2nd Amendment limitations...

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3238411
Your Quote
"People who modify semi-autos today are doing it for one purpose - major damage and firepower for a crime."
I'll let is speak for itself. Nobody but you would ever modify the weapon just to go have a little harmless fun.
Not in today's world. I doubt the gun advocates who follow the rules verbatim would never contemplate modifying a semi-auto knowing it's against the law. I wouldn't do it today. Would you?
What is the difference between an AR 15 "assault" riffle and a Mini 14 ranch riffle? Functionally nothing. Both are semi automatic 223 with a detachable magazine. Difference is the Mini doesn't look like an M16 so it wasn't subject to the ban.
If it has the same functionaily and capability, it should be. Give the assault weapons advocates some time. They'll add it to the list. Actually, the AR-15 as a whole isn't banned. They only banned the models that had the 'options' installed that are on the ban list (i.e grenade launcher, detachable stock, etc.
What is responsible for the most deaths in the US annually:
A) Guns
B) Doctors
C) Cars
D) Water
Who cares. One death by any of those is one too many.
Your idea about gun registration fits right in with Hitler and Stalin's. Why we are at it lets make people register to exercise freedom of speech too.
You don't give up. You have a tattoo of your NRA Membership Card on your forearm?

What's wrong with registering any firearm? If you're the responsible gun owner you say you are, you should have no problem with it. Do you have a problem registering your car? I mean, why should you? You bought it, you own it, the government has no business keeping track of it. Oh that's right. They do it for SAFETY reasons!! You're skewing the actual meaning and intentions of the 2nd Amendment. There's a difference between 'the right to bear arms' and the 'right to bear arms RESPONSIBLY'. I mean, so what I have a criminal record. I WANT MY GUN. The 2nd says I have a right to one. Your statement validates this waiting period they implemented is completely useless. The main intent of that stupid law is basically to give some hot head a 'cooling off' period before being able to pick up his newly purchased weapon. Keeps him from walking straight out of the store, and driving back over to his neighbor to blow him away because of some ridiculous dispute. The background checks they have in place today are a waste of time as well. As long as I only have a few traffic tickets on my record, I'm good to go. Just because I'm on an 'anti-depressant' and have been diagnosed as bipolar, who cares? I WANT MY GUN! GIVE ME MY GUN! Get the point?
Saying what's on your mind rarely gets someone killed. Putting a firearm in the hands of the wrong individual that intends to use that weapon for a criminal act, WILL.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238463
Saying what's on your mind rarely gets someone killed. Putting a firearm in the hands of the wrong individual that intends to use that weapon for a criminal act, WILL.
LOL! Tell that to Martin Luther King.
Both are protected rights. Driving is a privilege. If you allow the government to register one you are giving them the right to register any of them. If you allow the government to register any right you are then subject to their terms and conditions that can change with the political winds. NOT SMART.
If you ever belonged to the NRA you are one up on me, never been a member.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3238518
LOL! Tell that to Martin Luther King.
Both are protected rights. Driving is a privilege. If you allow the government to register one you are giving them the right to register any of them. If you allow the government to register any right you are then subject to their terms and conditions that can change with the political winds. NOT SMART.
If you ever belonged to the NRA you are one up on me, never been a member.
Sorry. MLK was shot for more than talking.
Driving is a privilege, but owning a car is not. Regardless if you drive or not, you're required to register your car in your respective state.
That where paranoia comes into play. Just because it makes logical sense to register certain firearms, doesn't mean that opens the door for the government to register everything else under the sun. The Constitutionalist think that if you allow the government to restrict you in one thing, they'll automatically restrict your entire lifestyle. Again, being paranoid of a government run BY THE PEOPLE. The same people who would have to live by the same restrictions if they passed said laws.
I still wouldn't see a problem with registering any firearm. You're pretty much doing that now when you buy one. I'll ask again - If you're a responsible gun owner, and intend to use that firearm for any legal purpose, what's wrong with registering it?

 

[veni vidi vici]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238580
- If you're a responsible gun owner, and intend to use that firearm for any legal purpose, what's wrong with registering it?
Because its none of the governments friggin business.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3238588
Because its none of the governments friggin business.

