Question Of The Month. (August 2017)

[ripjack13]

Howdy,
This is a monthly series of questions topic for everyone to join in on the discussion. Some of the later questions may have a poll, and some will not. Don't be shy now, go ahead and post an answer and vote in the polls...

Face it, we're stuck with a bunch of em, and we will never ever have them disappear, so, with that reality to go by....

What Gun Regulations Need to be Repealed or Replaced?






**Rules**
There is no minimum post requirement.

 

[meanstreak]

Living in Oklahoma, a gun friendly state, I am ok with the laws here. If I were in CT or CA, I would not be ok with the bans on various guns and magazines they have instituted.

 

[Water Monkey]

Safe act and magazine limits.

 

[DarkPassenger308]

Ask a cop why his mags shouldn't be limited to 7 rounds and you'll get an articulate, well reasoned, and logically sound answer.

The fact that those reasons aren't applicable to all law-abiding citizens speaks to the treason committed by those that would subject us to such a law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[John A.]

NFA needs to be fixed and more importantly removed altogether. The Constitution gaurantees a God given right for US citizens to keep and bear arms. Not just some of them, and especially without taxation.

The sole intent of enacting a tax (equivelant to around $3500 EACH) was their means of circumventing an outright ban due to attrition.

A law should also be implemented that anyone who would unjustly remove the citizens right to bear arms (or any of them really), should be hanged for TREASON by the neck until dead in a public manner and location.

That is how strongly that I feel about that.

 

[Water Monkey]

NFA needs to be fixed and more importantly removed altogether. The Constitution gaurantees a God given right for US citizens to keep and bear arms. Not just some of them, and especially without taxation.

The sole intent of enacting a tax (equivelant to around $3500 EACH) was their means of circumventing an outright ban due to attrition.

A law should also be implemented that anyone who would unjustly remove the citizens right to bear arms (or any of them really), should be hanged for TREASON by the neck until dead in a public manner and location.

That is how strongly that I feel about that.

I like the cut of your Jib.

 

[MikeD]

NFA needs to be fixed and more importantly removed altogether. The Constitution gaurantees a God given right for US citizens to keep and bear arms. Not just some of them, and especially without taxation.

The sole intent of enacting a tax (equivelant to around $3500 EACH) was their means of circumventing an outright ban due to attrition.

A law should also be implemented that anyone who would unjustly remove the citizens right to bear arms (or any of them really), should be hanged for TREASON by the neck until dead in a public manner and location.

That is how strongly that I feel about that.

^^^^ This!!

 

[Scoop]

Well, I was going to say just repeal ALL the laws in this book, but it does contain prohibitions against using a gun to threaten, intimidate, harm, kidnap, hijack, rob, rape pillage, plunder or murder. I would say that I am generally opposed to such actions.


I suggest we get rid of NFA34 and GCA68. Grand hopes indeed.

But as I looked thru my copy I noticed that I highlighted one of my pet peeves.

18 USC 930
Possession of firearms in federal facilities.​

I worked in federal facilities for 34 year. Apparently before they cared much about that. I remember in my first year at the Memphis Air Route Traffic Control Center we were taking a class on how to teach trainees. As a demonstration of his teaching abilities one of the students brought in a 1911 and demonstrated field stripping. Nothing said.

Then they changed the rules and you had to ask permission and the answer was always NO.
Actually I didn't care too much that they wouldn't allow us to carry inside the ARTCC.

But I hate 930 because it applies to POST OFFICES.

[Your Honor. I plead NOT GUILTY because I wasn't carrying a revolver.]

 

[LTB45]

I am so tired of the need for my state (CT) permit and a non resident (PA) permit, so that I can legally carry in ALMOST all the state's I travel through, to visit the in-laws in TN.

NATIONAL RECIPROCITY would be nice.
Yet I feel it will NEVER HAPPEN.

 

[CaddmannQ]

What Gun Regulations Need to be Repealed or Replaced?

Every damn one they passed in California last year!

 

[OhioArcher]

Well, I was going to say just repeal ALL the laws in this book, but it does contain prohibitions against using a gun to threaten, intimidate, harm, kidnap, hijack, rob, rape pillage, plunder or murder. I would say that I am generally opposed to such actions.
View attachment 15845

I suggest we get rid of NFA34 and GCA68. Grand hopes indeed.

But as I looked thru my copy I noticed that I highlighted one of my pet peeves.

18 USC 930
Possession of firearms in federal facilities.​

I worked in federal facilities for 34 year. Apparently before they cared much about that. I remember in my first year at the Memphis Air Route Traffic Control Center we were taking a class on how to teach trainees. As a demonstration of his teaching abilities one of the students brought in a 1911 and demonstrated field stripping. Nothing said.

Then they changed the rules and you had to ask permission and the answer was always NO.
Actually I didn't care too much that they wouldn't allow us to carry inside the ARTCC.

But I hate 930 because it applies to POST OFFICES.

[Your Honor. I plead NOT GUILTY because I wasn't carrying a revolver.]

Don't recall ever seeing that sign at a PO. Must be posted in the back for employees only.

As for the OP question, anything that limits capacity, number that can purchased within a specified time period, wait times, interstate travel. Legally, I can't bring a firearm to visit my sister in NY which is two states away.

I do not like the convoluted laws pertaining to self defense. What is legal in one city may not be in another. Same state to state.

I don't feel that required training is an abridgement of my 2A rights. I think it is a good idea.

I don't not like the fact that businesses can bar me from carrying on their property. If it is not a private club or business then it should not have any say in whether I can carry or not. My rights trump theirs.

 

[Scoop]

...I don't not like the fact that businesses can bar me from carrying on their property. If it is not a private club or business then it should not have any say in whether I can carry or not. My rights trump theirs.

If it is a private business that I'm running, then I want the right to make the rules. I don't want the gummit telling me I've got to serve people that I don't want there. I want you to wear shoes. I don't want you to wear perfume. I don't want you to bring your pet parrot in. You are free to exercise your right to buy from my competitors if you cannot comply.

Hell, there are gun stores that will not let you bring a loaded gun in.

I asked the gun store I used to shoot at near Atlanta why he had a sign like this up. He said that 80% of his customers are too stupid to handle a loaded gun without sweeping bystanders or firing a round into the ceiling. [As he pointed to the bullet hole in the ceiling.]

I agree w/ how you feel, and I tell merchants about why I won't patronize their shops. But I still would not like the government to require them to open the doors to those they don't want in. After all, it is Government regulations that we are discussing that we wish to repeal or replace, not those rules established by the private citizen.

[edit: spelling]

 

[Bobster]

NFA 1934, GCA 1968, FOPA 1986 and ANY state law that agrees with these "laws".

PS: I also believe a private party or business can make their own rules regarding carrying on THEIR premises. As a consumer, I can choose to not give them my business.