Are These Reasonable Regulations of Guns? or Harassment of Gun Owners?

[Daryl Hunt]

Unconstitutional of course.

You throw that term around haphazardly. Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

Because it violates the Second Amendment, shit-faced boy.

The Second Amendment has little to do with States Rights. The 2nd Amendment deals with Federal. And there have been so many changes in our nation in the last 200 years of so, the 2nd amendment has lost much of it's meaning. But it still means that the Federals can't dictate whether you have the right or not to have firearms. But the State, through due process, does.

Just saying something is Unconstitutional or is against the 2nd amendment doesn't say a damned thing other than you are ignorant and can't back up your argument.

 

[White 6]

I'm OK with most of these. Some details might be problematic but generally they're OK. They should have little or no impact on the average user.

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.Father giving his son a rifle is now illegal?
• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. What good is a NONdangerous weapon?
  
• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period. What good does this do?
  
• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours. So if you just got back from vacation, you are now a criminal?
  
• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others. This can be exploited for purposes of revenge or harassment too easily; lower form of 'swatting.
  
• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms. Without a trial and conviction the person loses their 2A rights?
  
• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18. Taking your kids to the firing range is now a class 6 felony, but thats OK?
  
• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events. So now we are to let woketards restrict our 2A rights even more? This is why no gun owners trust a liberal to be reasonable in their use of regulation to reduce gun crimes.

Jim, everything I am seeing here is vary badly worded. Some worse than others. I am not sure we are looking at the exact legal verbiage of the proposed legislation and would like to see the bill numbers so I might log in and read the actual legislation myself, not from a pro-gun magazine.
I have no problem with comprehensive background checks, and it has nothing to do with giving your young son a rifle or shotgun. You are still responsible for the weapon and your child's access to it. Did a lot of hunting on my own and with my friend in teenage days, but dad knew when and where I was going and weapons in the house were stored where he wanted them stored.

That "Dangerous weapon" bullet point is a deal breaker. I have no problem with semi-automatic rifles whether they look military styled or not. On your own property or a range designed for that weapon's range, I'm good. I am not in favor of bump stocks or modified full auto weapons. Their only real use is for kicking doors and spraying a lot of rounds only loosely aimed after first 3 rounds. The longer you hold the trigger, the worse your aim. Anybody tells you different is full of sh#t. Silencers are strictly offensive and I would ban further sale. If some dumb ass is shooting at me, I would like to be able to zero in on the sound. Silencers I have used, muffled the shot not silenced it, but was enough at 50 yards to make much harder to zero in on the sound, especially around buildings. These are weapons that belong in the home, on the farm or on the appropriate range, not in your car going to Kroger, work, or just riding around town. Nobody ever has the right to take away what you already legally own, now.

One gun handgun purchase in 30 days is stupid if you have to get a background check on every sale or every separate day sale.

Two days should be time frame to report missing weapons. Anybody that doesn't do a weapons and ammunition check by the day after he gets back from vacation is an idiot and they should be stored and accounted for securely. I like a flash drive not stored with the weapons or ammo that includes pictures and serial numbers. I figure it might help me get it back or at least be good for insurance purposes.

Protective orders may be necessary, but there should always be a hearing and you should be reimbursed for reasonable legal fees whether you are allowed to keep your weapon or not. Not uncommon in families to take weapons access away from Alzheimer patients, or senile members, or other mental conditions, but if the state is taking them at the behest of family or 3rd parties you should be protected, and nobody should be able to sell or give away your weapons without your signed approval until you are dead, no matter how senile you are.

Same safeguards for final protective.

Enhanced punishment for leaving weapons accessible to kids. Sounds good to me. Raise age 14 to 18. Sounds good to me, also. Kids are immature, erratic, often just plain stupid and like to show friends what is laying around the house, sometimes taking them out in public without your knowledge. You are responsible for weapons in your home, not your kid.

Weapons regulations as absolutely should be at state or federal level and not a mishmash across every county, town, berg and wide spot in the road.

 

[Auld Phart]

I'm OK with most of these. Some details might be problematic but generally they're OK. They should have little or no impact on the average user.

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.Father giving his son a rifle is now illegal?
• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. What good is a NONdangerous weapon?
  
• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period. What good does this do?
  
• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours. So if you just got back from vacation, you are now a criminal?
  
• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others. This can be exploited for purposes of revenge or harassment too easily; lower form of 'swatting.
  
• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms. Without a trial and conviction the person loses their 2A rights?
  
• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18. Taking your kids to the firing range is now a class 6 felony, but thats OK?
  
• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events. So now we are to let woketards restrict our 2A rights even more? This is why no gun owners trust a liberal to be reasonable in their use of regulation to reduce gun crimes.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake. But let's take each one point for point.

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.Father giving his son a rifle is now illegal?

As long as the Son is under age, the Parent or Guardian is responsible for that firearm and how it's used and stored. The underaged Son cannot legally own that gun. But when he comes of age, he can and MUST pass a legal background check to take possession of it. That's been a federal law for quite a few decades now. You don't like it, then get it changed. Otherwise, live with it. The VA law is just mirroring the Federal Law. Nothing to see here. Move on.

• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. What good is a NONdangerous weapon?

Again, dopey, the term Assault Weapon won't hold up in court. But if they say something specific like "AR-15 and AK-47 and their various clones" it will stand up in court. The law didn't go far enough. The high capacity Mags needed to be listed as at least 15 to pass the courts. The Bump Stocks already are illegal by Federal Standards. The Silencers are already covered by the FFL licensing. VA just needs to clean this law up a bit. But the intent is in the right place.

• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period. What good does this do?

I would not do less than 2 and more than 3. But there is nothing really wrong with 1 in a 30 day period. What are doing, stocking up for your "Civil War"? Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours. So if you just got back from vacation, you are now a criminal?

If your weapon was stolen while you are on vacation and you report it within 24 hours after discovering it then what's the beef. Or maybe your entire "Civil Revolution" Stash was stolen while you were gone and you can't figure out how to report it because....... Pick a reason. Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others. This can be exploited for purposes of revenge or harassment too easily; lower form of 'swatting.

This is why Due Process is used. You remember that, that's the thing that your bunch ignores on a daily basis. NO Person nor LE can confiscate your weapons without a Court order by a Judge or Grand Jury. And the person that has lost his weapons has the right to go back to the original court and sue to get those weapons back. And that is usually done in a couple of Hours. Nothing to see here. Move on.

• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms. Without a trial and conviction the person loses their 2A rights?

And the subject of the order has the right to go to the issuing judge and demand that proof be given that they are a threat with those weapons. It's called Due Process. It works both ways. Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18. Taking your kids to the firing range is now a class 6 felony, but thats OK?

If you are allowing your kids to go unaccompanied to that same firing range I see two problems. First of all, it's an established Firing Range, that Range needs to be shut down. Second, if it's to an unlicensed firing range and they are going unaccompanied then, yes, that's a class 6 felony. The Parent or the Guardian is responsible for not only the Weapon but the under aged person.

• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events. So now we are to let woketards restrict our 2A rights even more? This is why no gun owners trust a liberal to be reasonable in their use of regulation to reduce gun crimes.

So you want to go to the libraries to do a fashion statement? You want us all to see just how small a pecker you have? The States have the right to limit where or if you can carry arms. You don't like it, get that changed. And it has nothing at all to do with the 2A. It has everything to do with States Rights.

Your whole argument blows up pretty fast. VA just needs to clean up their law a bit. They need to in order to save the State a couple of million in legal fees and save a couple of the Gun Sales Lobbyists Organizations a couple of million as well.

But when he comes of age, he can and MUST pass a legal background check to take possession of it. That's been a federal law for quite a few decades now.

It has?

I'd like to see the statute that states a son has to pass a background check to accept a firearm from his daddy on his birthday.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I'm OK with most of these. Some details might be problematic but generally they're OK. They should have little or no impact on the average user.

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.Father giving his son a rifle is now illegal?
• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. What good is a NONdangerous weapon?
  
• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period. What good does this do?
  
• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours. So if you just got back from vacation, you are now a criminal?
  
• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others. This can be exploited for purposes of revenge or harassment too easily; lower form of 'swatting.
  
• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms. Without a trial and conviction the person loses their 2A rights?
  
• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18. Taking your kids to the firing range is now a class 6 felony, but thats OK?
  
• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events. So now we are to let woketards restrict our 2A rights even more? This is why no gun owners trust a liberal to be reasonable in their use of regulation to reduce gun crimes.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake. But let's take each one point for point.

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.Father giving his son a rifle is now illegal?

