Gun related law wish list

bruchibruchi Senior MemberPosts: 2,582 Senior Member
Inspired on the gun wish list one.

Same gun laws including the castle doctrine across the nation including Puerto Rico as in Arizona!

Add to above change import laws so full auto MP-5's don't cost a fortune to civilians.

Affordable stamps for SBR's, full auto, silencers and a 15 day turnaround, or just do away with the stamps?

All honorably discharged from the armed forces get to take and keep a rifle home + get free ammo to stay honest.

Local National Guard 600 yard range not ravenously guarded by that LGS owner that thinks it is exclusive for his deep pocket clients and always "forgets" to let others know when it is available, it is like their private country club.
If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".

Replies

  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,003 Senior Member
    That one's easy: No gun laws at all. I've never been able to figure out why so many people have trouble comprehending "shall not be infringed".

    Before the forum went down, I believe it was Eli who said something to the effect of "So long as you aren't causing any harm, you can walk down the street with an AT-4 across your back while freebasing on coke, and I won't care in the slightest".

    Punish the actions, not the equipment.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,959 Senior Member
    :agree: Bigslug hit the nail on the head! And no freekin' stoopid state, county, or city laws, either!
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    I wish that all the gunlaws were done away with. All we need in this Country is two gun laws: (1) You got the money? Yea! (2) You want to buy the gun? Yea! Sold. Pay money leave store go shoot..................I have felt and always have felt that we American citizens should have not only the right but the privledge to walk anywhere anytime, with guns on us behind us beside us etc.........That doesn't mean theres going to be a gunfight every second either, like some believe. Not that I have any fully-automatic weapons, but if I want one I should be able to purchase one and own it, I should be able to buy anything in this country thats for sale, without US Government intrusion, and without going through a ton of tax stamps, paper work, taxes, fines fees, etc. etc. We really really need to do away with the BATFE one and for all.... I have alway said that and always will.....
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • englishbobenglishbob Member Posts: 35 Member
    Really, only one law, in parts is needed....

    If you're an habtual violent criminal (not a one time mistake, misdemeanor), then you have no gun rights. And, if declared mentally incompetant, likewise.

    That just about covers it for me.
    “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Sir Winston Churchill
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,003 Senior Member
    englishbob wrote: »
    Really, only one law, in parts is needed....

    If you're an habtual violent criminal (not a one time mistake, misdemeanor), then you have no gun rights.

    The problem with that wording is that it implies some form of background checking and possibly registration structure (see previous comments on "shall not be infringed").

    If you've been verified as a "habitual violent criminal", then your one sole right should be the right to remain incarcerated. . .or landfill.

    Which brings us to another point of discussion - how about penalties for judges who release those who go on to commit additional crime?
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,582 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    That one's easy: No gun laws at all. I've never been able to figure out why so many people have trouble comprehending "shall not be infringed".





    Punish the actions, not the equipment.

    Grenade launchers as well?
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,972 Senior Member
    bruchi wrote: »
    Grenade launchers as well?

    Why not? I'd love to have an M-79...it would make for interesting coyote hunting...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,003 Senior Member
    bruchi wrote: »
    Grenade launchers as well?

    Yes. Basically anything short of nuclear, biological, and chemical agents should be fair game. The point of the 2A is to keep the government representative as opposed to self-serving. Far easier when everybody can play with the same toys. As has been said before, "Gun rights is not about the ability to continue hunting ducks".
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • englishbobenglishbob Member Posts: 35 Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    The problem with that wording is that it implies some form of background checking and possibly registration structure

    No, not disputing that at all. I suppose it could be accomplished with a "check", but it does not necessarily have to be a registration structure.....

    Unfortunately we can't give every violent criminal the short drop, so everything else is going to come up short and don't get me started on judges! Two years ago, I locked up a spouse abuser. He had abused his partner over yeas and eventually she'd had enough and called us cops. He was arrested and then bailed with all manner of conditions and injunctions. He broke these and abused her again. I went looking for him. It took a little time, but no greater feeling of achievement when finding a scuz ball like this, slapping cuffs on him and slamming a cell door!

    Anyway, the judge decided to remand him in custody till his trial. No worries, at least his spouse was safe. Unfortunately, another judge heard a bail application from his lawyers three weeks later. His lawyer was successful. Scuz ball was released and went straight from prison, to her place of employment and stabbed her to death.........

