision they always won when matched with the Yugo. The news would always report normal car accidents as someone crashed into someone else. But if a SUV was involved it was always that a SUV crashed into someone. They still do it most of the time, Just another case of blaming what ever they want to get rid of and sadly a lot of people buy it. Look what has happened in Australia and learn.

Ezzy

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:43 am

I forgot about the SUV thing but ur right

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:25 am

No one seems to like my suggestion. Mandate insurance for firearms. Let private industry investigate the mental, physical, and judicial health of the applicant. If you need to garage your car, then you should "garage" your weapons.

BTW...I am amazed that no one has mentioned how long it takes to go from one 10 shot clip to the next. Bruce Willis has been dropping clips from his sidearm and slapping a new one home...on TV .... for the last 30 years. What exactly does banning large capacity magazines do when a nut job has kids cringing on the floor in a school??

If a school, teacher, counselor, etc KNOWS that they have a problem child, a loner, that has violent tendencies.....among the first questions should be if the child has access to deadly force. It appears we can't do that because it would harm the child's rights. So...we wait for the nut job to cancel the life rights of others.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:10 am

Wyndancer wrote:
DogNewbie wrote: I wager that most people who have a gun for protection have it in their bedroom. I'd wager that most burglary situations when people are home is at night. If you hear someone, what's the difference between grabbing the gun in the drawer or punching in a code and grabbing the gun. 5 seconds? Most people have their home defense weapons in a small safe already. :roll:
So you've practiced "punching in a code" in total darkness?

How much you willing to wager?

http://www.recorder.com/home/2655685-95 ... -break-ins

Alarms Mean The Difference Between Daylight Savings & Losses
Of the residential burglaries reported in 2006, a staggering 63.1 percent occurred during the daytime. These numbers debunk a common misconception that homes get broken into mostly at night.
source: http://homesecurity.lifetips.com/faq/13 ... index.html

Go back to what I wrote. I said when people are at home. Both your articles state that most burglaries happen when no one is home, which, if anything, makes your guns that are unlocked around the house more likely to ending up at a crime scene after its stolen. I have no problem with carrying a gun on you at all times if you want, I just think it's irresponsible to leave guns unlocked unattended. If you look at the stats, about 7% of household burglaries involved some sort of violence. Of that 7%, 65% of the victims knew the offender. In addition, of the 7% of violent burglaries, 61% of the offenders were unarmed. Now, I am by no means trying to belittle the situations where an armed person does enter a house and people get hurt, I'm just trying to point out that it's much more likely your guns will get stolen and land in the wrong hands than it is that they'll prevent your property from being stolen or your family being in harms way.

Eric1542 · Post by **Eric1542** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:19 am

Mentally ill or misguided people will always find a way to do harm to others. Banning the assault rifles will just change what they use. After all if you look up the history of the car bomb...

"1920: The Wall Street bombing — Italian anarchist Mario Buda (a member of the "Galleanists") parked a horse-drawn wagon filled with explosives and shrapnel in the Financial District of New York City. The blast killed 38 and wounded 400."

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:20 am

ezzy333 wrote:
How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it
The point is well made with this statement, I believe. That doesn't make it right. I don't believe so now we are at a stalemate. I base my believe on my experience since I grew up in a household much like every rural home in the country where a gun was hanging over a door in the kitchen or maybe in the barn or hog house, where ever it was needed. And it never entered our head to use it to shoot someone. My kids and now my grand kids have grown up with guns in the house and not locked up. I spent the time to show the kids what the guns were and the dangers they presented and the kids made no effort to do anything with them since they were just a tool that had to be respected and they didn't need to wait for us to be gone so they could sneak around to see how this dreadful tool was all bout because they weren't allowed to see, handle, or shoot this tool when we were home. But the basis of the respect for a gun is taught at home and so many don't take the time to do that or take the time to teach how they are to be used. When you tell a kid they can't do something I can almost guarantee they will try to find out why and how the minute you aren't there to control the situation. Just takes some education, experience, and most of all a respect for life and we have taken it all away so now we live with the rewards of our actions and blame the tool.