It's none of the government's business how much money I make. But they do. It's none of the government's business what kind of cars, boats, RV's, or motorcycles I buy. But they do. It's none of the government's business to know whether I'm married or not, how many kids I have, or whether my kids go to school. But they do. It's none of the government's business what type of business I own, how many employees I hire, and how much I pay them. But they do. Why should firearms have an exclusion?
Shoot, if there's anyone the government should know how many guns they have, it's you.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238580
Sorry. MLK was shot for more than talking.
Driving is a privilege, but owning a car is not. Regardless if you drive or not, you're required to register your car in your respective state.
That where paranoia comes into play. Just because it makes logical sense to register certain firearms, doesn't mean that opens the door for the government to register everything else under the sun. The Constitutionalist think that if you allow the government to restrict you in one thing, they'll automatically restrict your entire lifestyle. Again, being paranoid of a government run BY THE PEOPLE. The same people who would have to live by the same restrictions if they passed said laws.
I still wouldn't see a problem with registering any firearm. You're pretty much doing that now when you buy one. I'll ask again - If you're a responsible gun owner, and intend to use that firearm for any legal purpose, what's wrong with registering it?
I've lived in California, Arizona, Idaho, Montana and Colorado. Not one of those required to to register a car to possess it, only if you want to drive it on their roads. Also, could you point out where in the constitution we were granted the right to drive?
I will not register my guns because I cannot be required to ask permission from the government to exercise any of my other constitutional rights.
If you want to run around in the Pollyanna rose colored glasses concerning the feds be my guest. I've seen too many abuses. As we have seen over and over and over again the federal government doesn't give a rat fart for the people. They are only interested in the next election and keeping Freddie Mac and Fanny May in business so they have a place to retire. Registration leads to confiscation. If we all run out and register our guns they will know just where to come pick them up once a democrat stays in power long enough to add a couple more left wingers to the SCOTUS.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238802
It's none of the government's business how much money I make. But they do. It's none of the government's business what kind of cars, boats, RV's, or motorcycles I buy. But they do. It's none of the government's business to know whether I'm married or not, how many kids I have, or whether my kids go to school. But they do. It's none of the government's business what type of business I own, how many employees I hire, and how much I pay them. But they do. Why should firearms have an exclusion?
Shoot, if there's anyone the government should know how many guns they have, it's you.

So if someone breaks a window to get into your house to steal your TV your solution is to give them a key so next time they can come in the door. I guess it saves you the cost of the window.

 

[salt210]

Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid
http:///forum/post/3234365
So after reading the other post I started, the 2nd amendment debate came up yet again, and I have a simple question:
When the constitution says you have the right to bear arms, what exactly does the constitution consider to be "arms"? Is a handgun considered arms? How bout a knife, ninja sword, flaming ball of gas, nuclear weapon, etc...
I only ask, because I get SO irritated by those who get their respective panties in a bunch when the thought of banning assult weapons comes up. Call me crazy, but I can't possibly imagine a time where any individual would need what in essence is a military grade weapon.
Someone please enlighten me as to why you would ever use, or want one...
Hunting? No
Self Defense? No
Stopping those pesky Brits from knocking your door down? well, maybe...
I did not read this whole post as I am a late comer. But to me and many others the 2A was put in place to give us a way to fight for ourselves with equal arms as our government

 

[salt210]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238580
Sorry. MLK was shot for more than talking.
Driving is a privilege, but owning a car is not. Regardless if you drive or not, you're required to register your car in your respective state.
That where paranoia comes into play. Just because it makes logical sense to register certain firearms, doesn't mean that opens the door for the government to register everything else under the sun. The Constitutionalist think that if you allow the government to restrict you in one thing, they'll automatically restrict your entire lifestyle. Again, being paranoid of a government run BY THE PEOPLE. The same people who would have to live by the same restrictions if they passed said laws.
I still wouldn't see a problem with registering any firearm. You're pretty much doing that now when you buy one. I'll ask again - If you're a responsible gun owner, and intend to use that firearm for any legal purpose, what's wrong with registering it?
Bionic, even tho one person purchased the gun, there is no paperwork that says that person hasnt sold the firearm off

