Gun owner paranoia---

[Concerned American]

Democrats: "We need to keep guns out of the hands of children, criminals, and the mentally retarded"

Republican Translation: Them damn Liberals are gonna take all our shootin irons away!!



Why are Republicans so paranoid about guns? America has more guns in circulation than they have people. A few less guns in the hands of criminals and children seems like common sense to me.

First, healthy skepticism is not paranoia. Second, if you targeted the criminals and not law-abiding gun owners you might be more successful. You have all the laws that you need--enforce them. I have been a gun owner for over 50 years and I have yet to be charged with anything more than a traffic ticket. I should be able to buy a gun anywhere in America immediately based on my background. That doesn't sit well with your PARANOID agenda does it?

 

[Concerned American]

Democrats: "We need to keep guns out of the hands of children, criminals, and the mentally retarded"

Republican Translation: Them damn Liberals are gonna take all our shootin irons away!!



Why are Republicans so paranoid about guns? America has more guns in circulation than they have people. A few less guns in the hands of criminals and children seems like common sense to me.

It's not paranoia, it's disgust and distrust. Past statements and actions have shown Democrats cannot be trusted.

Leave the guns alone.

Get rid of the criminal element. Permanently.

"For the children." Right. What a joke.

But, but, but--we defunded the police, so we have no one to enforce the laws--must be gun's fault.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And it is mot racist to state facts dumb ****.

I seriously wonder if racists like you are even aware how racist you are.

Dude, I don;t know you from Adam. I read one post here from you and you told me straight away you view the world through race. Now either you are proud to be racist or you have work to do.

No reply is required. Peace

LOL you are either delusional or a liar.

 

[Care4all]

I'm a gun owner. Got a bunch of 'em downstairs in the safe. Got my first gun at 11yrs old. Bought it with my chore money. Used to be a member of the NRA. Until they went stupid.

I think American gun-culture is stupid and crazy.
I've long advocated that when a tool of such potential destructive/disruptive potential is brought into our civil society then what comes with it is ----- strict liability.

If there is ANY harm to humans or property after that weapon is fired then the OWNER of the gun bears a significant liability. NOT just the jackass who fired it ....... but also the owner of record.

That means if your Glock is stolen from underneath the seat of your Ford-150 and it is used to shoot somebody's cheatin' wife.....well, the shooter gets arrested and tried, and the owner of the gun gets a whopper of a fine.

It was his gun. He brought it into our society. He failed to secure it adequately. Ergo......he has a share of the responsibility.

THEN.......you would see a more serious, responsible, cautious approach to owning those things.

IMHO

and if someone steals your car, and drives it into a crowd, you're partially responsible for any deaths and damages it causes?

But are there laws that say you must keep your car locked up and safe from others stealing your car and using it in a crime? I'm not aware of any....?

 

[ThisIsMe]

I'm a gun owner. Got a bunch of 'em downstairs in the safe. Got my first gun at 11yrs old. Bought it with my chore money. Used to be a member of the NRA. Until they went stupid.

I think American gun-culture is stupid and crazy.
I've long advocated that when a tool of such potential destructive/disruptive potential is brought into our civil society then what comes with it is ----- strict liability.

If there is ANY harm to humans or property after that weapon is fired then the OWNER of the gun bears a significant liability. NOT just the jackass who fired it ....... but also the owner of record.

That means if your Glock is stolen from underneath the seat of your Ford-150 and it is used to shoot somebody's cheatin' wife.....well, the shooter gets arrested and tried, and the owner of the gun gets a whopper of a fine.

It was his gun. He brought it into our society. He failed to secure it adequately. Ergo......he has a share of the responsibility.

THEN.......you would see a more serious, responsible, cautious approach to owning those things.

IMHO

and if someone steals your car, and drives it into a crowd, you're partially responsible for any deaths and damages it causes?

Sure, if you leave it with the keys in it and maybe running while left unattended. There is no keys for a gun and it's always running. For those that don't show "Reasonable" security then they are as guilty as the person that pulled the trigger. I saw a young in a quick stop who had a gun on her hip. She was tossing her hip in that direction knowing (or unknowingly) to broadcast she was carrying an open carry. I can just see the bad guy now who decides to mug here. "Hey, jake, look a free gun and a free piece of ass".

