Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger View Post
    CJ,

    Good points! Existing laws should actually be enforced before creating new legislation.
    Mental illness keeps getting new definitions. There are some that say "You'd have to be nuts, to want a gun". When the definitions encompass enough people, who will not be "disqualified" to own a gun?

    My opinion...all gun laws are unconstitutional, and should not be enforced. "Anyone that cannot be trusted with a gun should not be walking among us without a custodian." David Cordrea

    Regarding these people that have been documented as problems...they seem to want them to continue to be in public. Then, when they really go off the tracks, make more laws, that would not have prevented the evil.
    And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Steven Spaugh

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    527
    Mine in Bold

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel Suarez View Post
    I think we all agree that some people should not have guns...nut in truth, they should not have the same freedom in society that the rest of us do...They should not be free at all. like driving, making financial and political decisions, etc. Sometimes it is obvious...walk into a an MVD/DMV and look at the people that are on the road with you and your kids. Amazing isn't it. I wonder if anyone has done a study on how many deaths are caused by -

    a). Impaired drivers
    b). Drivers too old to drive
    c). Shitty cars that should not be on the road

    I know the arguement is that the consitution does not recognize anyone's right to drive, but that is cold comfort to a father mourning the loss of his entire family because nobody denied the 85 year old blind guy on oxygen his ability to drive on the same roads.

    The same issue presents itself with firearms, bit it is a far more incendiary discussion because in fact there is a national conspiracy to deny firearms to normal people. I will say that the world would be far better if I could decide who is armed and who is not, and if I could require a safety test (similar to what a driver is required to show) before a CCW is allowed to carry in the world among other people. The perfect world would have me...or someone of similar mind and perspective deciding. While you might be a good choice, there are others that believe that they are a good choice. A lot of places, like California, have may issue CCW permits. Only the rich, and connected, get a permit. Sadly we know this is not going down that way. Once the door is open, the decission makers can be anyone. And...once that decision maker is anti-gun, for most citizens?...

    That said, I think the Red Flag laws are inevitable in the end. You can vote all you wish, but at some point a compromise translation = more rights lost will be made. Examples -

    1). Border Wall, or no red flags?
    2). Additional PERMANENT tax cuts, or no red flags?
    3). Abolish Obamacare...or no Red Flags?

    Me...I may be tempted to select the former as those elements affect me and my objectives far more than the latter. But its not up to me...or you really.

    So my view on the matter is this - DON'T KEEP ALL YOUR EGGS IN THE SAME BASKET. Buy several Pelican Cases. In each one place a Glock (use dual illuminated RMRs), five magazines, 100 rounds of ammo, an AR Pistol also with five magazines and 200 rounds of ammo. Throw in some dessicant and preservative. Place these cases in places that are not under your legal control. Think burried somewhere remote...think in a storage unit you paid for in cash and that cannot be traced to you...think entrusted to a good friend (they kind that would not only help you move bodies, but also eliminate witnesses). The number of these cases may be directly linked to your exposure to such laws.

    More to discuss I suppose as the week unfolds.
    Don't take my comments as criticism of you.
    And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Steven Spaugh

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    527
    The problem with "Red Flag Laws", is that anyone that is not happy with you, can claim you are a risk. The police show up, take all of your guns, and you get to pay to try to get them back. This does not happen quickly. The government is not in a hurry, to restore rights.

    I believe that while in this process, you cannot posess a firearm. Your God given right, has been suspended, by a higher authority.
    And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Steven Spaugh

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    45,668
    eyeroll.jpg

    Well...this devolved into a fight over the right to be a dumbshit again didn't it. I will leave it to you guys now. My position remains as stated.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,184
    Quote Originally Posted by barnetmill View Post
    If there was free web access for doing a firearms purchase background check, it could also be used by individuals wanting to check someones background for a minimal fee without any firearm sale being contemplated.
    If I can run a background check on you without your knowledge it's a real problem. This is why I said above that it's "not exactly trivial" because you need to have some sort verification that *both* sides want the check to be done.

    There's a couple different ways of doing it.

    I assume that individual transaction would also involve some sort of paperwork for civilian being equivalent to the ATF Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record.
    Do you mean something the Civilian would print out and store in their records?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    McKinney
    Posts
    1,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Spaugh View Post
    The problem with "Red Flag Laws", is that anyone that is not happy with you, can claim you are a risk. The police show up, take all of your guns, and you get to pay to try to get them back. This does not happen quickly. The government is not in a hurry, to restore rights.

    I believe that while in this process, you cannot posess a firearm. Your God given right, has been suspended, by a higher authority.
    Even the liberal states that already have these laws do require more than an anonymous tip So far; I cannot find a single case where someone has had it used against them maliciously. And I’ve tried pretty hard to find one.
    "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit." -Aristotle

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Spaugh View Post
    Mental illness keeps getting new definitions. There are some that say "You'd have to be nuts, to want a gun". When the definitions encompass enough people, who will not be "disqualified" to own a gun?
    While this is a very real threat, it's clear to anyone who has interacted with schizophrenics and those in a psychotic episode that no, you really really don't want them having access to anything more dangerous than soap. Preferably liquid soap.

    There are many mental illnesses that have a genetic or physical basis. Schizophrenia is one. The University of Texas shooter had a tumor pressing on part of his brain that was *probably* the root cause of his aggression.

    The solution to this problem is the same as overreaching politicians--learn and speak back. Argue against the politicization of psychology and demand that the loss of 2nd amendment rights coincide with the loss of *all* other civil rights. If you're not competent to handle a firearm you're not competent to vote or drive.


