No one is going to take your guns

[Ernie S.]

There will be blood, and hell to pay for this. These idiots do not realize the Pandora's box they just opened on themselves. For the gun owners of New York: Do not give in to their demands. You have your rights.

The Second Amendment:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Stuff all that 2nd amendment stuff Tempie....I'd have your Gun before you can say TEMPLAR KORMAC....


Like AUSTRALIA.....SAY NO TO GUNS.....and remember since the ASSASSINATION of President JFK.......over 1.2 Million Americans have been Killed/Murdered BY GUNS.

Steve(Well we can't agree on everything Tempie)

You wanna try to come and take mine?

 

[thereisnospoon]

They're ordering someone who knowingly is breaking the law there to turn over their guns.

It looks more like they changed the law and are now trying to enforce that change on people who registered guns that were perfectly legal.

It is stupid to say the least and it does shoot the shit out of the whole ‘no one is taking your guns’ argument because here they are – taking this persons guns.

that is why

registration always = confiscation

I support a testing and licensing procedure similar to obtaining a driver's license.
I see no harm in requiring gun owners to take some kind of safety course then becoming licensed upon passing said course.
After all, in order to get a permit( In NC) one must submit to a background check by local or county law enforcement. For concealed carry, one must take a safety and knowledge course, show proficiency and knowledge of the firearm one will carry before the permit is issued.

 

[Pogo]

A co-worker who had just went hunting was stopped at a road block. Checking Insurance and Registration, and looking for drunks.........

He had his guns on the back seat.............

One of the Police told the others to come over, and said LOOK AT THESE GUNS................

He stated they all gathered around and looked..........Then he was asked, why do you have these guns..................Are they loaded....................

The Co-worker said, yes they are loaded and I don't have to tell you why they are there...........And he then reminded them that he wasn't violating the law as OPEN CARRY IS LEGAL in Miss..........

They said, OK and he was on his way...............

Which is why I like the open carry law.........When I was a kid, we used to carry either a shotgun or 22 rifle back into the woods to hunt and target shoot...........We walked through the neighborhood with these guns............No one cared back then......We'd wave and they'd say be careful........

In today's world they'd probably call the police.......Time's have changed.

So you're fine with random SS searches of law abiding citizens moving about freely without probable cause ---------- as long as they don't go for the guns?

 

[Pogo]

22 LR is a great gun

cheaper on bullets too.........

Nothing wrong with it unless your a lib who thinks GUNS EVIL...........

Not surprising considering said libs also will not eat anything that has eyes. Which MO shows quite well in my sig. Got her pie hole full on the munch and has another steam shovel full on deck. LMAO

-Geaux

What in the wide world of fuck are you babbling about?

What is that, archaic Slovenian?

 

[Erand7899]

Jesus no one is confiscating anything. He can sell or move them to another place where once again it is not illegal. If he turns them in that is his choice. So is living in New Yorkistan.

Very few modern firearms hold less than six rounds, and that means this law disarms just about everyone in New York City. However, the police and the gangbangers will still have their guns. Doesn't that make you feel safer than ever?

 

[Geaux4it]

It looks more like they changed the law and are now trying to enforce that change on people who registered guns that were perfectly legal.

It is stupid to say the least and it does shoot the shit out of the whole ‘no one is taking your guns’ argument because here they are – taking this persons guns.

that is why

registration always = confiscation

I support a testing and licensing procedure similar to obtaining a driver's license.
I see no harm in requiring gun owners to take some kind of safety course then becoming licensed upon passing said course.
After all, in order to get a permit( In NC) one must submit to a background check by local or county law enforcement. For concealed carry, one must take a safety and knowledge course, show proficiency and knowledge of the firearm one will carry before the permit is issued.

Testing is a solution in search of a problem. While common sense dictates one should know how to safely handle a firearm, there is no evidence this requirement would have any effect on crime

-Geaux

 

[jon_berzerk]

It looks more like they changed the law and are now trying to enforce that change on people who registered guns that were perfectly legal.