Thats a dangerous way of thinking about it because you are going down a path that anything in your life that is not "properly secured" could lead you to legal problems.

Loan your buddy a hammer and he kills someone with it, you are on the hook. Leave your garage door open while working in the back yard and someone steals a hatchet and kills someone else with it you are on the hook.

Leave your car parked on the driveway, even though locked, its not in the garage and therefore not "secured", and someone breaks in and steals a knife and kills someone with it, you're on the hook.

Look, I agree that you should always secure your belongings, especially firearms, but trying to make a case for legal damages on behalf of the owner simply because he left his truck running while he ran into the store to grab some coffee, and someone steals his truck....that can open a can of worms that could potentially make EVERYONE a criminal.

Newsflash: that driver that runs into the store and leaves his vehicle running is already liable for anything it's used for. If not criminal, civil.

Really? I've never heard of anyone being held liable for leaving their vehicle running.

Any thoughts as to the rest of my post?

Many states have a Puffing law. Look it up. You might learn something. Or not.

I looked it up, only info I could find on it is in about 4 states it only said it was a law to keep vehicles from being stolen, but mentioned nothing about holding owners responsible for what thieves did with a stolen vehicle.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I don't see what the problem is, if those on the left feel there should be fewer guns on the streets, there is nothing preventing you from turning your firearms in.

 

[Chillicothe]

But are there laws that say you must keep your car locked up and safe from others stealing your car and using it in a crime? "

I honestly don't know. But if they are out there perhaps someone can inform the forum.

Regardless, we can agree it is irrelevant.
Cars ain't guns.
Guns ain't cars.

It's a false equivalency.
Duh!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But are there laws that say you must keep your car locked up and safe from others stealing your car and using it in a crime? I'm not aware of any....?

No, at least not in my state. There have been plenty of incidents where people got ripped off because thieves went into their car, stole a laptop, cellphone, and yes, sometimes a gun. From what I've read, nobody ever got a citation over it.

 

[noonereal]

I live in a dem city. So, your assumptions are wrong.

LOL

What can I do but laugh.

Where were you the last time you saw someone use a gun to force his will on another?

It's been a while. I am no longer out and about as I was.
Of course, that is the story of my life the last 10 years in regards to anything.

Last time was when my hillbillies neighbors by my country home had a shouting match and one reached for a gun to show how dangerous it was to argue with him. Douche bag. This I witnessed outside my window within the last 10 years.

I grew up in the country. Ish. I never had neighbors like that.

lucky you

then another neighbor actually shoots his gun in the air in the middle of the night to complain and threaten because of a barking dog!

Mind you, my country place is only one hour from Manhattan. It is not like I am in the middle of Indiana or Alabama.

I got more stories. Only one from where you might expect it, from an inner city.

I live in the Rust Belt. City now. Ruralish suburbs when I was younger. Never seen shit like that.

I was an inner city kid who was lucky enough to have spent summers on grandfathers working farm. So I got to see both worlds. Then, as I said, I spent high school years in upper middle class suburbs, later another 5 years in a suburban area when my kids were young.

Way more time in the cities, way way more experiences with guns in the country. Oh, and college in NH, saw the gun come out on a Friday night a couple times too.

As we all have different experiences AND different interpretations of these experiences hence we all have different opinions. Still, I was never anti gun, I still own 3, until the FL high school massacre. Interestingly enough, it was not the shooting itself that changed me, it was the posts of the pro gun people afterward that made me say, "we got a problem."

peace brother

How many do you own now?

Rifle, shotgun and pistol.

Why? Are you paranoid?

nope, just stuff that has been around. None of it is for "protection"

I can handle myself just fine and am not scared of being hit by lightening.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The paranoia concerning imaginary Big Blue Meanies coming to take precious shooties away, notwithstanding, if the problem were limited to "criminals in the hood" it would be comparatively easy to confront.

The tragic reality of horrific, ubiquitous, mass shootings such as at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Stoneman Douglas High School, Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Amish West Nickel Mines School, Mandalay Bay concert in Las Vegas, etc., etc., etc. cannot be avoided by pointing at scapegoats.

