You mean transferable registration? I'll pass. I could see all private sales requiring a NICS check. FFL shops would make a nice little profit, $20-50 per phone call. Of course, this wouldn't kill the illegal market because criminals have the bad habit of not obeying laws. I'd like to say firearms owners should be required to properly store and secure their firearms, but I can't see how that could be accomplished without registration. Personally, I think a person who's too poor or stupid to own, at the mininum, a gun locker, shouldn't own any firearms at all.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
How about transferable licensing between individuals as with automobiles? I'd be all for that. That way, the straw purchaser couldn't claim ignorance of the law or complain about legal second-hand sales, and second-hand sales would smell a bit more legitimate.
All private sales through NICS with 4473 filed? I'll pass.Reciprocity wrote:
You mean transferable registration? I'll pass. I could see all private sales requiring a NICS check. FFL shops would make a nice little profit, $20-50 per phone call. Of course, this wouldn't kill the illegal market because criminals have the bad habit of not obeying laws. I'd like to say firearms owners should be required to properly store and secure their firearms, but I can't see how that could be accomplished without registration. Personally, I think a person who's too poor or stupid to own, at the mininum, a gun locker, shouldn't own any firearms at all.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
How about transferable licensing between individuals as with automobiles? I'd be all for that. That way, the straw purchaser couldn't claim ignorance of the law or complain about legal second-hand sales, and second-hand sales would smell a bit more legitimate.
FFL shops charging $20-50 for this worthless service? I'll pass.
Firearm owners being required to store their firearms in a safe or locker? I'll pass.
Can't justify the need or cost for a locker doesn't mean you're stupid and shouldn't own firearms.
Anything cheap enough to be "reasonable" is too easy to walk away with or defeat on site.
Its all worthless feel good bullshit.
Oh no, 4473s!!! that's how the invading commies will disarm us.west-phoenix-az wrote:
All private sales through NICS with 4473 filed? I'll pass.
It's already a common fee paid for FFL transfers.FFL shops charging $20-50 for this worthless service? I'll pass.
locks keep honest people honest and dumb people frustrated. Of course, with time, resources and insanity, anything can be defeated, so what's your point? Smash-and-grab crackheads are interested in the fast, easy score. A curious 3 year old won't be sparking up an acetylene torch just to accidently shoot his 2 year old brother in the head. Pretending no responsibility comes with the right of firearms ownership is half the reason we often look like shitkicking morons. Lanza's dumb cunt of a mother should never have been showing her defective, personality disordered son, how to handle firearms. Not that an absense of firearms would prevent insane people from doing insane things, but a little common sense on that bitch's part wouldn't have hurt.Can't justify the need or cost for a locker doesn't mean you're stupid and shouldn't own firearms.
Anything cheap enough to be "reasonable" is too easy to walk away with or defeat on site.
If a ban ever comes down they will be used for registration and tracking. Im sure the feds already use them as a form of registration when a FFL goes out of business and all their 4473s are sent in. Who knows if the auditors copy or record some if not all when they want or if the NICS records are destroyed/deleted per law.Reciprocity wrote:
Oh no, 4473s!!! that's how the invading commies will disarm us.
I know, I've paid them plenty of times.Reciprocity wrote:
It's already a common fee paid for FFL transfers.
I don't see any point in doing them for private transactions.
Its just one more cost required to exercise your right to keep and bear arms.
The NFA process is bullshit.
Why on top of that process does it also cost $200 each?
Why does it take months and months for approval?
Why can't new machine guns be added?
Doesn't seem like its about safety to me. Seems like its about making things difficult and expensive so less people will do it. Its nothing more than control and it works pretty well. Shall not be infringed
A gun locker isn't difficult for a thief to break in to, take with him, or come back for.Reciprocity wrote:
locks keep honest people honest and dumb people frustrated. Of course, with time, resources and insanity, anything can be defeated, so what's your point? Smash-and-grab crackheads are interested in the fast, easy score. A curious 3 year old won't be sparking up an acetylene torch just to accidently shoot his 2 year old brother in the head.
A safe or bolted down locker is much more secure, but costs more money.
Money one should not be required to pay to exercise their right.
A locker is not a cure for bad parenting.
Should all gun owners also be required to have a locker in their vehicle?
Doesn't every new gun come with a gun lock? I know you can get these locks for free. These gun locks should stop children from shooting them, but they don't. Hows that one working out? Not so well. Hmm, lets make some more laws to fix stupidity.
I believe its a great idea for gun owners to secure their firearms when not in use. I don't think it should be required by law.
I see these gun buy backs for "safety", but I've never seen a gun locker/safe give away for "safety". Sounds like a good idea to me. Why don't all these people who think guns should be locked up in lockers or safes donate their money to purchase some so they can be given away to those who want them?