It is stupid to say the least and it does shoot the shit out of the whole ‘no one is taking your guns’ argument because here they are – taking this persons guns.

that is why

registration always = confiscation

I support a testing and licensing procedure similar to obtaining a driver's license.
I see no harm in requiring gun owners to take some kind of safety course then becoming licensed upon passing said course.
After all, in order to get a permit( In NC) one must submit to a background check by local or county law enforcement. For concealed carry, one must take a safety and knowledge course, show proficiency and knowledge of the firearm one will carry before the permit is issued.

for generally purchasing a firearm a criminal/mental background screening

as for concealed carry pay the ten bucks

and meet the following

Is eighteen years-of age or older;
Has never pled guilty to, nolo contendere to, or been convicted of a felony or a crime of violence; Note: "Crime of violence" is defined in SDCL 22-1-2 (9)
Is not habitually in an intoxicated or drugged condition;
Has no history of violence;
Has not been found in the previous ten years to be a "danger to others" or a "danger to self" as defined in SDCL 27A-1-1 or is not currently adjudged mentally incompetent;
Has physically resided in and is a resident of the county where the application is being made for at least thirty days immediately preceding the date of the application;
Has had no violations of chapter 23-7, firearms control, 22-14, unlawful use of weapons, or 22-42, controlled substances; marijuana, constituting a felony or misdemeanor in the five years preceding the date of application or is not currently charged under indictment or information for such an offense;
Is a citizen of the United States; and
Is not a fugitive from justice.

my permit is valid in your state

with the exception that one has to be 21 years old

as for open carry no permit is needed at all

 

[Geaux4it]

22 LR is a great gun

cheaper on bullets too.........

Nothing wrong with it unless your a lib who thinks GUNS EVIL...........

Not surprising considering said libs also will not eat anything that has eyes. Which MO shows quite well in my sig. Got her pie hole full on the munch and has another steam shovel full on deck. LMAO

-Geaux

What in the wide world of fuck are you babbling about?

What is that, archaic Slovenian?

I think it's opposite of ebonics.

-Geaux

 

[chikenwing]

It looks more like they changed the law and are now trying to enforce that change on people who registered guns that were perfectly legal.

It is stupid to say the least and it does shoot the shit out of the whole ‘no one is taking your guns’ argument because here they are – taking this persons guns.

that is why

registration always = confiscation

I support a testing and licensing procedure similar to obtaining a driver's license.
I see no harm in requiring gun owners to take some kind of safety course then becoming licensed upon passing said course.
After all, in order to get a permit( In NC) one must submit to a background check by local or county law enforcement. For concealed carry, one must take a safety and knowledge course, show proficiency and knowledge of the firearm one will carry before the permit is issued.

Whats your take on voter ID laws?

 

[Pogo]

Not surprising considering said libs also will not eat anything that has eyes. Which MO shows quite well in my sig. Got her pie hole full on the munch and has another steam shovel full on deck. LMAO

-Geaux

What in the wide world of fuck are you babbling about?

What is that, archaic Slovenian?

I think it's opposite of ebonics.

-Geaux

Whatever it is, it makes no point.

 

[Geaux4it]

What in the wide world of fuck are you babbling about?

What is that, archaic Slovenian?

I think it's opposite of ebonics.

-Geaux

Whatever it is, it makes no point.

No offense- That's because you are an Obama supporter, which means logic escapes you.

-Geaux

 

[The Rabbi]

It looks more like they changed the law and are now trying to enforce that change on people who registered guns that were perfectly legal.

It is stupid to say the least and it does shoot the shit out of the whole ‘no one is taking your guns’ argument because here they are – taking this persons guns.

that is why

registration always = confiscation

I support a testing and licensing procedure similar to obtaining a driver's license.
I see no harm in requiring gun owners to take some kind of safety course then becoming licensed upon passing said course.
After all, in order to get a permit( In NC) one must submit to a background check by local or county law enforcement. For concealed carry, one must take a safety and knowledge course, show proficiency and knowledge of the firearm one will carry before the permit is issued.

As some know, I am a firearms dealer in real life. I fill out 4473s (the over the counter purchase form) all day long. I have lots of different kinds of people through the shop. I have been doing this for 10 years.
After all that time I am convinced that the Gun Control Act of 1968 is a farce. No one is safer as a result of background checks for firearms purchases. No one is safer because handguns and pistol grip shotguns and AR receivers cannot be sold to an out of state resident. No one is safer because an 18 year old cannot buy 9mm ammunition, unless he is buying it for his carbine. In which case it's OK. No one is safer because if he buys 2 handguns from the same dealer within 5 days the dealer must submit a form to ATF stating such.
No one is safer because they are made to take a course in gun safety. No one takes a course in chainsaw safety, yet millions are sold and used every year. And chainsaws are probably more dangerous than firearms.
TN requires an 8hr class for a carry permit. Indiana requires a form and a fee paid to the county sherriff. Both states have identical rates of crime by permit holders.
We have 100 years worth of experience with gun control laws. None of them work. Get rid of all of them. Put criminals in jail for real.