Do you remember when the government wanted to do away with SUV's because they used too much gas and weren't fair since in a collision they always won when matched with the Yugo. The news would always report normal car accidents as someone crashed into someone else. But if a SUV was involved it was always that a SUV crashed into someone. They still do it most of the time, Just another case of blaming what ever they want to get rid of and sadly a lot of people buy it. Look what has happened in Australia and learn.

Ezzy

I think you make a good point when it comes to how the way you're raised effects how you view things. We only had shotguns in the house growing up and they were always locked up unless we were hunting. Dad never told us where the keys were until we were old enough to hunt on our own. Very different experience which I'm sure influences my view today.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:34 am

DogNewbie wrote:
Wyndancer wrote:
DogNewbie wrote: I wager that most people who have a gun for protection have it in their bedroom. I'd wager that most burglary situations when people are home is at night. If you hear someone, what's the difference between grabbing the gun in the drawer or punching in a code and grabbing the gun. 5 seconds? Most people have their home defense weapons in a small safe already. :roll:
So you've practiced "punching in a code" in total darkness?

How much you willing to wager?

http://www.recorder.com/home/2655685-95 ... -break-ins

Alarms Mean The Difference Between Daylight Savings & Losses
Of the residential burglaries reported in 2006, a staggering 63.1 percent occurred during the daytime. These numbers debunk a common misconception that homes get broken into mostly at night.
source: http://homesecurity.lifetips.com/faq/13 ... index.html
Go back to what I wrote. I said when people are at home. Both your articles state that most burglaries happen when no one is home, which, if anything, makes your guns that are unlocked around the house more likely to ending up at a crime scene after its stolen. I have no problem with carrying a gun on you at all times if you want, I just think it's irresponsible to leave guns unlocked unattended. If you look at the stats, about 7% of household burglaries involved some sort of violence. Of that 7%, 65% of the victims knew the offender. In addition, of the 7% of violent burglaries, 61% of the offenders were unarmed. Now, I am by no means trying to belittle the situations where an armed person does enter a house and people get hurt, I'm just trying to point out that it's much more likely your guns will get stolen and land in the wrong hands than it is that they'll prevent your property from being stolen or your family being in harms way.

Where did I say my weapons would be unlocked when I'm not at home? See, I can be pedantic as well.

Your pointing out your opinion that my weapon will be taken from me and land in the wrong hands. I could state my opinion, that given enough time, I don't care what method of home safe you use to keep your guns, somebody could get them.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:41 am

I don't care what method of home safe you use to keep your guns, somebody could get them.

This is like saying that someone can steal my car so why have keys..or lock it...or why not just leave the motor running and the door open at the mall. You take precautions to limit opportunistic crime. I should think we would want to do that for each other.

Post by **ezzy333** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:50 am

DogNewbie wrote:
ezzy333 wrote:
How would it be punishing law abiding citizens? I don't think tracking gun purchases is going to make you responsible for a stolen gun. But I would argue you're responsible to store you guns properly. I believe all guns should either be stored in a safe or with a trigger lock. People argue that will make home defense more difficult. Personally, I don't buy it
The point is well made with this statement, I believe. That doesn't make it right. I don't believe so now we are at a stalemate. I base my believe on my experience since I grew up in a household much like every rural home in the country where a gun was hanging over a door in the kitchen or maybe in the barn or hog house, where ever it was needed. And it never entered our head to use it to shoot someone. My kids and now my grand kids have grown up with guns in the house and not locked up. I spent the time to show the kids what the guns were and the dangers they presented and the kids made no effort to do anything with them since they were just a tool that had to be respected and they didn't need to wait for us to be gone so they could sneak around to see how this dreadful tool was all bout because they weren't allowed to see, handle, or shoot this tool when we were home. But the basis of the respect for a gun is taught at home and so many don't take the time to do that or take the time to teach how they are to be used. When you tell a kid they can't do something I can almost guarantee they will try to find out why and how the minute you aren't there to control the situation. Just takes some education, experience, and most of all a respect for life and we have taken it all away so now we live with the rewards of our actions and blame the tool.