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by salt210
http:///forum/post/3238813
Bionic, even tho one person purchased the gun, there is no paperwork that says that person hasnt sold the firearm off
There isn't now, but maybe there should be. You're required to file paperwork to transfer the title of your vehicle to a new owner when you sell it. Do you have a problem with the government tracking what happens to a used vehicle when it's sold? I don't. I don't want to buy a car that's not safe to drive. I don't want to buy a lemon, or a car that has an odometer reading of 40,0000 miles, when the car actually has 105,000 miles on it. If there was a requirement to register your gun with a national database that could be used by the police to track back the owner of a weapon when used in a crime, then maybe criminals would have second thoughts about using that weapon. Get rid of the old serial numbering system of guns. Put chips on them like you put into your pets so you can find them if they get lost. Make it so a gun can be traced back to the original owner no matter where it ends up. If that weapon is used in a crime, whoever is listed as the current owner gets prosecuted for the crime. Happens with cars. You buy a car new, then sell it later. Somewhere down the line, the car is used in a crime. The registration number on that car can be traced back to the last owner because that car is required to be registered with the state to get license plates. Unless the car was reported stolen, or can be proved that that person didn't own the car at the time of the crime, that owner is held responsible for the crime that was committed with that car. Same could be done with firearms. But people like reef and Veni think that requirement violates some Constitutional Amendment. Where in the 2nd does it says the government can't require you to register your firearm? Where does it say it in the 1st?
Kind of makes me wonder about a gun owner that would be against doing something that would validate they were a responsible gun owner. If you never intend to use a firearm in a criminal manner, why would you object to letting the police know you own the gun? Reef and Veni keep saying that 'they' would come and take my guns away from me. What's comical is the 'they' they are referring to are the same people as you and me. The 'they' are just REPRESENTATIVES of the people. 'They' hold no more power than any of us. 'They' are just elected officials that have to abide by the same rules and laws they implement as you and I do. Reef and Veni think there's this EVIL little entity hiding in Washington just waiting to come and take everything you own, and strip you of every right you have. If you believe that, then you have a REAL disconnect with reality and how the Democratic system works in this country.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3238806
So if someone breaks a window to get into your house to steal your TV your solution is to give them a key so next time they can come in the door. I guess it saves you the cost of the window.
What kind of analogy is that? What has registering your firearms have to do with giving them to someone? You afraid that if you register your guns, it gives the authorities the right to take them away from you? Come on. Registration is just a tracking mechanism. Do you have a problem with your insurance company knowing you own guns? Bet you don't. If someone were to break into your house and steal your guns, you'd want your homeowners insurance to cover the loss. Do you write down the serial numbers on your guns? What would be the point? If they're stolen, there's no way to track them in case they get sold at a pawn shop or used in a crime. You're just out a couple thousand bucks. Sucks to be you.

 