Except those kind of mass shootings are an anomaly, not the norm. Look at how many get shot and killed in Chicago on a holiday weekend, or any weekend for that matter.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns. Just jet over about 40 or 50 miles into Indianna and you can buy a gun fairly easily. Then motor back into Chicago slums. There are people making big bucks by legally purchasing in Indy, transporting them across the Ill state line and reselling them. According to the Chicago Police Chief, that comprises over 60% of the "Illegal" guns on the street.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns.

'Legally' procured?

I don't expect you to understand as it would make your head explode if you did.

I'm trying to understand how someone could 'legally' buy a firearm, especially when it is ILLEGAL to buy a firearm in a state you don't live in.

including handguns.

They can be purchased, but have to be sent to an FFL in the purchasers home state.

Unless it's a private sale, pay and go isn't allowed.

Okay, let's say you are just misinformed. A Legal Indy person can guy the guns. He goes from place to place and buys even more guns until his van is filled up. He then drives the Van and it's contents into Chitown and sells the Van and all it's cargo for a nice tidy profit. These guns were purchased legally although what happens after that isn't. BTW, many guns make it into Mexico the same way from Texas where it's even easier.

The problem isn't with Ill, it's with Indy who refuses to clean their system up and go after these gun runners. Same goes for Texas. BTW, Kansas is bitching about MJ being legally purchased in Colorado and then transported to Kansas.

LOL liar tje atf can track anyone that buys lots of firearms and there is a law against it, requiring you to register and get an ffl.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I'm a gun owner. Got a bunch of 'em downstairs in the safe. Got my first gun at 11yrs old. Bought it with my chore money. Used to be a member of the NRA. Until they went stupid.

I think American gun-culture is stupid and crazy.
I've long advocated that when a tool of such potential destructive/disruptive potential is brought into our civil society then what comes with it is ----- strict liability.

If there is ANY harm to humans or property after that weapon is fired then the OWNER of the gun bears a significant liability. NOT just the jackass who fired it ....... but also the owner of record.

That means if your Glock is stolen from underneath the seat of your Ford-150 and it is used to shoot somebody's cheatin' wife.....well, the shooter gets arrested and tried, and the owner of the gun gets a whopper of a fine.

It was his gun. He brought it into our society. He failed to secure it adequately. Ergo......he has a share of the responsibility.

THEN.......you would see a more serious, responsible, cautious approach to owning those things.

IMHO

and if someone steals your car, and drives it into a crowd, you're partially responsible for any deaths and damages it causes?

But are there laws that say you must keep your car locked up and safe from others stealing your car and using it in a crime? I'm not aware of any....?

If you leave it running while you are having that last cup of coffee in the warmth of your Kitchen then that IS against the law here. And anyone that steals your car at that point, his actions can be legally held against you. Not a criminal but a Civil. It's called Puffing. Look it up. Learn something. Read a Book instead of just eating the covers off it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I'm a gun owner. Got a bunch of 'em downstairs in the safe. Got my first gun at 11yrs old. Bought it with my chore money. Used to be a member of the NRA. Until they went stupid.

I think American gun-culture is stupid and crazy.
I've long advocated that when a tool of such potential destructive/disruptive potential is brought into our civil society then what comes with it is ----- strict liability.

If there is ANY harm to humans or property after that weapon is fired then the OWNER of the gun bears a significant liability. NOT just the jackass who fired it ....... but also the owner of record.

That means if your Glock is stolen from underneath the seat of your Ford-150 and it is used to shoot somebody's cheatin' wife.....well, the shooter gets arrested and tried, and the owner of the gun gets a whopper of a fine.

It was his gun. He brought it into our society. He failed to secure it adequately. Ergo......he has a share of the responsibility.

THEN.......you would see a more serious, responsible, cautious approach to owning those things.

IMHO

and if someone steals your car, and drives it into a crowd, you're partially responsible for any deaths and damages it causes?

Sure, if you leave it with the keys in it and maybe running while left unattended. There is no keys for a gun and it's always running. For those that don't show "Reasonable" security then they are as guilty as the person that pulled the trigger. I saw a young in a quick stop who had a gun on her hip. She was tossing her hip in that direction knowing (or unknowingly) to broadcast she was carrying an open carry. I can just see the bad guy now who decides to mug here. "Hey, jake, look a free gun and a free piece of ass".

Thats a dangerous way of thinking about it because you are going down a path that anything in your life that is not "properly secured" could lead you to legal problems.