Do you remember when the government wanted to do away with SUV's because they used too much gas and weren't fair since in a collision they always won when matched with the Yugo. The news would always report normal car accidents as someone crashed into someone else. But if a SUV was involved it was always that a SUV crashed into someone. They still do it most of the time, Just another case of blaming what ever they want to get rid of and sadly a lot of people buy it. Look what has happened in Australia and learn.

Ezzy

Why do we need more laws on how to store our guns when they are in the house since it is already against the law for someone to break in to the house? And what makes any of us feel qualifies to tell everyone else how to do that?

What I am hearing reminds me of the need to have a law that SAYS YOU CAN'T SELL DRUGS NEAR A SCHOOL WHEN IT IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW TO SELL DRUGS. As YOU WILL NOTICE NEITHER LAW HAS WORKED TO PREVENT THE SALE OF DRUGS ANYPLACE. if YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT PREVENTING PEOPLE BEING SHOT, START FIGURING OUT HOW YOU TEACH PEOPLE TO NOT SHOOT THEM. IT REALLY ISN'T THAT DIFFICULT AS IT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST WITHOUT ALL OF THE SENSELESS LAWS. and A GOOD PLACE TO START IS TEACHING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS AND MAKE YOU PAY SERIOUS PENALITIES FOR DISOBEYING THE LAWS INSTEAD OF WRITING MORE LAWS THAT DO NOTHING BUT TAKE A LITTLE MORE FREEDOM FROM THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY.

Post by **ezzy333** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:52 am

JKP wrote:
I don't care what method of home safe you use to keep your guns, somebody could get them.
This is like saying that someone can steal my car so why have keys..or lock it...or why not just leave the motor running and the door open at the mall. You take precautions to limit opportunistic crime. I should think we would want to do that for each other.

I think to stop people from coming into your house and shooting someone we all should buy a safe big enough we can stay in them so we won't be shot.

Ezzy

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:02 am

Wyndancer wrote: Where did I say my weapons would be unlocked when I'm not at home? See, I can be pedantic as well.

Your pointing out your opinion that my weapon will be taken from me and land in the wrong hands. I could state my opinion, that given enough time, I don't care what method of home safe you use to keep your guns, somebody could get them.

Well that's the point. You're a responsible gun owner, not everyone else is. That's how guns end up in the wrong hands and I have no problem making irresponsible gun owners be responsible gun owners.

ezzy333 wrote: Why do we need more laws on how to store our guns when they are in the house since it is already against the law for someone to break in to the house? And what makes any of us feel qualifies to tell everyone else how to do that?

What I am hearing reminds me of the need to have a law that SAYS YOU CAN'T SELL DRUGS NEAR A SCHOOL WHEN IT IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW TO SELL DRUGS. As YOU WILL NOTICE NEITHER LAW HAS WORKED TO PREVENT THE SALE OF DRUGS ANYPLACE. if YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT PREVENTING PEOPLE BEING SHOT, START FIGURING OUT HOW YOU TEACH PEOPLE TO NOT SHOOT THEM. IT REALLY ISN'T THAT DIFFICULT AS IT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST WITHOUT ALL OF THE SENSELESS LAWS. and A GOOD PLACE TO START IS TEACHING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS AND MAKE YOU PAY SERIOUS PENALITIES FOR DISOBEYING THE LAWS INSTEAD OF WRITING MORE LAWS THAT DO NOTHING BUT TAKE A LITTLE MORE FREEDOM FROM THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY.

Because people who steal guns aren't always breaking into the house. Sometimes they live there like what happened last month. I do agree with you, however, that the most important approach is mental health and making sure our children are raised so they become stable, caring, empathetic, remorseful people.