Spoiler (highlight to read):
its not about the money
its not a lot of money
when its not your money
I never said it should be a law.Hmm, lets make some more laws to fix stupidity.
I've got a ton of firearms. Some I've bought privately. I wouldn't have any personal issues with having each one individually registered and transferring the license from seller to purchaser, as long as the fee wasn't artificially inflated to make gun sales inconvenient. I'm not so paranoid as to think that it's all preparation for mass gun confiscations, and it's no more inconvenient than anything else the government has you do. It's not a foolproof solution, but it's something.
If you can't afford a safe for your guns, you probably have more important things to focus on than hoarding rounds.Why don't all these people who think guns should be locked up in lockers or safes donate their money to purchase some so they can be given away to those who want them?
coming from the guy who had to raid his piggy bank to buy some weed
I can't kill people with weed
was that safe/hoarding statement directed at me or people in general?
in general. you're cool
Why don't all the gun-owners donate their money to provide bullet-proof vests for every school student?Macbeth wrote:
If you can't afford a safe for your guns, you probably have more important things to focus on than hoarding rounds.Why don't all these people who think guns should be locked up in lockers or safes donate their money to purchase some so they can be given away to those who want them?
Honestly these knee-jerk whinges are beyond stupid.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Damn. Your units sucked.Jay wrote:
Nope. Our military is shockingly unprepared. Most of our troops go to the range for a few weeks in basic training and then maybe go to the range to qualify once a year. Unless you're a sniper, they don't talk about bullet drop or anything else ballistic related. We were made to memorize the maximum effective range of our weapons and that was all. Soldiers are cannon fodder meant to move around on a chess board, not think.Shocking wrote:
I figured they tell you stuff like that before you get deployed.
Even Guard units have classes on using scopes, bullet drop, wind drift, humidity & temperature in relation to atmospheric density,etc. If I'm teaching it, we'll briefly touch on gyro drift, precession, coriolis drift, velocity tolerances and vertical dispersion, etc etc.
If you cant afford an actual gun safe (internal locks, bolted to the wall/floor/both) you shouldnt have a firearm.
If you can't afford a chain and a padlock you shouldn't have a firearm.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
OK, 500kg safe it is then.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
merkins really hate responsibility it seems.
Freedom >>>>>>>>>> Responsibility
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Why shouldn't a person be allowed to own a firearm because they aren't wealthy? If they need a firearm for purposes other than recreational shooting then it's likely they wouldn't keep it in their safe anyway.Adams_BJ wrote:
If you cant afford an actual gun safe (internal locks, bolted to the wall/floor/both) you shouldnt have a firearm.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
wat. that's not the point, shifty.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Why shouldn't a person be allowed to own a firearm because they aren't wealthy? If they need a firearm for purposes other than recreational shooting then it's likely they wouldn't keep it in their safe anyway.Adams_BJ wrote:
If you cant afford an actual gun safe (internal locks, bolted to the wall/floor/both) you shouldnt have a firearm.
I missed the point then, what was it?
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
If you're buying a gun, you should have a safe, even if you keep it on or near your person at all times. If you're buying a second gun, you should most definitely have a safe. If you don't have a ton of guns, you don't need a $1000+ cabinet safe. A smaller, cheaper one will do. If you have a ton of guns, your ass could well afford a cabinet safe.
(e: I think I a word)
(e: I think I a word)
:picard:-Sh1fty- wrote:
Why shouldn't a person be allowed to own a firearm because they aren't wealthy? If they need a firearm for purposes other than recreational shooting then it's likely they wouldn't keep it in their safe anyway.Adams_BJ wrote:
If you cant afford an actual gun safe (internal locks, bolted to the wall/floor/both) you shouldnt have a firearm.
Thank god there was a good guy with a gun there.A 22-year-old man was in custody as a suspect in a shooting during a New Year's Eve fireworks show in Sacramento, California, where two people were fatally shot and three were wounded, police said Tuesday.
The suspect, whose name wasn't released, is being treated at a Sacramento hospital, police said.
The shooting occurred in Old Sacramento, where 40,000 people, including families with young children, had gathered for the 9 p.m. fireworks show, CNN affiliate KOVR reported. Witnesses reported hearing the shots and running for cover.
Police canceled the next fireworks show, which was scheduled for midnight.
The violence began with an argument inside a sports bar that escalated into a fight and culminated in a shootout between the suspect and an armed security guard, police said.
An employee tried to break up the fight, and the suspect fired several rounds toward the subjects he was fighting with, police said.
The two people fatally wounded were the employee, who was in his 20s, and a 35-year-old man, police said. They suffered multiple gunshot wounds and died at the scene, police said.