Loan your buddy a hammer and he kills someone with it, you are on the hook. Leave your garage door open while working in the back yard and someone steals a hatchet and kills someone else with it you are on the hook.

Leave your car parked on the driveway, even though locked, its not in the garage and therefore not "secured", and someone breaks in and steals a knife and kills someone with it, you're on the hook.

Look, I agree that you should always secure your belongings, especially firearms, but trying to make a case for legal damages on behalf of the owner simply because he left his truck running while he ran into the store to grab some coffee, and someone steals his truck....that can open a can of worms that could potentially make EVERYONE a criminal.

Newsflash: that driver that runs into the store and leaves his vehicle running is already liable for anything it's used for. If not criminal, civil.

Really? I've never heard of anyone being held liable for leaving their vehicle running.

Any thoughts as to the rest of my post?

Many states have a Puffing law. Look it up. You might learn something. Or not.

I looked it up, only info I could find on it is in about 4 states it only said it was a law to keep vehicles from being stolen, but mentioned nothing about holding owners responsible for what thieves did with a stolen vehicle.

Trust me, an lawyer worth their salts will use that law to put financial burden on the car owner. It's not criminal, it's civil.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The paranoia concerning imaginary Big Blue Meanies coming to take precious shooties away, notwithstanding, if the problem were limited to "criminals in the hood" it would be comparatively easy to confront.

The tragic reality of horrific, ubiquitous, mass shootings such as at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Stoneman Douglas High School, Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Amish West Nickel Mines School, Mandalay Bay concert in Las Vegas, etc., etc., etc. cannot be avoided by pointing at scapegoats.

Except those kind of mass shootings are an anomaly, not the norm. Look at how many get shot and killed in Chicago on a holiday weekend, or any weekend for that matter.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns. Just jet over about 40 or 50 miles into Indianna and you can buy a gun fairly easily. Then motor back into Chicago slums. There are people making big bucks by legally purchasing in Indy, transporting them across the Ill state line and reselling them. According to the Chicago Police Chief, that comprises over 60% of the "Illegal" guns on the street.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns.

'Legally' procured?

I don't expect you to understand as it would make your head explode if you did.

I'm trying to understand how someone could 'legally' buy a firearm, especially when it is ILLEGAL to buy a firearm in a state you don't live in.

including handguns.

They can be purchased, but have to be sent to an FFL in the purchasers home state.

Unless it's a private sale, pay and go isn't allowed.

Okay, let's say you are just misinformed. A Legal Indy person can guy the guns. He goes from place to place and buys even more guns until his van is filled up. He then drives the Van and it's contents into Chitown and sells the Van and all it's cargo for a nice tidy profit. These guns were purchased legally although what happens after that isn't. BTW, many guns make it into Mexico the same way from Texas where it's even easier.

The problem isn't with Ill, it's with Indy who refuses to clean their system up and go after these gun runners. Same goes for Texas. BTW, Kansas is bitching about MJ being legally purchased in Colorado and then transported to Kansas.

LOL liar tje atf can track anyone that buys lots of firearms and there is a law against it, requiring you to register and get an ffl.

So OAN told you that, right. Newsflash: You can buy as many guns as you want in the Denny's parking lot without recording a damned thing. Plus,in Indy, you can purchase 2 or 3 at a single location but go to many locations to get the numbers you want. I can tell you are a Rumper. You don't want it fixed. It gives you something to whine around.

 

[Correll]

I'm a gun owner. Got a bunch of 'em downstairs in the safe. Got my first gun at 11yrs old. Bought it with my chore money. Used to be a member of the NRA. Until they went stupid.

I think American gun-culture is stupid and crazy.
I've long advocated that when a tool of such potential destructive/disruptive potential is brought into our civil society then what comes with it is ----- strict liability.

If there is ANY harm to humans or property after that weapon is fired then the OWNER of the gun bears a significant liability. NOT just the jackass who fired it ....... but also the owner of record.

That means if your Glock is stolen from underneath the seat of your Ford-150 and it is used to shoot somebody's cheatin' wife.....well, the shooter gets arrested and tried, and the owner of the gun gets a whopper of a fine.

It was his gun. He brought it into our society. He failed to secure it adequately. Ergo......he has a share of the responsibility.

THEN.......you would see a more serious, responsible, cautious approach to owning those things.

