Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

Gun show loophole

2»

Replies

  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,733 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Is that not a permit from the government to carry a concealed firearm?

    It is. In addition to this, it is a document that proves that you have passed a background check.
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, and speed is the economy of motion" - Scott Jedlinski
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    No problem with a 10 day waiting period? Really? You're kidding me, right?
    Maybe a 10 day wait before you're allowed to speak or write so we can check just in case you might have committed libel or slander at one time.
    Maybe a 10 day wait so we can decide by arbitrary criteria crafted to support our agenda whether you have the mental faculties to register to vote.
    Maybe a 10 day wait before we allow you to pray or worship so we can investigate your church for state-approved orthodoxy and political correctness.

    NO CONSTITUIONAL RIGHT should ever be subject to prior restraint - especially by a government firmly in the grip of those who want to abridge and infringe it. For cryin' out loud no wonder the liberals are on the attack. WE DON"T BOTHER TO VOTE, and then some of us are actually on their side anyway. I sincerely hope that anybody who ever uttered a single word in support of any aspect of gun control loses everything - especially all their guns. UNTIL THEY FREAKING GET A CLUE. It would serve their rationalizing butts right.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    From the state government it is.

    Government is government. You are still accepting a permitting process to exercise a Constitutional right.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    NO CONSTITUIONAL RIGHT should ever be subject to prior restraint - especially by a government firmly in the grip of those who want to abridge and infringe it. For cryin' out loud no wonder the liberals are on the attack. WE DON"T BOTHER TO VOTE, and then some of us are actually on their side anyway. I sincerely hope that anybody who ever uttered a single word in support of any aspect of gun control loses everything - especially all their guns. UNTIL THEY FREAKING GET A CLUE. It would serve their rationalizing butts right.

    Do you have a CHL?
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    WE DON"T BOTHER TO VOTE,

    That is your choice.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • NomadacNomadac Senior Member Posts: 902 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    I don't really see a problem with a 10 day waiting period.

    What about the girlfriend or wife that has been threatened by her boyfriend or husband, gotten a restraining order and tries to buy a firearm to protect herself and while waiting to pickup the firearm is attacked and killed, because she could not defend herself and the restraining order didn't protect her?

    This has happened back when the 10-day waiting period was in effect and more than one person died as a result.

    As previous mentioned name one gun control law, ban, etc. that has prevented any crime with a firearm? There are none. Currently more than 20,000 already on the books and zero effectiveness.

    Gun Control Insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Government is government. You are still accepting a permitting process to exercise a Constitutional right.
    My reply was to indicate the lack of total Federal reciprocity....your permit is allowed by the state, not the Nation entire.
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Really? Does the FFL holder requesting a BGC get charged for the request?


    Depends. I held an FFL in California and background checks cost $25.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    Nomadac wrote: »
    What about the girlfriend or wife that has been threatened by her boyfriend or husband, gotten a restraining order and tries to buy a firearm to protect herself and while waiting to pickup the firearm is attacked and killed, because she could not defend herself and the restraining order didn't protect her?

    Folks should have a gun before they need it. I got a kick out of the LA riots, everyone trying to buy guns and folks with guns trying to buy ammo State government shut down sales. I just sat there and smiled sittin on that there stash of mine.
    I don't like any of it, CHL included. Vermont has the right idea. Right now it's all about damage control and folks we have been damaged. Look at this forum as an example, gun owners can't even discuss this topic with out arguing and calling one another names. Reasonable discussion is never going to happen.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    Depends. I held an FFL in California and background checks cost $25.
    And who is the cause of that cost? Who did your money go to?
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Folks should have a gun before they need it.

    ^Sorry, you can't argue with this.^
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    And who is the cause of that cost? Who did your money go to?

    The CA DOJ. They called it a fee, but in reality it was a tax on gun buyers. If CA used the NICS system, it would have been free.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    So CA charged YOU $25, for some desk flukey to press a button? And excuse my ignorance, but why would a state so restrictive about gun ownership NOT be using the NICS!?
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    So CA charged YOU $25, for some desk flukey to press a button? And excuse my ignorance, but why would a state so restrictive about gun ownership NOT be using the NICS!?