As long as the Son is under age, the Parent or Guardian is responsible for that firearm and how it's used and stored. The underaged Son cannot legally own that gun. But when he comes of age, he can and MUST pass a legal background check to take possession of it. That's been a federal law for quite a few decades now. You don't like it, then get it changed. Otherwise, live with it. The VA law is just mirroring the Federal Law. Nothing to see here. Move on.

• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers. What good is a NONdangerous weapon?

Again, dopey, the term Assault Weapon won't hold up in court. But if they say something specific like "AR-15 and AK-47 and their various clones" it will stand up in court. The law didn't go far enough. The high capacity Mags needed to be listed as at least 15 to pass the courts. The Bump Stocks already are illegal by Federal Standards. The Silencers are already covered by the FFL licensing. VA just needs to clean this law up a bit. But the intent is in the right place.

• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period. What good does this do?

I would not do less than 2 and more than 3. But there is nothing really wrong with 1 in a 30 day period. What are doing, stocking up for your "Civil War"? Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours. So if you just got back from vacation, you are now a criminal?

If your weapon was stolen while you are on vacation and you report it within 24 hours after discovering it then what's the beef. Or maybe your entire "Civil Revolution" Stash was stolen while you were gone and you can't figure out how to report it because....... Pick a reason. Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others. This can be exploited for purposes of revenge or harassment too easily; lower form of 'swatting.

This is why Due Process is used. You remember that, that's the thing that your bunch ignores on a daily basis. NO Person nor LE can confiscate your weapons without a Court order by a Judge or Grand Jury. And the person that has lost his weapons has the right to go back to the original court and sue to get those weapons back. And that is usually done in a couple of Hours. Nothing to see here. Move on.

• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms. Without a trial and conviction the person loses their 2A rights?

And the subject of the order has the right to go to the issuing judge and demand that proof be given that they are a threat with those weapons. It's called Due Process. It works both ways. Nothing to see here, move on.

• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18. Taking your kids to the firing range is now a class 6 felony, but thats OK?

If you are allowing your kids to go unaccompanied to that same firing range I see two problems. First of all, it's an established Firing Range, that Range needs to be shut down. Second, if it's to an unlicensed firing range and they are going unaccompanied then, yes, that's a class 6 felony. The Parent or the Guardian is responsible for not only the Weapon but the under aged person.

• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events. So now we are to let woketards restrict our 2A rights even more? This is why no gun owners trust a liberal to be reasonable in their use of regulation to reduce gun crimes.

So you want to go to the libraries to do a fashion statement? You want us all to see just how small a pecker you have? The States have the right to limit where or if you can carry arms. You don't like it, get that changed. And it has nothing at all to do with the 2A. It has everything to do with States Rights.

Your whole argument blows up pretty fast. VA just needs to clean up their law a bit. They need to in order to save the State a couple of million in legal fees and save a couple of the Gun Sales Lobbyists Organizations a couple of million as well.

But when he comes of age, he can and MUST pass a legal background check to take possession of it. That's been a federal law for quite a few decades now.

It has?

I'd like to see the statute that states a son has to pass a background check to accept a firearm from his daddy on his birthday.

It's not a Federal law. I misspoke on that one. But here in Colorado, it's a state law. And please don't insult us all by screaming cite, cite, cite on this one.

 

[Auld Phart]

Firearms FAQs

"If you are selling to a non-immediate family member, a background check must be done by an FFL (Federal Firearm Licensee). However, immediate family members do not need background checks done to transfer firearms between one another. The firearm should not be transferred to any family member who is prohibited from purchasing and/or possessing firearm. Immediate family is defined as spouses, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles (in-laws do not apply). (CRS 18-12-112)"

 

[KissMy]

I don't agree with #3 or the last 2 bullet points.

Also #2 needs to ban any weapon with quick change magazines. We don't need any more Vegas shooters firing 1500 rounds into crowds. 15 rounds is more than anyone needs to protect family.

Morons....the magazines had nothing to do with the body count, it was the choice of target.....

Vegas shooter...firing into a tightly packed, unaware crowd of over 22,000 people, from a concealed and fortified position...

58 killed.

muslim terrorist using a rental truck and 5 minutes of driving through a crowd...

86 killed....

You morons...

Gilroy....rifle with detachable magazine...3 killed.

Navy Yard shooter, with 5 shot, tube fed pump action shotgun...12 killed.

Russia, polytechnich school shooter, with a 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed 40 injured.

You morons don't know what you are talking about...it is never about the weapon or magazine, but always about the choice of target and the ability of the shooter to shoot unarmed people, and how long it takes for someone to shoot back at them to stop them...

It's easy enough to protect crowds from cars & trucks with barricades & dump trucks full of sand. You can't drive into a Crowded National Monument, NFL Football or Major League baseball stadium, etc. But 1 crazy with 1 gun accepting quick change mags & a bunch of 100 round mags can easily harm or kill a few thousand in any well protected crowd.

It's the same reason WMD's & weapons that can be used for mass murder have always been banned even though they are considered arms & the constitution says we have the right to bear arms. We can't have nuclear bombs, fully armed & operational M1 Tanks, a crate full of functional 81mm mortars & a launcher tube, grenades, Bazooka, Stinger missiles, etc even though they are arms & the constitution says we have the right to bear arms.

There are more terrorist crazies in the world who want a chance at mass murder or get famous with a new kill record. We simply can't allow them legally & easily obtain, cheaply produced, reliable, easy to conceal mass murder weapons to practice with or lay in wait until they have the prime opportunity to strike US citizens down by the thousands.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I don't agree with #3 or the last 2 bullet points.
.

It's easy enough to protect crowds from cars & trucks with barricades & dump trucks full of sand. You can't drive into a Crowded National Monument, NFL Football or Major League baseball stadium, etc. But 1 crazy with 1 gun accepting quick change mags & a bunch of 100 round mags can easily harm or kill a few thousand in any well protected crowd.

Lol, you are a blithering moron.

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

These are the new anti-gun laws that the Virginia Dimocrats are set to pass ASAP.

Here's the List of Bills Anti-Gunners Plan to Enact in Virginia - GunsAmerica Digest

The list from local news affiliate WSET:

• Legislation requiring background checks on all firearms sales and transactions. The bill mandates that any person selling, renting, trading, or transferring a firearm must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.
• Legislation banning dangerous weapons. This will include bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, bump stocks and silencers.
• Legislation to reinstate Virginia’s successful law allowing only one handgun purchase within a 30-day period.
• Legislation requiring that lost and stolen firearms be reported to law enforcement within 24 hours.
• Legislation creating an Extreme Risk Protective Order, allowing law enforcement and the courts to temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior that presents an immediate threat to self or others.
• Legislation prohibiting all individuals subject to final protective orders from possessing firearms. The bill expands Virginia law which currently prohibits individuals subject to final protective orders of family abuse from possessing firearms.
• Legislation enhancing the punishment for allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child from a Class 3 Misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill also raises the age of the child from 14 to 18.
• Legislation enabling localities to enact any firearms ordinances that are stricter than state law. This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events.

I'm OK with most of these. Some details might be problematic but generally they're OK. They should have little or no impact on the average user.

Not sure what constitutes a "dangerous weapon" (high-capacity magazines, bump stocks should be restricted IMHO) or if I'd be prohibited from taking my kids to a range to shoot.

You're being ok is not acceptable.
are they constitutional? No, they aren't

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't agree with #3 or the last 2 bullet points.

Also #2 needs to ban any weapon with quick change magazines. We don't need any more Vegas shooters firing 1500 rounds into crowds. 15 rounds is more than anyone needs to protect family.

Morons....the magazines had nothing to do with the body count, it was the choice of target.....

Vegas shooter...firing into a tightly packed, unaware crowd of over 22,000 people, from a concealed and fortified position...

58 killed.

muslim terrorist using a rental truck and 5 minutes of driving through a crowd...

86 killed....

You morons...

Gilroy....rifle with detachable magazine...3 killed.

Navy Yard shooter, with 5 shot, tube fed pump action shotgun...12 killed.

Russia, polytechnich school shooter, with a 5 shot, tube fed, pump action shotgun...20 killed 40 injured.

You morons don't know what you are talking about...it is never about the weapon or magazine, but always about the choice of target and the ability of the shooter to shoot unarmed people, and how long it takes for someone to shoot back at them to stop them...

It's easy enough to protect crowds from cars & trucks with barricades & dump trucks full of sand. You can't drive into a Crowded National Monument, NFL Football or Major League baseball stadium, etc. But 1 crazy with 1 gun accepting quick change mags & a bunch of 100 round mags can easily harm or kill a few thousand in any well protected crowd.