IMHO

and if someone steals your car, and drives it into a crowd, you're partially responsible for any deaths and damages it causes?

Sure, if you leave it with the keys in it and maybe running while left unattended. There is no keys for a gun and it's always running. For those that don't show "Reasonable" security then they are as guilty as the person that pulled the trigger. I saw a young in a quick stop who had a gun on her hip. She was tossing her hip in that direction knowing (or unknowingly) to broadcast she was carrying an open carry. I can just see the bad guy now who decides to mug here. "Hey, jake, look a free gun and a free piece of ass".

Thats a dangerous way of thinking about it because you are going down a path that anything in your life that is not "properly secured" could lead you to legal problems.

Loan your buddy a hammer and he kills someone with it, you are on the hook. Leave your garage door open while working in the back yard and someone steals a hatchet and kills someone else with it you are on the hook.

Leave your car parked on the driveway, even though locked, its not in the garage and therefore not "secured", and someone breaks in and steals a knife and kills someone with it, you're on the hook.

Look, I agree that you should always secure your belongings, especially firearms, but trying to make a case for legal damages on behalf of the owner simply because he left his truck running while he ran into the store to grab some coffee, and someone steals his truck....that can open a can of worms that could potentially make EVERYONE a criminal.

Newsflash: that driver that runs into the store and leaves his vehicle running is already liable for anything it's used for. If not criminal, civil.

Really? I've never heard of anyone being held liable for leaving their vehicle running.

Any thoughts as to the rest of my post?

Many states have a Puffing law. Look it up. You might learn something. Or not.

I looked it up, only info I could find on it is in about 4 states it only said it was a law to keep vehicles from being stolen, but mentioned nothing about holding owners responsible for what thieves did with a stolen vehicle.

Trust me, an lawyer worth their salts will use that law to put financial burden on the car owner. It's not criminal, it's civil.

And that is why lawyers are the scum of the earth.

 

[Shawnee_b]

A person is not "paranoid" if they really are out to get you.

And they are. Started with the 1934 MG act, 1968 GCA, 1986 act (11th hour act). ATF has doubled the size of their CFR rulebook since my first in 68 and last one 2018. No input, no argument, no lawmakers, no Congress, no anyone arguing the 2nd,, just the jackboots doing what they wish. You won't be aware until they pass rules and many not even then.

Then the state laws! Try to get a firearm in NYC, CT. MA, Ill. One needs a FOID card, ie permission for that one firearm. Only the states are not reviewing applications for FOID, so no gun. In Ill lucky if you can get one in a year, if they let you. MANY types of firearms are banned in MA and CT, some even by caliber. And or by slick corrupt people. Know in CT one can own a machinegun provided the NFA hoops. And one more hoop. CT does not allow that machine gun to have a semi position on the selector. Very very few don't have a semi position. Works for them, not for you.

Some states have banned weapons, highcap magazines. There were little to no turnins, no compliance. MA believe it was told the State police to go door to door collecting, state was told a bold "screw you, do it yourself" How did the highcap ban in PA work for them. It didn't, near 0 compliance.

Got some awakening for you. Registration of firearms have been going on since the Brady act. If you buy at a gun dealer, shop, gunshow, and fill a 4473. You are background checked, you provided all info they need who/where/what. Make, model, caliber, action type, serial number. Oh yeah. Brady act says the FBI "can't keep this data" over 24 hrs. Lets say on Monday you got a "delayed" response vs a "proceed" Friday you get the verdict, don't like it, appeal. That's over 24hrs isn't it. Say it was a "proceed" Think FBI destroys all info? Think again, BATFe gets it for their database. Brady simply says "can't hold on to it" Passing the info to the ATF is not holding it (think a child holding crossed fingers behind their back) but it is registration and the ATF has it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

A person is not "paranoid" if they really are out to get you.

And they are. Started with the 1934 MG act, 1968 GCA, 1986 act (11th hour act). ATF has doubled the size of their CFR rulebook since my first in 68 and last one 2018. No input, no argument, no lawmakers, no Congress, no anyone arguing the 2nd,, just the jackboots doing what they wish. You won't be aware until they pass rules and many not even then.

