US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement
-
I think there are some problems...
-
They want to raise the legal age to own a long gun to 21. They're going to have to refine that. If a kid can be drafted and go to war, if he can vote, then surely he can own a .22 rifle or a shotgun.
-
LFD makes a very good point. During the Clinton Administration there was a lot of emphasis on domestic violence. As such, a domestic violence misdemeanor can now disqualify a citizen from buying a gun. Any gun. It's the only misdemeanor I know of that can possible prohibit you from buying a firearm.
There's going to have to be some rules and regs made for the proposed Red Flag laws, so that we don't trample over people's Constitutional rights.
See Form 4473:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions
- BTW, if you use marijuana you may be disqualified from owning a gun. Or if you take a Class III painkiller.
The devil is in the details.
-
-
From the CNN article:
"What lawmakers left out
Expanded background checksNotably, the agreement doesn’t include a provision that would expand background checks for all firearm sales or transfers in the country. Currently, background checks are not required for gun sales and transfers by unlicensed and private sellers.
Democrats have long supported such a requirement, and last year the House passed gun legislation that would expand background checks on all commercial gun sales, marking the first congressional move on significant gun control since Democrats won the White House and the majority in both chambers of Congress.
Assault weapons ban
Also left out is a federal ban on military-style assault weapons, another measure Democrats have been pushing in recent years, citing mass shootings that have involved such weapons.
Higher minimum age of purchase
Additionally, the agreement doesn’t include a change to the age at which a person needs to be to purchase an assault-style weapon. Democrats, including West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, the chamber’s most conservative Democrat, have said the age to purchase assault weapons must be raised from 18 to 21.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What, exactly is "military-style assault weapons?" Wasn't that ban on scary-looking guns enacted in 1994 with zero effect on gun deaths?
I have no problem with many of the other provisions (and I say that as someone who owns zero firearms). But, as I alluded in another thread, pandering is easy, governing is hard.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
I think there are some problems...
-
They want to raise the legal age to own a long gun to 21. They're going to have to refine that. If a kid can be drafted and go to war, if he can vote, then surely he can own a .22 rifle or a shotgun.
-
LFD makes a very good point. During the Clinton Administration there was a lot of emphasis on domestic violence. As such, a domestic violence misdemeanor can now disqualify a citizen from buying a gun. Any gun. It's the only misdemeanor I know of that can possible prohibit you from buying a firearm.
There's going to have to be some rules and regs made for the proposed Red Flag laws, so that we don't trample over people's Constitutional rights.
See Form 4473:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions
- BTW, if you use marijuana you may be disqualified from owning a gun. Or if you take a Class III painkiller.
The devil is in the details.
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
I think there are some problems...
You're doing SSDD. Today's news is that a proposal was arrived at. That's all. They're not down in the weeds yet.
There has to be a change. Has to. For that to happen, everybody is going to have to give up some of their sacred cows. Maybe we'll end up with something that no one will be 100% happy with, but will represent an improvement, a step forward, fewer people dying pointlessly.
Maybe; no guarantees at this point. It's gonna be a long road, no matter what happens. Possibly it's too late to fix it. Standing fast and shouting LA-LA-LA-LA with our fingers in our ears will keep us exactly where we are now.
For change to happen, it must start with the feds. Omitting Congress will result in more of what we have now. We can palaver and debate forever. Today Congressmen from both sides sat down and came up with a first step. That's all they're claiming. Let's not rush into all the same tired old reasoning we've been using before we've even given it a chance.
Here's where we're at, like it or not: Americans are faced with a choice. Either we like the Second more than we like our children, or we like our children more than we like the Second. If we don't change, or if we keep butting heads so that we can't change, then we have our answer, don't we? We must accept that we as Americans like the Second enough to pay regular dues in the form of dead kids. That's what we're doing now, and it will continue, and all the handwringing and fucking thoughts and prayers in the world won't save a single kid when it happens the next time.
We must, absolutely must, think our way out of this box, start with a fresh sheet. If it doesn't work, at least we tried.
But we might just pull it off.
-
-
From the CNN article:
"What lawmakers left out
Expanded background checksNotably, the agreement doesn’t include a provision that would expand background checks for all firearm sales or transfers in the country. Currently, background checks are not required for gun sales and transfers by unlicensed and private sellers.
Democrats have long supported such a requirement, and last year the House passed gun legislation that would expand background checks on all commercial gun sales, marking the first congressional move on significant gun control since Democrats won the White House and the majority in both chambers of Congress.
Assault weapons ban
Also left out is a federal ban on military-style assault weapons, another measure Democrats have been pushing in recent years, citing mass shootings that have involved such weapons.
