A happy medium

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

ohbythebay

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2014
Messages
644
Location
Snohomish, WA
I think this may belong in a sub-forum (but for the life of me, I don't know where - so mods, place where it belongs if it aint here :D )

Now guys, don't bash me for this, its just an opinion and thought. Is there a happy medium ? something lawful gun owners and anti's can live with and be at peace ?

what if the law across the land worked like this:

  1. Open carry and concealed carry made legal in all 50 states with a permit
  2. Permit requirement's standard - Cant be a felon, fugitive, etc. etc. just like today
  3. All guns registered to the legal gun owner with a national database - ALL GUNS
  4. Online sales and stores - Normal background check and sale
  5. Private sales must have a form transferring ownership to the new owner - filled out at the time of sale, mailed by the seller to the regulating agency, driver license or ss card and photo id to be the best effort by the seller (this way if that gun is ever involved in a crime, best effort was made to show who the owner is)
  6. New owner of the private sale can walk away with the gun but severe penalty if he or she lied on the transfer form (no blame assigned to the seller unless it is determined that made no effort to verify information)
  7. The above will take 10 minutes to fill out and a stamp and if you are a lawful owner and seller, you should want that gun no longer registered to you
  8. Mandatory safety class for all "first time" gun buyers - existing owners exempt

Now..please discuss, don't bash. Would that be so terrible ? All my guns are registered, I have my CCP, but I do have one gun purchased in a private sale - I am in the process of filling out the state form to transfer it to me because I DONT CARE if the State knows its mine - I want them to know.

Thoughts ? Discussion ? Did I miss some aspect not accounted for and would the anti's and the gun owners accept this ?
 
Take a close look at these "measures" you are supporting and ask yourself, "what will this do for us as a society? Will it reduce crime, or just make it more of a pain for people to exercise their second amendment rights to protect themselves?"

Happy mediums are never truly "happy", there will ALWAYS be tention between the gunners and the anti-gunners. We are better off fighting for what we have been, such as no new gun legislation, because no matter what kind of "happy medium" that gets cooked up, THEY won't be happy till every single one of us is unarmed.

JMHO.

YMMV.
 
3, 5, and 6 are going to cause this idea to fail just by the fact that they serve no valid purpose.

You can not advocate for national registration and regulation of private sales within that context and expect gunowners across the country to accept it if for any other reason than national registration of firearms serves no valid purpose while adding a bureaucracy and the expense of said organization in the face of over 20 years of falling homicide rates without it. If homicide rates were unchanged or climbing you might use such an expensive scheme in an attempt to drive homicides down, but the opposite is the case. Worse, the Canadians did this experiment (without giving anything to gunowners) and have now found it was a huge failure. Toss in that surveys of criminals show that they aren't following the laws about firearms sales in any state with or without registration nor are they getting weapons used in crimes through "normal" channels.

So, why advocate for national registration and documentation of private sales if it serves no valid purpose and our neighbor to the north tried it and found it failed to have any beneficial impact on crime?

Worse, where states have registration the records have errors and those errors make it nearly impossible for guys like you to prove they 1) Never owned the gun the state says you own and 2) Legally transferred the gun the state says you owned. How do you prove a negative when the burden of proof is now on you and not the state that you did not violate the law instead of the burden of proof being on them that you did when they have a record now implying you criminally transferred a firearm?

What do you expect to get in return? Constitutional carry? Most people don't carry anyway so we shouldn't expect the majority of gunowners to want to trade away their current freedom for a minority of gunowners.

Canada tried it and failed to show any benefit and is now abandoning it so you wouldn't expect Americans to adopt a failed bureaucratic approach.
 
Last edited:
Registering every firearm in the US would not prevent theft for unlawful use. (An everyday occurrence.)

It would not prevent borrowing by a friend or family member for unlawful use. (Sirhan Sirhan, as example.)

It would not prevent an onset of mental problems and an ensuing unlawful use. (Charles Whitman, as example.)

The history of national registration has been one of national confiscation, and in many countries, "Turn it in or die." Confiscation has already occurred in some of the U.S. states.

Registration cannot prevent misuse of firearms in crimes, so what's the point?

There are some 400 million personal firearms in the US, in some 40% of all homes--which is approximately 50 million homes. No possible system could be successful enough to be worth the hassle to that many people at what Canada learned was a too-high expense, even with their relatively low population of people and guns.

I'll end with the opinion that one should consider whether a government will always and forever be benevolent--in the face of the Patriot Act, the NDAA and the TSA. Consider the public statements of people in high office, that private citizens should not be allowed to possess firearms.
 