    My opinion...all gun laws are unconstitutional, and should not be enforced.
    It may be that most current laws are, or border on unconstitutional, but the constitution has a specified process for revoking someone's rights--"Due Process". So any law that deprives someone who has gone through "due process" of their right to keep and bear arms is constitutional, as long as the initiating event is constitutional.

    We don't want felons buying guns until they've proven they can be back on the street safely--and there is generally a process for restoring one's rights.

    The Constitution stipulates ages for different things--voting age, age to become a Congressman or President etc. The courts have *always* held that minors do not have the same rights as adults, and given what we know today about neurological development (the parts of the brain that understand long term planning don't develop fully until the early 20s, especially in males) age restrictions--implemented via laws--are *certainly* constitutional.

    Other laws that are narrowly tailored to address specific compelling issues--for example a law requiring all pistols sold for public/concealed carry to be drop safe--would certainly pass constitutional muster as long as the test was reasonable.

    Background check laws and even registration laws would generally be constitutional--after all we register to vote, right? And a gun seller has to have *some* way of verifying that the person he's selling to isn't a felon. The constitution specifies a "well regulated militia", implying that registering those who are of age *and* have weapons could very well be considered not only "constitutionally allowed", but constitutionally *required*. After all, how do you muster the militia if you don't know who they are.

    Now, those of us paying attention know that registration laws aren't for that. They're setups for future confiscation, so no, that's not going to happen. But *some* form of universal background check that gives me the ability to verify you're not a felon--and save that record--would certainly be constitutional.

    Further (and I'm not familiar with any laws like this) it would be *perfectly* constitutional to have a law that *requires* firearms to be "suitable to the task they are sold for". Meaning that if you're advertising, or selling a gun as a deer rifle it must be reasonably capable of taking a deer. That a self-defense weapon be reasonably reliable etc. This doesn't *interfere* with the right to keep and bear arms, it would enable it.

    Ultimately there are a LOT of constitutional firearms laws. This doesn't mean that most of the existing ones are compatible with a textual or historical understanding of the purpose behind the 2nd amendment, but bad laws don't invalidate good ones.



    Regarding these people that have been documented as problems...they seem to want them to continue to be in public.
    Our system is based on the notion that the government does not give you your rights, that you have them because you're human (God given, Natural Rights, whatever), and that they cannot be revoked until you do something to justify it.

    We also would like to believe in redemption--that someone can make a bad decision, screw up, pay the price and then learn from their mistake. A lot of us did things in our teens and 20s that if we'd been caught and convicted would put us on the "them" side of things. Now, maybe those shouldn't be felonies, but they very well would give someone reason to doubt our decision making capabilities.

    There is no way to tell if someone has learned their lesson without putting them in public. But it is also stupid to take someone who has served their time and hand them a gun as they walk out the prison gates.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Appalachians.
    Posts
    3,612
    I think some of you are missing ghe point here.

    Obviously, "Red flag" laws are unconstitutional. Obviously, oath sworn LEO shouldn't enforce unconstitutional laws.

    But, congress will do what they do, because the rich and (truly) powerful will get their lap dogs to write whatever laws they pay for. Lots of cops do whatever they want anyways, and disregard their oath. And at the end of the day, lots of LEO and others who have sworn oaths to uphold the constitution, will choose a paycheck over your rights. Plain and simple.

    To that end, one should be prepared for those distinct possibilities. Gabe was simply noting how easy the preparation would be, and a suggestion on how to accomplish it.
    Isaiah 54:17

    Deus dea traballo, dixo o enterrador.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,184
    Quote Originally Posted by H60DoorGunner View Post
    Obviously, "Red flag" laws are unconstitutional. Obviously, oath sworn LEO shouldn't enforce unconstitutional laws.
    I don't think that Red Flag laws--properly written and implemented--are necessarily unconstitutional.

    I don't think they're currently implemented very well, nor do I think that will change much--mostly because "the left" wants them to be as draconian as possible and the "the right" doesn't want them *at all*.

    I think it's entirely possible to write such laws so as to protect both society AND the gun owner.


    But, congress will do what they do, because the rich and (truly) powerful will get their lap dogs to write whatever laws they pay for. Lots of cops do whatever they want anyways, and disregard their oath. And at the end of the day, lots of LEO and others who have sworn oaths to uphold the constitution, will choose a paycheck over your rights. Plain and simple.
    Go research how the laws are actually playing out--almost universally if the cops show up at your house for your guns, and they take them, *merely* showing up for your court date and not being crazy is enough that the court order is voided and you get your guns back.

    So here's the thinking man's solution to Red Flag Laws:
    1) Don't be fucking crazy.
    2) If #1 is not an option for you, do not act crazy.
    3) Don't threaten, bluster or act an ass.
    4) When it is not time to act, speak rationally. When it is time to act, do so forthrightly.
    5) If you're feeling suicidal talk to a professional and get that shit worked out.

    Thing is, these are the right thing to do regardless of the Red Flag Laws.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    45,668
    Mine in bold
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyOblivion View Post
    So here's the thinking man's solution to Red Flag Laws: My revisions added

    1) Don't be fucking crazy.
    2) If #1 is not an option for you, do not act crazy.
    3) Don't threaten, bluster or act an ass.
    4) When it is not time to act, speak rationally. When it is time to act, do so forthrightly.
    5) If you're feeling suicidal talk to a TRUSTED FRIEND WHO WILL KEEP THE SHIT TO HIMSELF and get that shit worked out.

    Thing is, these are the right thing to do regardless of the Red Flag Laws.
    Perhaps a new thread...but when YOUR rights conflict my MY rights...who wins?
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •