FYI: the 1968 gun control act: Who Cannot Have a Gun in America?

[Wyatt earp]

This is worth posting, for some reason the gun nuts want to overlook this 40 year old plus law and changed their tune about universal back ground checks.

Who Cannot Have a Gun in America? - U.S. Government Info/Resources

Who Cannot Have a Gun in America?

The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits certain people from possessing a firearm:

*Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any
crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
exceeding on year; Fugitives from justice;

* Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any
controlled substance;

*Persons who have been declared by a court as
mental defectives or have been committed to a mental
institution; Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the
United States under a nonimmigrant visa;

*Persons who have been dishonorably discharged
from the Armed Forces;

*Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship; Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders;

*and Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor
crime of domestic violence.

 

[OKTexas]

This is worth posting, for some reason the gun nuts want to overlook this 40 year old plus law and changed their tune about universal back ground checks.

Who Cannot Have a Gun in America? - U.S. Government Info/Resources

Who Cannot Have a Gun in America?

The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits certain people from possessing a firearm:

*Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any
crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
exceeding on year; Fugitives from justice;

* Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any
controlled substance;

*Persons who have been declared by a court as
mental defectives or have been committed to a mental
institution; Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the
United States under a nonimmigrant visa;

*Persons who have been dishonorably discharged
from the Armed Forces;

*Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship; Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders;

*and Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor
crime of domestic violence.

In bold. What does that say about all the folks in CO and WA that are using marijuana, I think their screwed, hope they aren't hunters.

 

[OriginalShroom]

You are so full of it..

No one has said that we want to get rid of current background check regulations and requirements.

We don't want additional background checks regulations and requirements.

We have already compromised several times in attempts to be find the balance between the "Shall not be infringed" and what is needed to keep out of the hands of those who have proven they can't handle the right responsibly.

But look at what the Gun grabbers have done. Now a person who has been accused of domestic violence can lose their weapons. Just accused. Not convicted, but accused. Then those convicted of the misdeamnor crime of domestic violence lose their rights, many lost their rights retroactively when the law was passed and lost their jobs.

I know two people whose wives called the police, accusing their husbands of DV during divorce proccedings. It took over a year and a ton of money in lawyer fees to get 2nd Amendment rights back and their guns had been destroyed by the police.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You are so full of it..

No one has said that we want to get rid of current background check regulations and requirements.

We don't want additional background checks regulations and requirements.

We have already compromised several times in attempts to be find the balance between the "Shall not be infringed" and what is needed to keep out of the hands of those who have proven they can't handle the right responsibly.

But look at what the Gun grabbers have done. Now a person who has been accused of domestic violence can lose their weapons. Just accused. Not convicted, but accused. Then those convicted of the misdeamnor crime of domestic violence lose their rights, many lost their rights retroactively when the law was passed and lost their jobs.

I know two people whose wives called the police, accusing their husbands of DV during divorce proccedings. It took over a year and a ton of money in lawyer fees to get 2nd Amendment rights back and their guns had been destroyed by the police.

then please give me a link that the NRA is now once again for universal background checks? I think the reason why they changed is because they are affraid of this law.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And I know this law should be changed, but please dont the gun guys dont try tell me to enforce the laws on the books...... because no one wants that if they follow this law to a "T".. this law is fuckin stupid. but it is the law.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And I know this law should be changed, but please dont the gun guys dont try tell me to enforce the laws on the books...... because no one wants that if they follow this law to a "T".. this law is fuckin stupid. but it is the law.

According to current attempts, simply being prescribed certain medications would be enough to deny some people their 2nd Amendment rights.

Like I said it is the law if you have been forcibly committed or legally ( by a Judge) found to be incompetent or mentally deficient you are denied owning weapons. However the current attempts include claiming that just saying someone is crazy is enough to deny them their rights. Further we have people on this site and in this country that think just because you may have a few minor problems that should be enough to deny you your rights.

An attempt to include anti depressants as a drug if taken would deny you your rights.

getting the idea yet?

The current NEW attempts all include illegal, UNCONSTITUTIONAL requirements that would deny people their 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And I know this law should be changed, but please dont the gun guys dont try tell me to enforce the laws on the books...... because no one wants that if they follow this law to a "T".. this law is fuckin stupid. but it is the law.

According to current attempts, simply being prescribed certain medications would be enough to deny some people their 2nd Amendment rights.

Like I said it is the law if you have been forcibly committed or legally ( by a Judge) found to be incompetent or mentally deficient you are denied owning weapons. However the current attempts include claiming that just saying someone is crazy is enough to deny them their rights. Further we have people on this site and in this country that think just because you may have a few minor problems that should be enough to deny you your rights.

An attempt to include anti depressants as a drug if taken would deny you your rights.

getting the idea yet?

The current NEW attempts all include illegal, UNCONSTITUTIONAL requirements that would deny people their 2nd Amendment rights.

like I am trying to say I agree. their are single woman with no fault of their own, on meds due to a looney ex spouse and they are denied a gun to protect themselfs from the said offender. The gun laws have to be changed and then enforced.