That is not a medium. That is a huge step backward in trade for for nothing we can't get by legitimate means.
 
We don't need ANYTHING 'registered' in this country -- NOT firearms, not ANYTHING. That's why we are private citizens. Everything should be private. That is why, every April 15th, I pay my taxes and object to the fact that a higher power should even know what I earn. I am a private citizen, with emphasis on private!
 
Why?

Why discuss things that have been proven not to reduce crime?
Why are we still discussing 'compromise' with the grabbers, when their repeatedly stated intent is total disarmament?
Why would I register ANYTHING after what's happened in Connecticut, New York and California?

If you want to 'compromise', let's try this:

Reopen the NFA.
Remove NFA restrictions from SBR's, suppressors and AOW's.
Allow open carry in government buildings, churches, banks, bars, stadiums-anywhere.
Repeal all state AWB and magazine restrictions.
Allow open and concealed carry without permits of any kind.

You want to compromise? Give me something. But the grabbers never do; 'common sense', 'compromise' and 'reasonable' are all codes for 'a little bit closer to complete prohibition', and that's it.

Larry
 
With all respect obythebay: Firearms are multipurpose tools like many other tools. They provide security, recreation and sporting events. They are collectables, hobbies, family heirlooms, put food on the table and provide jobs among other things. Many every day objects do not have as many purposes that firearms do. Some will say that firearms are used to take lives. But so are other objects such as ropes, pills, knives, blunt objects, water, chemicals, ladders, cars, hands, feet, arms, legs, heads and the list goes on.

I see no reason for the government to have any business at all delving into the ownership and exchange of firearms and the regulating of people who own them. I reason that government does not delve into the ownership and regulation of the people who own the other objects I mentioned outside of motor vehicles. At the bottom line in my view, autos are registered and taxed for the supposed reason of providing for roads to run them on and to create a huge bureaucracy and private business to feed off of the removal of that so called "privilege".

As for carrying firearms, I happen to fall into the camp that thinks one should carry concealed for a number of reasons. It's no one's business if I am nor should I have to obtain "permission" from government regulators to do so. If it's concealed who would know? A predator certainly isn't going to advertise that fact, so rules and laws have no effect except upon the law abiding. I have often thought that open carry actually defeated the purpose of me carrying a firearm as I have believed fear of the unknown is a good thing when it comes to someone who might consider me prey. I have no objection to open carry, otherwise.
 
ohbythebay

You being in Washington, please remember to vote YES on I591 and No on I594. The rest of the gun owners in Washington will thank you.
 
Utterly useless/hopeless/Draconian/ UNWORKABLE.

Did you not see the recent FAILURE of the long-gun registry in Canada? It has now been ABANDONED.

They had dreams of a system similar to your proposal.... some parts of it are still staggering along, but IT DOESN'T WORK.

You asked for us not to attack you or your concept of "happy medium". All I can say to that is , if THIS is your concept of "medium", I would purely hate to see what you might come up with for "extreme".
 
Now..please discuss, don't bash. Would that be so terrible ? All my guns are registered, I have my CCP, but I do have one gun purchased in a private sale - I am in the process of filling out the state form to transfer it to me because I DONT CARE if the State knows its mine - I want them to know.
Click to expand...

This just does not make sense at all. Washington state does not register guns. So nothing you have should be registered unless you have NFA items. Getting a background check is not "registering" your gun its simply getting a back ground check. Going out on your own and getting yourself background checked after buying a gun in a private sale does absolutely nothing; you're likely to get a very odd look if you try to go to an FFL and get a check for gun you already possess, though I'm sure theres some unscrupulous FFL that will take your money anyway.

We fear registration, because it gets abused. Just because it is not currently politically possible to confiscate weapons does not mean that will always be true. I prefer for the government to at best have a vague idea where the legal guns are.

Most of all I don't see how this is middle ground. I think gun laws are too restrictive and anti gunners think they're not restrictive enough. Middle ground is not making them more restrictive.
 
#1 is the only suggestion on that list that even makes that anything like a compromise. Even with that, you're still TAXING A RIGHT!!! Yes taxing, permits aren't free.

The rest of that is all-out "we're here to strip you of your rights" talk.
 
okay

I understand better now. I wanted to hear what people had to say about each item..makes sense.

Trust me when I say, I don't advocate things that are nonsense...just wanted to see why people felt they were nonsense to get a clearer picture.