It's the same reason WMD's & weapons that can be used for mass murder have always been banned even though they are considered arms & the constitution says we have the right to bear arms. We can't have nuclear bombs, fully armed & operational M1 Tanks, a crate full of functional 81mm mortars & a launcher tube, grenades, Bazooka, Stinger missiles, etc even though they are arms & the constitution says we have the right to bear arms.

There are more terrorist crazies in the world who want a chance at mass murder or get famous with a new kill record. We simply can't allow them legally & easily obtain, cheaply produced, reliable, easy to conceal mass murder weapons to practice with or lay in wait until they have the prime opportunity to strike US citizens down by the thousands.

Dear dumb ass Murder is already illegal but there is no way in hell to legislate that away.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Firearms FAQs

"If you are selling to a non-immediate family member, a background check must be done by an FFL (Federal Firearm Licensee). However, immediate family members do not need background checks done to transfer firearms between one another. The firearm should not be transferred to any family member who is prohibited from purchasing and/or possessing firearm. Immediate family is defined as spouses, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles (in-laws do not apply). (CRS 18-12-112)"

That's not federal law. disregard
Private Gun Sale Laws by State - FindLaw

 

[toobfreak]

• must first obtain the results of a background check before completing the transaction.

Subject to those creating asnd conducting the background checks to determine what "passes." Not specified and subject to arbitrary change.

• Legislation banning dangerous weapons.

All weapons are inherently dangerous, given the circumstances. Totally arbitrary and subject to change.

• temporarily separate a person from firearms if the person exhibits dangerous behavior

Dangerous behavior totally arbitrary and subject to change.

• allowing access to loaded, unsecured firearm by a child

Impossible to guarantee the actions of another basically requiring you to keep guns locked away unavailable at all times.

• This includes regulating firearms in municipal buildings, libraries and at permitted events.

Conveniently protecting those who make the laws but least likely to be subject to firearm violence. Just another way of establishing "gun free zones" where attackers know they are safe.

I would feel very harassed as all of this is aimed at maximizing the ability to remove weapons from those most in need of them who are historically the least likely to intend to commit any crime. Of course, I know none of that would mean jack shit to any "law maker" as all they are really interested in is protecting their political career!

 

[sparky]

The *informative* words in the 2nd amendment are; shall not be infringed

And the use of the words "Assault Rifle" won't stand up in court. That's already been established. That needs to be made more specific.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake.

Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

With the BB's indulgence , i'd like to stray into fruitcakeopia

I'm going to start a militia on my farm (2 loyal goats so far....)

I'm mounting rocket launchers on my barn roof

RPG's on the canoe , and a howitzer on the hay wagon

Would i still be '2nd Amd' compliant?

~S~

 

[bigrebnc1775]

[
Jim, everything I am seeing here is vary badly worded. Some worse than others. I am not sure we are looking at the exact legal verbiage of the proposed legislation and would like to see the bill numbers so I might log in and read the actual legislation myself, not from a pro-gun magazine.
I have no problem with comprehensive background checks, and it has nothing to do with giving your young son a rifle or shotgun. You are still responsible for the weapon and your child's access to it. Did a lot of hunting on my own and with my friend in teenage days, but dad knew when and where I was going and weapons in the house were stored where he wanted them stored.

That "Dangerous weapon" bullet point is a deal breaker. I have no problem with semi-automatic rifles whether they look military styled or not. On your own property or a range designed for that weapon's range, I'm good. I am not in favor of bump stocks or modified full auto weapons. Their only real use is for kicking doors and spraying a lot of rounds only loosely aimed after first 3 rounds. The longer you hold the trigger, the worse your aim. Anybody tells you different is full of sh#t. Silencers are strictly offensive and I would ban further sale. If some dumb ass is shooting at me, I would like to be able to zero in on the sound. Silencers I have used, muffled the shot not silenced it, but was enough at 50 yards to make much harder to zero in on the sound, especially around buildings. These are weapons that belong in the home, on the farm or on the appropriate range, not in your car going to Kroger, work, or just riding around town. Nobody ever has the right to take away what you already legally own, now.

One gun handgun purchase in 30 days is stupid if you have to get a background check on every sale or every separate day sale.

Two days should be time frame to report missing weapons. Anybody that doesn't do a weapons and ammunition check by the day after he gets back from vacation is an idiot and they should be stored and accounted for securely. I like a flash drive not stored with the weapons or ammo that includes pictures and serial numbers. I figure it might help me get it back or at least be good for insurance purposes.