[salt210]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238874
What kind of analogy is that? What has registering your firearms have to do with giving them to someone? You afraid that if you register your guns, it gives the authorities the right to take them away from you? Come on. Registration is just a tracking mechanism. Do you have a problem with your insurance company knowing you own guns? Bet you don't. If someone were to break into your house and steal your guns, you'd want your homeowners insurance to cover the loss. Do you write down the serial numbers on your guns? What would be the point? If they're stolen, there's no way to track them in case they get sold at a pawn shop or used in a crime. You're just out a couple thousand bucks. Sucks to be you.
after katrina the "authorities" were going door to door confiscating firearms. for every firearm that I have I do have the serial numbers, so that when they are reported stolen they will be stolen and not a legal firearm.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by salt210
http:///forum/post/3238894
after katrina the "authorities" were going door to door confiscating firearms. for every firearm that I have I do have the serial numbers, so that when they are reported stolen they will be stolen and not a legal firearm.
Why would you bother giving the authorities your serial numbers if you guns were stolen, if they have no listing of your serial numbers in the first place? Since your guns aren't registered, why would you care if they were used in a crime, since they can't be traced back to you anyways?
The authorities were confiscating guns in New Orleans and Mississippi after Katrina? I never heard about this. If they were doing this, I would think that would've been on every major headline in the country, and every NRA member and 2nd Amendment fanatic would've jumped all over that. So how and when did you get your guns back? What law gave them the right to take your guns in the first place? Is there some martial law that states when there's a federal emergency or disaster, the authorities are allowed to take your guns from your possession? News to me.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238874
What kind of analogy is that? What has registering your firearms have to do with giving them to someone? You afraid that if you register your guns, it gives the authorities the right to take them away from you? Come on. Registration is just a tracking mechanism. Do you have a problem with your insurance company knowing you own guns? Bet you don't. If someone were to break into your house and steal your guns, you'd want your homeowners insurance to cover the loss. Do you write down the serial numbers on your guns? What would be the point? If they're stolen, there's no way to track them in case they get sold at a pawn shop or used in a crime. You're just out a couple thousand bucks. Sucks to be you.
You threw out taxes (which by the way are authorized by the 16th amendment) as an example of the government snooping into issues of your life where they don't belong as a way of justifying allowing them to register guns. So what your saying is if the government gets to snoop into your personal life (break into your house) we might as well let them register our right to own guns (give them the key). Like I said, you go right ahead. In a perfect world where we could trust the politicians to follow the constitution registering guns would ALMOST make sense.
I am mellow about this stuff compared to other gun owners. I actually think it would be a pretty good idea to ban magazines in excess of 10 rounds and have no issues with gun show background checks but I'll tell you this much. Anything short of a constitutional amendment to repeal the second amendment I am not giving up a single gun unless I happen to be convicted of a felony and wont register them either. You may be willing to give up your rights for a false sense of security, not me.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238868
There isn't now, but maybe there should be. You're required to file paperwork to transfer the title of your vehicle to a new owner when you sell it. Do you have a problem with the government tracking what happens to a used vehicle when it's sold? I don't. I don't want to buy a car that's not safe to drive. I don't want to buy a lemon, or a car that has an odometer reading of 40,0000 miles, when the car actually has 105,000 miles on it. If there was a requirement to register your gun with a national database that could be used by the police to track back the owner of a weapon when used in a crime, then maybe criminals would have second thoughts about using that weapon. Get rid of the old serial numbering system of guns. Put chips on them like you put into your pets so you can find them if they get lost. Make it so a gun can be traced back to the original owner no matter where it ends up. If that weapon is used in a crime, whoever is listed as the current owner gets prosecuted for the crime. Happens with cars. You buy a car new, then sell it later. Somewhere down the line, the car is used in a crime. The registration number on that car can be traced back to the last owner because that car is required to be registered with the state to get license plates. Unless the car was reported stolen, or can be proved that that person didn't own the car at the time of the crime, that owner is held responsible for the crime that was committed with that car. Same could be done with firearms. But people like reef and Veni think that requirement violates some Constitutional Amendment. Where in the 2nd does it says the government can't require you to register your firearm? Where does it say it in the 1st?
Kind of makes me wonder about a gun owner that would be against doing something that would validate they were a responsible gun owner. If you never intend to use a firearm in a criminal manner, why would you object to letting the police know you own the gun? Reef and Veni keep saying that 'they' would come and take my guns away from me. What's comical is the 'they' they are referring to are the same people as you and me. The 'they' are just REPRESENTATIVES of the people. 'They' hold no more power than any of us. 'They' are just elected officials that have to abide by the same rules and laws they implement as you and I do. Reef and Veni think there's this EVIL little entity hiding in Washington just waiting to come and take everything you own, and strip you of every right you have. If you believe that, then you have a REAL disconnect with reality and how the Democratic system works in this country.
If you are foolish enough to believe the powers that be in DC are part of "we" I don't know what to tell you.

But then again you believe our form of government is democratic so I guess that is where your misconceptions come from. If we had a democratic system where we the people got to vote on every bill created by congress this country would indeed be great. I guarantee you bills spending millions on pork projects and creating stupid, ineffectual laws like the assault weapon ban would have never seen the light of day.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3238918
Why would you bother giving the authorities your serial numbers if you guns were stolen, if they have no listing of your serial numbers in the first place? Since your guns aren't registered, why would you care if they were used in a crime, since they can't be traced back to you anyways?
The authorities were confiscating guns in New Orleans and Mississippi after Katrina? I never heard about this. If they were doing this, I would think that would've been on every major headline in the country, and every NRA member and 2nd Amendment fanatic would've jumped all over that. So how and when did you get your guns back? What law gave them the right to take your guns in the first place? Is there some martial law that states when there's a federal emergency or disaster, the authorities are allowed to take your guns from your possession? News to me.
Not something you would have heard on Air America or BS NBC

* Notice the Smiley
New Orleans did confiscate guns, not sure if other cities did or not. I guess NO was afraid some of their cops would be shot while looting.
I didn't hear of guns being confiscated anywhere else.