 

[Pogo]

I think it's opposite of ebonics.

-Geaux

Whatever it is, it makes no point.

No offense- That's because you are an Obama supporter, which means logic escapes you.

-Geaux

And where do you get that idea?



"which MO shows in your sig"? You don't even have a sig. You used to, until I pointed out that it was bogus...

 

[JoeB131]

Dear Democrats:

You own whatever comes out of this. If government officials are shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens, the onus is on you. There are just some things you don't do: Don't hit on another man's woman, ride another man's Harley, and don't mess with his guns.

I'm sure the same goes for the ladies as well.

Last time I checked, if you killed someone for hit on your woman or riding your Harley, your ass still goes to jail, as it should.

That's what's called "A disproportianate response".

If government officials are shot, the people who do it should be treated just like anyone else who shoots at law enforcement.

 

[Geaux4it]

Whatever it is, it makes no point.

No offense- That's because you are an Obama supporter, which means logic escapes you.

-Geaux

And where do you get that idea?



"which MO shows in your sig"? You don't even have a sig. You used to, until I pointed out that it was bogus...

Like most of your post lol...

-Geaux

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

That's how stupid the law is, which is the bigger point

-Geaux

funny thing though

the law only targeted law abiding citizens

(those that obeyed the registration law originally)

the criminal who did not obey the law is content

in the knowing that the city does not know they

they have firearms

We should get rid of any laws that some people break?

That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard on this forum.

Noooo...the most retarded thing would be a person who cant grasp the fact that the criminals wont turn their guns in.
Now thats retarded!!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Isn't it amazing how many times people say that, and how they are always proven wrong?

There’s nothing in the OP citing a case where a citizen’s gun was ‘confiscated’ and a hearing conducted subsequently to determine if the taking was warranted, and if warranted what the just compensation would be in accordance with the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause.

Such a case would be part of the public record and available to the OP to document.

Absent a sample case as proof, no ‘confiscation’ has taken place.

What’s not amazing is the OP is once again wrong, and once again only succeeded in exhibiting his ignorance.

Dance,Dance Dance......

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Nonsense.

Criminals don’t obey laws making car theft illegal.

By your ‘reasoning’ stealing a car shouldn’t be a crime.

If a criminal is found in possession of a stolen car or an illegal gun, he’ll be subject to criminal prosecution. That’s how laws and the justice system work.

of course one can be busted for having it

they can not be busted for not registering as i said in the post

registration is aimed at the law abiding

not the criminal since they can not register

There's no penalty for possessing an unregistered handgun in New York State?

lol

So just how many people can the criminal with the gun kill before they take it away?
Is there like a limit or something? Maybe they should go to the projects and start kicking in doors,thats where the problem lies.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Dear Democrats:

You own whatever comes out of this. If government officials are shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens, the onus is on you. There are just some things you don't do: Don't hit on another man's woman, ride another man's Harley, and don't mess with his guns.

I'm sure the same goes for the ladies as well.

Drama Queen alert.


"shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens"?

Uh - you're saying law abiding citizens would murder? That actually would make taking their guns away the right thing to do, doncha think?

The Supreme Court already ruled that citizens have the right to defend themselves with lethal force against unlawful arrest or assault or theft.

The Constitution is the highest law in the land.

 

[Pogo]

Dear Democrats:

You own whatever comes out of this. If government officials are shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens, the onus is on you. There are just some things you don't do: Don't hit on another man's woman, ride another man's Harley, and don't mess with his guns.

I'm sure the same goes for the ladies as well.

Drama Queen alert.


"shot and/or killed in New York for taking firearms from law abiding citizens"?

Uh - you're saying law abiding citizens would murder? That actually would make taking their guns away the right thing to do, doncha think?

The Supreme Court already ruled that citizens have the right to defend themselves with lethal force against unlawful arrest or assault or theft.

The Constitution is the highest law in the land.

And the link to where SCOTUS ruled murder Constitutional is.... where again?