Protective orders may be necessary, but there should always be a hearing and you should be reimbursed for reasonable legal fees whether you are allowed to keep your weapon or not. Not uncommon in families to take weapons access away from Alzheimer patients, or senile members, or other mental conditions, but if the state is taking them at the behest of family or 3rd parties you should be protected, and nobody should be able to sell or give away your weapons without your signed approval until you are dead, no matter how senile you are.

Same safeguards for final protective.

Enhanced punishment for leaving weapons accessible to kids. Sounds good to me. Raise age 14 to 18. Sounds good to me, also. Kids are immature, erratic, often just plain stupid and like to show friends what is laying around the house, sometimes taking them out in public without your knowledge. You are responsible for weapons in your home, not your kid.

Weapons regulations as absolutely should be at state or federal level and not a mishmash across every county, town, berg and wide spot in the road.

First off, I never had a desire to have a bump stock never had one. But it is private property and that's why I would defend the ownership. Have you ever shot a rifle that had a bump stock attached? using one puts your body in an unnatural shooting position. You can take a simple rubber band and do better with that than a bump stock.for a lot cheaper and it doesn't put you shooting stance in an awkward position.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The *informative* words in the 2nd amendment are; shall not be infringed

And the use of the words "Assault Rifle" won't stand up in court. That's already been established. That needs to be made more specific.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake.

Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

With the BB's indulgence , i'd like to stray into fruitcakeopia

I'm going to start a militia on my farm (2 loyal goats so far....)

I'm mounting rocket launchers on my barn roof

RPG's on the canoe , and a howitzer on the hay wagon

Would i still be '2nd Amd' compliant?

~S~

Well, you are at least 'Funny Farm' compliant.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The *informative* words in the 2nd amendment are; shall not be infringed

And the use of the words "Assault Rifle" won't stand up in court. That's already been established. That needs to be made more specific.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake.

Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

With the BB's indulgence , i'd like to stray into fruitcakeopia

I'm going to start a militia on my farm (2 loyal goats so far....)

I'm mounting rocket launchers on my barn roof

RPG's on the canoe , and a howitzer on the hay wagon

Would i still be '2nd Amd' compliant?

~S~

Well, you are at least 'Funny Farm' compliant.

Why do some people like to make a joke out of issues like this?

 

[sparky]

The *informative* words in the 2nd amendment are; shall not be infringed

And the use of the words "Assault Rifle" won't stand up in court. That's already been established. That needs to be made more specific.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake.

Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

With the BB's indulgence , i'd like to stray into fruitcakeopia

I'm going to start a militia on my farm (2 loyal goats so far....)

I'm mounting rocket launchers on my barn roof

RPG's on the canoe , and a howitzer on the hay wagon

Would i still be '2nd Amd' compliant?

~S~

Well, you are at least 'Funny Farm' compliant.

work w/me Jim

~S~

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why do some people like to make a joke out of issues like this?

I suspect it is a coping mechanism.

A Civil War is simply a huge horrific route to take. Just imagine several people in your family and circle of friends dying or living the rest of their lives maimed.

Not a thought many can cope with without humor.

 

[sparky]

The *informative* words in the 2nd amendment are; shall not be infringed

And the use of the words "Assault Rifle" won't stand up in court. That's already been established. That needs to be made more specific.

Okay, let's take a good look at your nonsensical overreactions. You always take it to the extremes. And you wonder why States are passing these laws without consulting those like you? Easy answer, you are a fruitcake.

Why is it Unconstitutional? Point out why?

With the BB's indulgence , i'd like to stray into fruitcakeopia

I'm going to start a militia on my farm (2 loyal goats so far....)

I'm mounting rocket launchers on my barn roof

RPG's on the canoe , and a howitzer on the hay wagon

Would i still be '2nd Amd' compliant?

~S~

Well, you are at least 'Funny Farm' compliant.

Why do some people like to make a joke out of issues like this?

do i present some constitutional quagmire to you?

~S~

 

[JimBowie1958]

Well, you are at least 'Funny Farm' compliant.

work w/me Jim
~S~

While I am ugly as a goat, I cant really work with them very well; too hard headed.

 

[JimBowie1958]

do i present some constitutional quagmire to you?
~S~

Just a quagmire, no need to qualify it.



Dude, I appreciate most of your posts, but if you are going to clown around you cant get annoyed with the laughter, can you?