 

[fishtaco]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3238926
You threw out taxes (which by the way are authorized by the 16th amendment) as an example of the government snooping into issues of your life where they don't belong as a way of justifying allowing them to register guns. So what your saying is if the government gets to snoop into your personal life (break into your house) we might as well let them register our right to own guns (give them the key). Like I said, you go right ahead. In a perfect world where we could trust the politicians to follow the constitution registering guns would ALMOST make sense.
I am mellow about this stuff compared to other gun owners. I actually think it would be a pretty good idea to ban magazines in excess of 10 rounds and have no issues with gun show background checks but I'll tell you this much. Anything short of a constitutional amendment to repeal the second amendment I am not giving up a single gun unless I happen to be convicted of a felony and wont register them either. You may be willing to give up your rights for a false sense of security, not me.
I don't have an issue with background checks either at gun shows, I engrave all my guns in a very clear location with my driver's license and "not for sale". I know somebody else who does the same and they had their house broken into just before Christmas and the thief pulled the shotgun out and must have seen the engraving and left it sitting on the bed. Makes it harder to sell them, but I don't get into buying and selling so not a problem.
I like the new technology that will allow a gun to only fire for it's owner, but to pursue something like this on a federal level does not make sense because of all the guns already out there.
Fishtaco

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Fishtaco
http:///forum/post/3238940
I don't have an issue with background checks either at gun shows, I engrave all my guns in a very clear location with my driver's license and "not for sale". I know somebody else who does the same and they had their house broken into just before Christmas and the thief pulled the shotgun out and must have seen the engraving and left it sitting on the bed. Makes it harder to sell them, but I don't get into buying and selling so not a problem.
I like the new technology that will allow a gun to only fire for it's owner, but to pursue something like this on a federal level does not make sense because of all the guns already out there.
Fishtaco

I've got some shooters and I've got some collector pieces. The engraving sounds like a great idea for the shooters. People looking to grab them for a quick resale are going to think twice about taking them.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3238934
If you are foolish enough to believe the powers that be in DC are part of "we" I don't know what to tell you.

But then again you believe our form of government is democratic so I guess that is where your misconceptions come from. If we had a democratic system where we the people got to vote on every bill created by congress this country would indeed be great. I guarantee you bills spending millions on pork projects and creating stupid, ineffectual laws like the assault weapon ban would have never seen the light of day.
That's why it's apparent that the system is broken. We as a nation have allowed our system of government to turn into something more of a Monarchy than a Democracy. We've allowed politicians to put themselves into this different 'society' that they feel they are above the rest of us. By your comments they've succeeded. What's sad is the American voter doesn't want to do anything to try and change it. Texas just voted for their respective party affiliates for Governor yesterday. Approximately 11% of Republican's voted for their candidate, and only 5% of the Democrats voted for theirs. So people whine and cry that Big Government is trying to run their lives and put them in the poor house, yet they don't even exercise their basic Constitutional right to change it. If you can't get off your lazy butt and take 20 minutes to go to your local polling place to vote, then you should have absolutely no right to complain what your Government is or isn't doing for you or this country.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3239016
That's why it's apparent that the system is broken. We as a nation have allowed our system of government to turn into something more of a Monarchy than a Democracy. We've allowed politicians to put themselves into this different 'society' that they feel they are above the rest of us. By your comments they've succeeded. What's sad is the American voter doesn't want to do anything to try and change it. Texas just voted for their respective party affiliates for Governor yesterday. Approximately 11% of Republican's voted for their candidate, and only 5% of the Democrats voted for theirs. So people whine and cry that Big Government is trying to run their lives and put them in the poor house, yet they don't even exercise their basic Constitutional right to change it. If you can't get off your lazy butt and take 20 minutes to go to your local polling place to vote, then you should have absolutely no right to complain what your Government is or isn't doing for you or this country.
I agree with that. People are dense.
Tonight on Oreilly he had a guest on discussing Obama care. The woman said making everyone buy insurance would bring down the cost and while Oreilly agreed he also said he thought it would be found unconstitutional and thrown out. She again makes the point that having more people on insurance and less scamming the ER would lower the cost and Oreilly again says, "Yes but the constitution doesn't grant the government the authority to make us buy something, including health insurance".
Her answer is "thats true but this wont work unless we make everyone buy health insurance". A supposedly educated woman who doesn't understand the notion that just because something might make sense it doesn't make it allowable under the law of the land. Stunning

By the way, I agree with both of them. Making people buy health insurance would drop the costs for those of us who do the right thing and the government doesn't have the authority to do so under the constitution.