Then the state laws! Try to get a firearm in NYC, CT. MA, Ill. One needs a FOID card, ie permission for that one firearm. Only the states are not reviewing applications for FOID, so no gun. In Ill lucky if you can get one in a year, if they let you. MANY types of firearms are banned in MA and CT, some even by caliber. And or by slick corrupt people. Know in CT one can own a machinegun provided the NFA hoops. And one more hoop. CT does not allow that machine gun to have a semi position on the selector. Very very few don't have a semi position. Works for them, not for you.

Some states have banned weapons, highcap magazines. There were little to no turnins, no compliance. MA believe it was told the State police to go door to door collecting, state was told a bold "screw you, do it yourself" How did the highcap ban in PA work for them. It didn't, near 0 compliance.

Got some awakening for you. Registration of firearms have been going on since the Brady act. If you buy at a gun dealer, shop, gunshow, and fill a 4473. You are background checked, you provided all info they need who/where/what. Make, model, caliber, action type, serial number. Oh yeah. Brady act says the FBI "can't keep this data" over 24 hrs. Lets say on Monday you got a "delayed" response vs a "proceed" Friday you get the verdict, don't like it, appeal. That's over 24hrs isn't it. Say it was a "proceed" Think FBI destroys all info? Think again, BATFe gets it for their database. Brady simply says "can't hold on to it" Passing the info to the ATF is not holding it (think a child holding crossed fingers behind their back) but it is registration and the ATF has it.

I notice that you start out whining about the Feds but quickly start whining about the States. The Feds can't ban guns of any kind. You have the right to own a jeep tripod mounted M-60 or M-240 if you wish to pay the fees. But the locals may have laws that says you can't. Full Auto Weapons were NEVER banned.

 

[Shawnee_b]

LOL liar tje atf can track anyone that buys lots of firearms and there is a law against it, requiring you to register and get an ffl.

No, not federal there isn't one but some states have limits. One can buy all the firearms they wish, 50 a day. Watch you, yes. Where the law came in I believe confused you is selling any. Then you need an FFL or you go down for "engaged in the business of selling firearms without a license" Even if one has a FFL type 03, C&R, curio and relics collector they cannot engage in the business, it's a collector lic not a dealer lic. However a C&R can occasionally sell one off their collection "to improve their collection"

This info is also available in ATF FAQ.

Is it illegal to stockpile guns?
That's not because it's illegal to horde thousands of rifles and handguns in your weird Bel Air mansion — stockpiling guns is actually protected by the Second Amendment, and most states have no limit on how many legal firearms you can own. ... Since the vast majority of gun manufacturing in the U.S.Jun 20, 2019


How many guns can I buy at once?
Summary of Federal Law
Federal law does not limit the number of guns a person may buy in any given time period. However, federal law does require federal firearm licensees (“FFLs”) to report multiple sales of handguns to ATF and other specified law enforcement agencies.


Gun Control in the United States of America
Weapons
Guns and Firearms
The United States of America
What's the maximum number of firearms you are allowed to own in the US?

Keith Shannon
, Texas LTC, scholar of 2A constitutional law

Depends on the state. In most of the United States, as many as you want. In New York City, as many as you can get individual permits to possess.
There is no Federal limit to gun ownership in terms of number of firearms. If there were, collectors and preppers alike would be complaining, loudly. The limit, where it exists, is typically in the form of discretionary authority over purchase permits. Some states, mainly concentrated in New England and the West Coast, require a person attempting to purchase a gun to obtain approval from local law enforcement or a state regulatory board. These permits are often discretionary; the approving agent or agency has the authority to deny the permit for any reason or no reason.

 

[Shawnee_b]

I'm well aware of the NFA regs on machine guns. as a licensed 07FFL manufacturer / class 2 SOT. I built them but could only sell to police and military with the excption silencers SBR, SBS

1986 act says "no new" machineguns to civilians. That's not a ban??? Say I want the latest MP5, or Styer Aug, or the new M338 replacing the M240, FN Scar, FN F2000, RM277 which is to replace the M4 which one can't buy either cause came out 1994 and many more. Can't, it's prohibited, banned. Looks to me the Feds DID ban certain firearms.

One must buy one on the registry, made before 1986, there aren't many and prohibitive costs. I mean prohibitive. Like CT and their "no semi selector" it's as effective as a total ban. $9000 for a Mac? $15K for a Ruger 556? $22K and up for a Tommy? $35K for an AK? $44K for an M16? $49K for an MP5?