DougB · Post by **DougB** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:09 am

The whole car analogy is wrong. You do not need a license to use a car on your own property. You do not need a permit to own a car, as long as you keep off the public roads. You don't have to license the car if you keep it off the roads. When the car is used on the public roads, then the car needs a license, insurance, and the driver needs a license to operate. Following the usual analogy, you should be able to buy-registering the change in ownership-but no licenses needed or training needed until the gun is off your property. Then, the gun gets licensed and the user needs training and permit.

The Canadiens, after years of registering long gun ownership, have decided that it was a waste of millions of dollars and accomplished nothing in controlling crimes of violence. They are closing the registry. The English, with their rigid laws, have succeeded in becoming a nation of violent non gun crimes. Their violent crime rate makes ours look respectable. In 2009, they had over 2000 violent crimes per 100,000. We had about 450, including guns. And they produced Piers Morgan. All the more reason to not follow their example.

As history has shown, people who whine loud enough and long enough tend to get their way.

DogNewbie · Post by **DogNewbie** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:25 am

ezzy333 wrote:
JKP wrote:
I don't care what method of home safe you use to keep your guns, somebody could get them.
This is like saying that someone can steal my car so why have keys..or lock it...or why not just leave the motor running and the door open at the mall. You take precautions to limit opportunistic crime. I should think we would want to do that for each other.
I think to stop people from coming into your house and shooting someone we all should buy a safe big enough we can stay in them so we won't be shot.

Ezzy

Go for it. You're right it won't stop people from trying, but it sure will make it a lot harder for them to succeed. Obviously we are both being facetious but I think the point is we take certain precautions like locking our doors to prevent law breakers, why not try to prevent them even further and store our weapon responsibly. I say this knowing that many here have guns in their house that are not under lock and key and I truly hope my opinions don't offend. That is not my intention and I hope you all will argue your opinions tooth and dagger. I do see where you all are coming from. As far as you are concerned, how is it you're responsibility that some joker broke the law and stole your gun. I get that and I see why it seems backwards to make you change your ways instead of focusing on the issue of robbery. But my opinion is that we can do both and while we are figuring out the much more complicated robbery issue, simply avoiding this completely by keeping guns locked without severely changing gun owners lives makes sense.

Dan Buchman · Post by **Dan Buchman** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:07 pm

Remember the old saying of locks keep honest people honest.

If a crook wants a gun they will get a gun no matter if we lock them up or not. The locks do help in accidental shootings but will have no effect on the murder rate. Also people that commit mass shootings plan them out over a long period of time and will figure out a way to get a gun or other device to carry out their plans no matter how we store our guns or even if we ban them completely.

MillerClemsonHD · Post by **MillerClemsonHD** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:36 pm

I don't need anyone telling me how to store my possessions on my private property. Anyone accessing my home without my permission has broken a law. Most of my guns are stored in locking cabinet. This is only in hopes they wont find them or slow them down enough that they have to get out before getting them. I should not be told or forced to store my weapons or any other PERSONAL property in a way the government sees fit. You are asking the government to dictate how those of us who obey laws live our lives, because of the actions of criminals. Maybe a stronger deterrent should be used for the criminals instead of trying to bully the rest of us around. How about real punishment for thieves, and give property owners more leeway to use deadly force and maybe they will start thinking twice. What if they start going around stealing gas cans and firebombing houses and buildings are you going to tell me I have to buy a safe and lock up all of my gas cans in my garage? My house is my safe and I should be able to treat it as such.

All the attacks on the AR15 bc of Sandy Hook and it wasn't even the weapon used. They haven't given all of the details but 4 handguns were used. Sounds like limiting magazine size isn't going to prevent a similar attack either. This is what happens when you listen to people with an agenda!!

cohanzick creek · Post by **cohanzick creek** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:23 pm

amen
cc

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:40 pm

Finally spoken from straight tongue. Thank you