And yes, will vote yes o I591
 
Guns are a commodity just like everything else. The closest example I can relate is a motorcycle. So you buy your commodity and never use it...big deal it sits there. If you use it you have to buy expendables (gasoline or ammo) at which the government says "we build roads to drive on and maintain them, pay me 50 cents per gallon of fuel to maintain those roads you enjoy. With ammunition...very few publicly funded ranges springing up, but there is public hunting land, so we give a dollar a box or whatever in tax on ammo. This is the full extent to which we should agree. Hunting/fishing license money is supposed to go back into their programs as well so that should take care of the money for public gun related stuff.

Registration of guns serves no beneficial purpose. All it does is make purchasing harder, and subsequently more expensive, and aggravating. So add the gun registry booth to your local courthouse and see it turn into the DMV which we all know and...love... What purpose does this serve now? Unless there is a plan to do something with those guns then nothing. The govt isn't going to reward us for owning a gun, so the intent must be detrimental to gun owners. To expand upon this point compare it once again to a motorcycle, you now have a registered commodity item, what are they doing with the bikes? Making sure you have proper licenses and insurance etc...more hassle more cost.

"But it's a dangerous weapon" the antis say...so is a chainsaw, baseball bat, golf club, ink pen, lawn mower, screwdriver...list goes on...so when and where do these guys need to go to register their socks and baking potatoes because that combo is a weapon and by ATF rules that's intent to build a weapon...ludicrous.

So, to sell a gun to my brother I need to do a bunch of paperwork at the Dept of Gun Control...the DGC is going to have similar hours to the DMV which apparently are the exact same hours that their customers work making it impossible to ever get in and do things legally, or you can take vacation to do it, or pay a huge convenience fee for online or mail in service...more money more hassle. "But the other guy could be a felon"...SO WHAT.if the guy did something so bad he can't be trusted to be part of society he should be behind bars because it takes a conviction to be a felon. Apparently people who served a sentence for their actions still owe society something when they get out...too political so I'll stop on this tangent.
Lastly, a required safety class? that's a joke. How many people (back to the motorcycle) get their MSF and then do something dumb and hurt others or get hurt. They say it's not if you wreck, but when you wreck so the percentage is pretty high. So we now are putting together more forms and licenses plus head count at the courthouse so again more money and more hassle.

It's not that we need to change laws and how stuff is done, we need to change mindsets. Media needs to not make a martyr out of serial killers on a rampage. Media needs to not deliver a biased viewpoint. Media is our answer. Let's straighten out the media so we don't have to fight a huge fire every time some stupid kid shoots his buddy. We don't see the stories of overdoses and such so why do we see so much on gun violence. Unbiased media let's people pick for themselves what is right and wrong. Let that run for a decade and see if we aren't back to how things have been in the past where the current laws are enough and people have common sense to know it's not the gun that shot people, but the person holding it.
 
Open carry and concealed carry made legal in all 50 states with a permit
Click to expand...
Ok, but let's make it without a permit, like they do in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

Permit requirement's standard - Cant be a felon, fugitive, etc. etc. just like today
Click to expand...
Most of that stuff is absurd fantasy anyway, as those who are felons, fugitives, etc., are carrying ANYWAY, who are we kidding about needing a permit? And, as I said before, none of the GOOD people should be required to submit to a system that the BAD people aren't using anyway.

All guns registered to the legal gun owner with a national database - ALL GUNS
Click to expand...
Hey, how about NO WAY IN HELL? Is that ok with ya? ;)

Online sales and stores - Normal background check and sale
Click to expand...
Is this an improvement somehow?

Private sales must have a form transferring ownership to the new owner - filled out at the time of sale, mailed by the seller to the regulating agency, driver license or ss card and photo id to be the best effort by the seller (this way if that gun is ever involved in a crime, best effort was made to show who the owner is)
Click to expand...
Nope. No thanks. Don't want or need the state or the federal government to know about or keep track of my guns "for me."

New owner of the private sale can walk away with the gun but severe penalty if he or she lied on the transfer form (no blame assigned to the seller unless it is determined that made no effort to verify information)
Click to expand...
Uh...like the "severe penalties" we go to such lengths to prosecute now...oh, wait, nevermind. :rolleyes:

The above will take 10 minutes to fill out and a stamp and if you are a lawful owner and seller, you should want that gun no longer registered to you
Click to expand...
Very few of my guns are in any way "registered" to me, so this is not a concern.

Mandatory safety class for all "first time" gun buyers - existing owners exempt
Click to expand...
Now, we've beaten this idea fair to death about a hundred times here, but I'll reiterate that a RIGHT that comes with government-mandated training and other hurdles isn't much of a right.

When we go so far as to require "safety training" for authors and preachers and voters, yeah, then I'll agree ... no, then hopefully I'll be long dead.
 
I'm an Australian. I live under a national registration and licensing system.