The so-called "Hughes Amendment" didn't perturb the NRA enough to spur opposition, and the bill was passed by a Democratically controlled Congress, then signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. Upon his signature, the sale of new machine guns to or between civilians was effectively banned.


Getty Images / AFP / Stringer
And it worked: Ownership of automatic weapons wasn't banned outright — the proposition of collecting hundreds of thousands of such firearms from owners across the country would be daunting even if the firearms in question weren't capable of firing up to 950 rounds per minute — but it was intensely regulated.

To procure an automatic weapon made before 1986, gun collectors are required to obtain a special ATF license, undergo a background check, pay a tax on the firearm and even designate a licensed gun dealer who will receive the weapon in the event of your death. (Literally taking it from one's cold, dead hands, as it were.)

Even then, a would-be owner has to deal with the insanely high cost of a legal automatic weapon. With the vast majority of the 543,073 registered automatic weapons in the U.S. belonging to law enforcement, according to the ATF, the cost of a pre-1986 weapon can run well into five figures.

As a result of FOPA's implementation, machine guns were largely regulated out of circulation. The law choked off a major point in the machine-gun supply chain used by professional crime syndicates for whom they were the weapon of choice: In 1980, machine guns were used in 23% of homicides in cartel-ridden Miami. Machine gun deaths are so rare today that it's nearly impossible to find data on any crimes involving automatic weapons at all.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

One word Darryl,,,, "StreetSweeper"

Banned mid 2000's 12 ga with a drum mag.

Not banned by the 1934 Firearms Act. The word is Regulated. You can own it if you have the proper documentation and licensing. Hell, I can own a fully functional Surplus M-1A Abrams with either the 105 or the 120mm barrel plus that functional M-2 Machine Guns but most states won't allow that.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The paranoia concerning imaginary Big Blue Meanies coming to take precious shooties away, notwithstanding, if the problem were limited to "criminals in the hood" it would be comparatively easy to confront.

The tragic reality of horrific, ubiquitous, mass shootings such as at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Stoneman Douglas High School, Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Amish West Nickel Mines School, Mandalay Bay concert in Las Vegas, etc., etc., etc. cannot be avoided by pointing at scapegoats.

Except those kind of mass shootings are an anomaly, not the norm. Look at how many get shot and killed in Chicago on a holiday weekend, or any weekend for that matter.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns. Just jet over about 40 or 50 miles into Indianna and you can buy a gun fairly easily. Then motor back into Chicago slums. There are people making big bucks by legally purchasing in Indy, transporting them across the Ill state line and reselling them. According to the Chicago Police Chief, that comprises over 60% of the "Illegal" guns on the street.

And most of the Chitown shootings are done by legally procured guns.

'Legally' procured?

I don't expect you to understand as it would make your head explode if you did.

I'm trying to understand how someone could 'legally' buy a firearm, especially when it is ILLEGAL to buy a firearm in a state you don't live in.

including handguns.

They can be purchased, but have to be sent to an FFL in the purchasers home state.

Unless it's a private sale, pay and go isn't allowed.

Okay, let's say you are just misinformed. A Legal Indy person can guy the guns. He goes from place to place and buys even more guns until his van is filled up. He then drives the Van and it's contents into Chitown and sells the Van and all it's cargo for a nice tidy profit. These guns were purchased legally although what happens after that isn't. BTW, many guns make it into Mexico the same way from Texas where it's even easier.

The problem isn't with Ill, it's with Indy who refuses to clean their system up and go after these gun runners. Same goes for Texas. BTW, Kansas is bitching about MJ being legally purchased in Colorado and then transported to Kansas.

LOL liar tje atf can track anyone that buys lots of firearms and there is a law against it, requiring you to register and get an ffl.

So OAN told you that, right. Newsflash: You can buy as many guns as you want in the Denny's parking lot without recording a damned thing. Plus,in Indy, you can purchase 2 or 3 at a single location but go to many locations to get the numbers you want. I can tell you are a Rumper. You don't want it fixed. It gives you something to whine around.

The law is clear it is illegal to sell to an out of state person with out sending the firearm to the stte ffl he is from it is illegal to sell with out a background chec and it is required all sales from a licensed ffl must be reported to atf.