    Oh boy, judges and other lawyers. I'm sure there's a special place in hell for them.
    “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Sir Winston Churchill
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,582 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Yes. Basically anything short of nuclear, biological, and chemical agents should be fair game. The point of the 2A is to keep the government representative as opposed to self-serving. Far easier when everybody can play with the same toys. As has been said before, "Gun rights is not about the ability to continue hunting ducks".

    From that point of view I have to agree. I just don't see a country populated by way too many reality show, Oprah, drive thru, People magazine loving folks getting of their couches to fight any government as long as the cable reception is good.
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »

    Before the forum went down, I believe it was Eli who said something to the effect of "So long as you aren't causing any harm, you can walk down the street with an AT-4 across your back while freebasing on coke, and I won't care in the slightest".

    Punish the actions, not the equipment.



    T'was I.

    I've always found the punishment of a "potential" act to be somehow, very........wrong!
  • Elk creekElk creek Senior Member Posts: 5,732 Senior Member
    We need only two laws, Felony stupid and misdemeanor stupid. Pretty much all bad human behavior will fit one of those.:tooth:
    Aim higher, or get a bigger gun.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Full auto and silencers over the counter. No silly stamps or waiting periods.
    Tax credits for ammo, reloading equipment and components.
    Federally guaranteed student loans for reloading classes.
    Large blocks of federal land opened and reserved for LR shooting 8nstruction.
    Lead bullets and shot are sacrosanct. Forever removed from EPA control. Especially shot
    That's a few of my wet dreams anyway..
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    That one's easy: No gun laws at all. I've never been able to figure out why so many people have trouble comprehending "shall not be infringed".

    So you and tennmike think that felons should be allowed to buy and open carry firearms with zero restrictions?

    Because that's the situation for "shall not be infringed", right?

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • HvyMaxHvyMax Senior Member Posts: 1,786 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    So you and tennmike think that felons should be allowed to buy and open carry firearms with zero restrictions?

    Because that's the situation for "shall not be infringed", right?

    No I think career felons should be removed permanently from society publicly so kids can see what happens if they choose to be scum.
    Wal Mart where the discriminating white trash shop.
    Paddle faster!!! I hear banjos.
    Reason for editing: correcting my auto correct
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,990 Senior Member
    Another ghost thread dug up from 2011............................

    Which reminds me of some MIA forum members...................
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,959 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    So you and tennmike think that felons should be allowed to buy and open carry firearms with zero restrictions?

    Because that's the situation for "shall not be infringed", right?

    There you go again, getting your daily exercise jumping to conclusions, running around in circles, making leaps of logic, and flying off the handle! :tooth:
    You made the leap from law abiding citizen to felon, not Bigslug or I. And explain in 10,000 words or less how things are any better after the NFA of 1934 and/or the GCA of 1968 made things better. Oh, I know; after those laws were passed felons were scared poopless to even THINK of touching a firearm! :rotflmao:
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • Elk creekElk creek Senior Member Posts: 5,732 Senior Member
    I didn't pull it out, it showed up as an unviewed thread.( in bold I at the top of the list) it was unintentional....
    Aim higher, or get a bigger gun.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,834 Senior Member
    Elk creek wrote: »
    I didn't pull it out, it showed up as an unviewed thread.( in bold I at the top of the list) it was unintentional....

    Yeah, I was going to ask that too, but I did enjoy the replay. This kind of thread never really gets old.

    Realistically, we have laws like this because Lawyers love them. It gives them business. Have you ever sat in a courtroom or watched a scumbag's lawyer on TV tell about his scumbag client as if he were the POPE? or Mary Poppins? And if you have you undoubtedly Observed said lawyer who seemed about to break out in violent, uncontrollable laughter, because he knows what he's saying is total BS and that he's getting off on putting a big bunch of POOH past the masses and having some believe it. Some lawyers are the biggest scam artists to ever grace the planet with their presence. And if you are going to tell me that you disagree with that because you know some politicians that are even better at it, think about this, that those politicians are probably lawyers.

    Oh and BTW, if there are some lawyers on this forum and that offends you, remember, my youngest daughter is a licensed attorney who practices law in Boston Commiechusetts, of all places.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    There you go again, getting your daily exercise jumping to conclusions, running around in circles, making leaps of logic, and flying off the handle! :tooth:
    You made the leap from law abiding citizen to felon, not Bigslug or I. And explain in 10,000 words or less how things are any better after the NFA of 1934 and/or the GCA of 1968 made things better. Oh, I know; after those laws were passed felons were scared poopless to even THINK of touching a firearm! :rotflmao:

    Here's what you said: Bigslug hit the nail on the head! And no freekin' stoopid state, county, or city laws, either!

    So you clearly said that there should be NO laws regarding possession of firearms, and echoed what Bigslug said.

    Where did I misunderstand? If there are laws that prohibit felons from possessing firearms, then this does change things on the "shall not be infringed", right? Whether these laws are federal, state, county, etc. laws limiting firearm possession, they are laws.

    I do NOT believe that the right for firearm possession is inalienable and that there is room for sensible laws. In other words, I do NOT believe that "shall not be infringed" is total, but in fact must be weighed against other matters.

    So yeah, I DO believe that there is room for firearms laws. You don't, which is your choice. Just don't react testily if you're asked to verify this. If you DO think that there is room for reasonable laws, then you also DO believe that "shall not be infringed" is not absolute.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,626 Senior Member
    To every graduating high school senior who is of age and not otherwise legally disqualified from firearms ownership, the school should issue, along with the diploma, an AR15 or AK47 (student's choice), and to the Salutatorian, a half case of ammunition, and to the Valedictorian, a full case.

    Everyone holding a CCW permit boarding a commercial airplane, should be allowed to carry their personal weapon, or, at their request, the airline should issue a .38 Special revolver, loaded with rounds appropriate for inside-an-airplane use. The weapons would be collected on landing, and re-issued to the next passengers.

    All fees paid for required administrative or training costs associated with obtaining a CCW permit should be tax deductible - not from the taxable income, but from the actual taxes due. There should never be anything like a 'poll tax' levied for the exercise of any fundamental civil right.

    The BATFE should be broken up into its constituent responsibilities, the new Bureau of Firearms should have the mission of getting as many firearms and as much ammunition into the hands of as many law-abiding citizens as possible. It should facilitate the importation of mil-surp weapons. 922r would be repealed. It should join with the NRA's Eddie Eagle program in implementing a nationwide education effort to teach students fundamentals of safe firearms handling, and sponsor JV and Varsity competitive shooting sports in every Middle and High school. The legal department of this Bureau should advocate for gun rights wherever they are currently infringed.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,959 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Here's what you said: Bigslug hit the nail on the head! And no freekin' stoopid state, county, or city laws, either!


    So you clearly said that there should be NO laws regarding possession of firearms, and echoed what Bigslug said.


    Bigslug wrote: »
    That one's easy: No gun laws at all. I've never been able to figure out why so many people have trouble comprehending "shall not be infringed".

    Before the forum went down, I believe it was Eli who said something to the effect of "So long as you aren't causing any harm, you can walk down the street with an AT-4 across your back while freebasing on coke, and I won't care in the slightest".

    Punish the actions, not the equipment.
    tennmike wrote: »
    :agree: Bigslug hit the nail on the head! And no freekin' stoopid state, county, or city laws, either!

    Right. No laws on possession or type of firearms by law abiding citizens.





    Where did I misunderstand? If there are laws that prohibit felons from possessing firearms, then this does change things on the "shall not be infringed", right? Whether these laws are federal, state, county, etc. laws limiting firearm possession, they are laws.

    You made the mistake of mixing laws concerning guns with laws concerning people. YOUR mistake, not MINE.


    I do NOT believe that the right for firearm possession is inalienable and that there is room for sensible laws. In other words, I do NOT believe that "shall not be infringed" is total, but in fact must be weighed against other matters.

    The right to self defense is natural law; one has the inalienable right to protect their life, and the lives of their family, from any deadly threat, period. The government has no right to meddle with this natural right of the individual. Firearms are the preferred choice of many weapons to accomplish this. And your idea of 'shall not be infringed' is as flawed as the design of the Titanic. 'Shall not be infringed' means EXACTLY what it says. Look it up.

    So yeah, I DO believe that there is room for firearms laws. You don't, which is your choice. Just don't react testily if you're asked to verify this. If you DO think that there is room for reasonable laws, then you also DO believe that "shall not be infringed" is not absolute.

    React testily? Give it a rest. When I become 'testy' there will be no doubt in your mind that I've become testy. I'm :rotflmao: at your leaps of logic, confusing McIntosh apples with road apples, and twisting the simple command "shall not be infringed" into something it isn't; the command is an absolute. Reminds me of Clinton and his "depends on what your definition if 'is' is."
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.