Higher minimum age of purchase
Additionally, the agreement doesn’t include a change to the age at which a person needs to be to purchase an assault-style weapon. Democrats, including West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, the chamber’s most conservative Democrat, have said the age to purchase assault weapons must be raised from 18 to 21.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What, exactly is "military-style assault weapons?" Wasn't that ban on scary-looking guns enacted in 1994 with zero effect on gun deaths?
I have no problem with many of the other provisions (and I say that as someone who owns zero firearms). But, as I alluded in another thread, pandering is easy, governing is hard.
@George-K said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
From the CNN article:
"What lawmakers left out
Expanded background checksNotably, the agreement doesn’t include a provision that would expand background checks for all firearm sales or transfers in the country. Currently, background checks are not required for gun sales and transfers by unlicensed and private sellers.
Democrats have long supported such a requirement, and last year the House passed gun legislation that would expand background checks on all commercial gun sales, marking the first congressional move on significant gun control since Democrats won the White House and the majority in both chambers of Congress.
Assault weapons ban
Also left out is a federal ban on military-style assault weapons, another measure Democrats have been pushing in recent years, citing mass shootings that have involved such weapons.
Higher minimum age of purchase
Additionally, the agreement doesn’t include a change to the age at which a person needs to be to purchase an assault-style weapon. Democrats, including West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, the chamber’s most conservative Democrat, have said the age to purchase assault weapons must be raised from 18 to 21.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What, exactly is "military-style assault weapons?" Wasn't that ban on scary-looking guns enacted in 1994 with zero effect on gun deaths?
I have no problem with many of the other provisions (and I say that as someone who owns zero firearms). But, as I alluded in another thread, pandering is easy, governing is hard.
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
-
@George-K said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
From the CNN article:
"What lawmakers left out
Expanded background checksNotably, the agreement doesn’t include a provision that would expand background checks for all firearm sales or transfers in the country. Currently, background checks are not required for gun sales and transfers by unlicensed and private sellers.
Democrats have long supported such a requirement, and last year the House passed gun legislation that would expand background checks on all commercial gun sales, marking the first congressional move on significant gun control since Democrats won the White House and the majority in both chambers of Congress.
Assault weapons ban
Also left out is a federal ban on military-style assault weapons, another measure Democrats have been pushing in recent years, citing mass shootings that have involved such weapons.
Higher minimum age of purchase
Additionally, the agreement doesn’t include a change to the age at which a person needs to be to purchase an assault-style weapon. Democrats, including West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, the chamber’s most conservative Democrat, have said the age to purchase assault weapons must be raised from 18 to 21.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What, exactly is "military-style assault weapons?" Wasn't that ban on scary-looking guns enacted in 1994 with zero effect on gun deaths?
I have no problem with many of the other provisions (and I say that as someone who owns zero firearms). But, as I alluded in another thread, pandering is easy, governing is hard.
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
The Brad
-
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed.
That sounds like infringement to me.
Arms are not a cars.
Arms are enshrined, they have a special place in our country. And they have served us well.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed.
That sounds like infringement to me.
Arms are not a cars.
Arms are enshrined, they have a special place in our country. And they have served us well.
-
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
Licensing is the first step to confiscation.
No go. Period.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
Licensing is the first step to confiscation.
No go. Period.
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
Licensing is the first step to confiscation.
No go. Period.
Sorry. That doesn't seem to make sense.
-
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
Licensing is the first step to confiscation.
No go. Period.
Sorry. That doesn't seem to make sense.
@taiwan_girl said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@LuFins-Dad said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
@Jolly said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
You can't regulate individual-to-individual sales. It's impossible. You can enforce laws such as no felon having a firearm in his possession (if you catch him) or other laws.
Sure you can. It’s long past time for gun owners to be licensed. That solves ALOT of the background check problems. Instead of requiring the seller to run background checks, that’s handled by the state game and wildlife department. That way, if I’m selling you my .38 that I don’t need anymore, I don’t need to run a background check. I take a scan of your license and register the sale on the state site… Easier than privately selling a car…
Licensing is the first step to confiscation.
No go. Period.
Sorry. That doesn't seem to make sense.
That's because you're a brainwashed left winger.
-
BTW, that punt gun is Mickey Mouse. I knew some coonasses down near Dulac, that homemade a cannon out of three-inch Schedule 80 pipe wrapped in piano wire, with the wire silver soldered. They'd load that sucker with Pyrodex and any bits of metal they could find...Busted up pieces of old cast-iron stoves, roofing tacks, small bolts, etc.
The cannon was tied down to a fourteen foot bateaux. To point the gun, you pointed the boat. You only got one shot, so you took it before daylight while the ducks were still rafting out on the water. All that metal would land among them and skip.
You might kill five or six dozen a shot.
-
@Copper said in US Senate Gun Legislation Agreement:
Will I still be able to buy one of these?
50 or more at once!
Link to video
Holy cow indeed! That recoil must hurt like hell…