These are the registered guns that were seized from me when the govt. decided that I didn't need them:
S&W Model 60.
S&W Model 66.
S&W Model 640.
Beretta 92G Elite II.
Para Ordnance 16-40.
Bul M5 IPSC Model.
Beretta Tomcat.
Glock 19.

When I first obtained a license it was for 'any lawful purpose'. Now it is for target shooting only and I must register 6 competition shoots per year.

Mandatory safety course went from a 10 question multiple choice exam that was done at the police station, with license issued on the spot, to a mandatory 8 hours of theory, with a separate fee to the examiner, then a 30 day wait for the license. The exam still boils down to the same questions at its core. The license went from $20 to $200.

Safe storage went from 'have a safe if you have more than one handgun' to all guns locked in a safe, ammo in a separate safe, safe bolted down, with in home inspection by the police of safe and firearms every 5 years.

The compliance rate with national registration was estimated at 28%, per one official review that I read. Assuming a similar rate in the USA, your idea will create a black market pool of around two hundred million guns.

3D printing means that within the decade kids will be able to print their own handguns, rifles and machine guns in the high school shop. The current system is based on controlling the distribution of weapons produced by a small number of factories. That will go the way of the afternoon newspaper. When the manufacture of guns cannot be prevented, creating an offense of possessing one is illogical. Criminals will still be able to make them and commit crimes, honest people will not commit crimes.

The legal philosophy is simple: Mallum Prohibitum; Wrong because its prohibited vs Mallum In Se; wrong because it is evil. Those who seek to ban guns have a near religious belief in their rightness. They see firearms as Mallum In Se, then make arguments for restriction via Mallum Prohibitum, because they can't convince the majority that their religious beliefs are correct. Don't take this as an insult, but as an observation: You appear to have drunk that particular cool aid.

Now as for mandatory training? Your Constitution confers on Congress the power to make laws for the training & arming of the Militia, this is a separate power to the restriction placed on Congress by the 2nd Amendment.

It would not be a bad thing to do this, as it would remove the fear of the unknown and the ' it was an accident' excuse. I note that in my own nation up until the early 70s, we had compulsory school cadets. Kids would take Bren machine guns home on the train. There were no school shootings and the gun crime rate was lower. Many of the European nations that anti-gun politicians like to point to as examples of 'good gun laws' had mandatory military service until quite recently. Yet those politicians do not press for mandatory training in the USA. Because their purpose is not to reduce crime or accidents with firearms. It is to disarm the American people. I've been observing the American gun debate as an interested outsider since 1987. I don't have a dog in that fight, I'm just stating what I have observed, again and again and again.
Those who will disarm you will speak of 'reasonable restrictions'. When they have implemented them and they are the new norm, then the new norm is not reasonable enough and they will push for the next level of 'reasonable restrictions'.

It happened here. It will happen there. If you fall for the trap of believing you are negotiating with reasonable people. Fanatics are not reasonable people.
 
Just to add, I'm talking about training as a mandatory subject in high school, not an obstacle put in the way of exercising an enumerated right.
 
It would not be a bad thing to do this, as it would remove the fear of the unknown and the ' it was an accident' excuse. I note that in my own nation up until the early 70s, we had compulsory school cadets. Kids would take Bren machine guns home on the train. There were no school shootings and the gun crime rate was lower.
Click to expand...


Yeah...but in the country where I grew up kids used to take RPG-7s and SA-16s home to train - and the rate of tanks and jet-fighters being crashed into homes was ZERO.
 
I like this site

And I no way want to get a bad rep...sorry I posted a hot topic. I had a really long post ...and decided, let it be...Peace to all !
 
Well, I should say kudos to you for having the guts to ask. Some folks would be more comfortable just never getting their questions explored and dealt with than risking the quasi-public drubbing that might come from asking some age-old questions which are so likely to raise the defensive guards of those of us who've been in the fight for decades.

If you have further questions or need the answers better fleshed out, please don't be afraid to ask. We'll try to keep the more toothy wolves at bay. ;)


...EDIT: Or, as Ken said, do you want us to close it, your questions answered?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
I just got this email from Rand Paul's office
Replies
2
Views
409
briney11
B
B
  • Locked
Are out-of-state purchases supposed to be taxed when transferred?
Replies
16
Views
2K
dukeofurl
D
P
  • Locked
Computers Make dealers obsolete for background check.
Replies
19
Views
805
Sam Cade
S
S
  • Locked
Thoughts on Background Checks for private sales?
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
3K
Texan Scott
T
N
  • Locked
Need NFA documentation...
Replies
1
Views
444
444
4
Back
Top