Poll: Would you be opposed to a program such as this?

Well ignoring the inevitable slippery slope arguement (those restrictions would get tighter and tighter over time, and allowing them to exist sets a precedent)...

If someone is old enough to die for their country, they should be able to recieve ALL the benefits of citizenship.

No liscense should be required for the right to bear arms.

The Constititution ought to be all that we need.

First comes the "liscense"...

then..registration...

and history proves this...confinscation.

Definately opposed

I'd be definately opposed to this on several levels.

Philosophically, I am opposed to it because no other item in the bill of rights requires a license. I think we've all seen that something that is licensed is something that can be easily taken away (handgun licenses in Washington, DC anyone?). It seems that there is a very large downside , and only a pretty small up side.

Personally, I am opposed to it since it'd be another license to renew (more tax $$ - ). Since I can't see adding an NFA items or anything else on your list (and I already legally own a number of normal capacity magazine), it wouldn't benefit me at all. For those who wish to have such things, they should be allowed to without having the license in the first place.

Is the proposed system better than it is now? Yes.

Should the proposed system be used instead of obeying the 2nd Amendment as written. No.

Once you have accepted that the Federal government can license a right, the only questions left are 1) what the requirements for the license, and 2) what is granted by the license?

The grabbers would never accept the terms of your proposition because their aim is to disarm the population, not to enable them to carry wherever they choose and to own automatic weapons. Assuming that they did accept it, they would simply shift their plan of attack to answering questions 1 and 2 above in the most restrictive fashion, i.e. by instituting the same restrictions we have today, and then some.

Most dangerously, it can argued that by accepting licensing, you give up any Constitutional appeal against the restrictions of the licensing. Your right to keep and bear arms is granted by license, and if you don't like the terms, tough.

I think you should just have a background check to see if you are a known felon on the FBI most wanted list for violent crimes. If you pass the check then knock yourself out with rifles, pistols, shotguns, machineguns, grenades or whatever.

Otherwise the gun store owner arrests/shoots you on the spot.

The only new license I would support would be a new type of "collector's FFL" that would be exactly like a C&R but would allow you to purchase modern firearms too.


Otherwise, I can already do 90% of what your new license allows (and when the AWB ends I'll be able to do 95%).


Maybe you just need to get out of California

Where does it say all that in the Second Amendment?

Pipsqueak, there was a thread on TFL way back when about that issue... there was a case involving a grain license or something. The ruling stated that acceptance of licensing didn't waive constitutional claims. I don't think it was a SCOTUS decision, though, so it might not matter much.

(I'm not sure why it didn't make the TFL "last call thread list". I'll see if I can locate it and put it in the list.)

The national ccw plan would have to be free and require no fingerprints in order to get my support. And the age ought to be 18. Only airport secure areas and courthouses should be exempted, and only if they're really secure. Incompetent or unreliable TSA goons screening carry-ons don't cut it. Incompetent goons screening (or not screening, as I observed in California) people entering courthouses doesn't cut it either. No adequate screening, no gun ban. And public establishments and public institutions may not ban carry for any reason.

boofus, even if that plan were politically feasible (RKBA restored to violent felons upon release), how would you check someone to see if they're a wanted felon? Fingerprint readers at gunshops? What if the violent criminal hasn't been booked before? No prints on record...

There are so few of us who think felons (ex-felons? non-wanted-felons? past-felons?) who have been released should have their RKBA restored. So I'm willing to accept that violent felons don't get that right back, even though they all have guns within a day of their release. Uhg.

...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

Click to expand...

ditto.

My dog is licensed. My car and myself are licensed. I have had to be licensed to work. I see a license to own any firearm and reloading supplies as acceptable. No felon should be doing anything but, feeding worms.

Better yet, why don't we just return to the way it was in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries? Buy gun, buy ammo, shoot gun. Misuse gun, go to prison. Get out of prison, buy gun, buy ammo, shoot gun. Misuse gun, go to prison. Repeat until you stop going to prison, are executed, or you die naturally.

Josey,

My dog is licensed. My car and myself are licensed. I have had to be licensed to work. I see a license to own any firearm and reloading supplies as acceptable.

Click to expand...

Did you have your license to make that post?

How about a license for the latest Clancy or Grisham book you read?

Is your church license up to date?

How much licensing are you comfortable with? Would an oxygen consumption license be cool with you?

I dont need any ????ing license to own a weapon or should I feel the need(which I currently do not) carry it concealed/open.

Should it become illegal to carry open, and I feel a need for a weapon/pistol, I will merely carry clandestinely.

You cannot regulate a primeval right.

There is no solution to firearms-related problems except social reform at the lowest of levels. Sadly, I do not believe this will occur.(which is why I may have to carry illegally at some future date)

Licencing, up here, has done nothing to deter crime. Criminals don't care about licences. For a new shooter to get all the BS permits, it costs about $300Cdn. If he wants to hunt it's more for a Hunter's Safety course and that course alone isn't enough to get the permits to own a firearm. Licences only deters new shooters and are only harrass shooters who aren't out committing crimes in the first place.

Well, that proposed system would be a great improvement over the fascist states(CA, MA, CT, IL, etc.) but it is a step backwards for the free states. There should be no NFA, AWB, or any of that crap.

I am opposed to licensing even though now I abide by it. Now that I've started carrying I doubt I'll ever stop no matter what the law says.

I would love this program, as long as you remove the license and background check parts.

David

Uhm... I have do do that whole "licensing" thing every time I buy a pistol in Michigan. Every single time. Please explain to me how you're going to get the general population to think that what I already do to buy a gun is suddenly going to let me purchase machine guns.

I can't even carry in my home state due to a misdemeanor commited over 2 years ago. I'm counting the months until my 3 years is up until i can. I'd love a federal law that allowed me to carry across the country. Well, I think we already have one, but that was trumped by many many states in disregard for the 2nd a long time ago.

Your plan isn't asking me to do anything that I don't do already but offering me many more rights than I currently am granted by the government. I'd go for it as a stop-gap measure for sure.

Tough Question

In principle I don't like the idea of needing more licence than the 2nd Amm.

In practice, I understand the desire to prevent acquisition by people that no one in town should trust with a burnt-out match, let alone a handgun. In a democracy you might find yourself needing to do some minimal humouring of the sheeple.

Fingerprinting would be WAY too big-brotherish. EEEK!

I do think that having a national CCW permit system is desirable, so that driving 5 miles doesn't make you a felon.

food for thought.

-S

The only regulations on weapons are those that fire an exploding or incinderary shell and those that cannot be operated and transported by an individual

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, this has to go too!

David

Yay or nay on licensing

Natedog,

Howdy!

The 2nd amendment grants me those options you mentioned(and more!), without the need for license and blessing of the federal or state government. Firearms registration and licensing is nothing more than a tool used by corrupt politicians who have violated their oaths of office. If the people would stand as a group and declare these laws unconstitutional, we would no longer have to fear breaking them. How about a Million Gun March?

That having been said, I realize it will never happen. Too many people are willing to accept whatever they are given by their masters. The fighting spirit has been culled from our society as a whole. How ashamed our founding fathers would be to see what this country has become.

I suppose as a compromise, Yur plan would work, with a few modifications.
Change the age to 16, allow incendiary and explosive rounds, and require the database to be purged every 30 days.

*Disclaimer*
The comments contained in this post are not in support of, nor should they be misread as, support of any anti-government, illegal or treasonous ideas, nor are they intended to foment discord or unrest against the Federal or State governments.
Excuse me a moment, someone is at my door. The FBI has probably sent me a singing telegram.

In the immortal words of my Drill Sergeant, "NOT EVEN"