    A lot of things going on out here that I don't understand either.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    Sacramento should burn like Rome.
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    So CA charged YOU $25, for some desk flukey to press a button? And excuse my ignorance, but why would a state so restrictive about gun ownership NOT be using the NICS!?

    Yeah the DOJ charged ME, but as a businessman, I passed that cost to the customer. The system CA used was more invasive than NICS.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    Please explain the invasion.....inquiring minds beg to be educated.
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Please explain the invasion.....inquiring minds beg to be educated.

    I had one customer that was denied because of an expired restraining order. Another that was delayed because of a 30 year old misdemeanor. Ironically, he had bought guns and was approved a half dozen times previously.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • timctimc Senior Member Posts: 6,684 Senior Member
    bullsi1911 wrote: »
    Fine. You can have one. Don't tell me I have to have one, though.

    Now I'm with that!
    timc - formerly known as timc on the last G&A forum and timc on the G&A forum before that and the G&A forum before that.....
    AKA: Former Founding Member
  • Hugh DamrightHugh Damright Member Posts: 169 Member
    Government is government.

    There is supposed to be a separation of state and federal powers with police powers, including gun control powers, being reserved to each state. In Presser v Illinois the SCOTUS said that "a state has the same undeniable and unlimited jurisdiction over all persons and things within its territorial limits as any foreign nation, where that jurisdiction is not surrendered or restrained by the constitution of the United States; that, by virtue of this, it is not only the right but the bounden and solemn duty of a state to advance the safety, happiness, and prosperity of its people, and to provide for its general welfare by any and every act of legislation which it may deem to be conducive to these ends, where the power over the particular subject or the manner of its exercise is not surrendered or restrained in the manner just stated". If a state passed a law requiring a 10 day waiting period to obtain a firearm, the SCOTUS might rule that it violates the 14th Amendment, or they might not. But for the federal government to pass a 10 day waiting period would seem to be a whole different matter.
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    So CA charged YOU $25, for some desk flukey to press a button? And excuse my ignorance, but why would a state so restrictive about gun ownership NOT be using the NICS!?

    Virginia does this too. Dealers contact the Va state police for background checks. We have two forms to fill out. A state form and a 4473. The state police then conduct the background check with both their own system and NICS. They only charge $2.00 though and that is passed along to the customer. However to buy "assault weapons" we have to produce 3 ID's. 2 ID's with matching addresses for everything else.

    Or you can just get around all that and go see one of the many "professional private sellers" we have around here. They usually have a nice selection of their never ending private collection with new items arriving daily lol
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 11,142 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    Quote Originally Posted by bullsi1911 View Post
    Guys in California- how did that registration of "Assault Weapons" work out for you? Did it lead to confiscation?

    No.

    Really? Did you have a registered SKS? http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/xcibviewitem.asp?id=195

    "all owners of the SKS "Sporter" to turn them in for a $230 reimbursement before January 1, 2000. "If you own an SKS Sporter, you can’t sell it and you can’t shoot it. You MUST turn it in before January 1 or face criminal charges and confiscation" goes the ad which has been run on local radio stations."
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    bullsi1911 wrote: »
    Really? Did you have a registered SKS? http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/xcibviewitem.asp?id=195

    "all owners of the SKS "Sporter" to turn them in for a $230 reimbursement before January 1, 2000. "If you own an SKS Sporter, you can’t sell it and you can’t shoot it. You MUST turn it in before January 1 or face criminal charges and confiscation" goes the ad which has been run on local radio stations."

    So did people register them and then later they came along and forced those on the list to turn them in?
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 11,142 Senior Member
    So did people register them and then later they came along and forced those on the list to turn them in?

    That's my understanding. Registration leads to confiscation- Every time.

    We have to draw a line in the sand on this one. NO more laws. This far and NO FURTHER. We have over 20,000 laws regulating firearms on the books. Gun control has been tried and FAILED. the CT shooting is proof. Gun control kills innocent people.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
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.

Advertisement