Gun Ownership Up & Violent Crime Down per FBI

[Dave]

I like to respond to these topics but little is accomplished if neither side listens. This is exactly that is happening here. My last statement on this topic, criminals and enforcement of the laws we already have must be upheld and when we don't enforce the law, anti gun movement wants more laws. Just like enforcing the illegals entering the country we don't enforce the law. This frustrates everyone and nothing gets done, just more pro and con posturing from both sides.

Dave

[Mr VJP]

Here's my suggestion, allow any American to get checked out by the Feds in a proper NICS manner, and do it within 1 month.  If that American has no felony convictions, that American passes, give that person an I.D. card that allows them to buy whatever gun they want, any size magazine they want, any ammo they want, and as many as they want, for the rest of their lives, uness they commit a crime that revokes their I.D.

Miracles DO happen I guess.  The first post of yours that shows some level of sanity.  What also needs to be added to this is that the same needs to apply to private sales.  What good does it do if NICS checks are required for purchases from dealers, if you can buy and sell it privately with NO background check?  I have NO doubt that this system WOULD keep guns away from the criminal element and there would be a better checks and balance to exactly how they are getting them.  Try passing this by the NRA, though!  They would have a huge $#!+ fit over anyone even suggesting something like this.  So tell me that they aren't also part of the problem here??

Shove your insults Steve.  You can't seem to post without them.  The system I described would apply to all sales, FFL or private.  Most intelligent people can see that.  There would be no NICS checks after the card was issued to an individual, it would be done once and that's it, period. 

Criminals would still get guns under this system, from the black market that would certainly arise.  But the system would shut the mouths of fools who think any type of gun control law will prevent criminals from getting guns.  Then again, they would probably whine this law isn't strict enough.

The NRA has long backed such a sensible compromise for gun owners in America. (They were the ones who promoted the NICS system over the 3 day waitng period from years ago.  Waiting 3 days for a gun to defend yourself with got a lot of people killed!)  But your Leftist, anti-gun Democrats aren't satisfied with the above proposal, as it doesn't have any hope of banning ALL guns from this so called "free" society.  They are the ones who have shot it down in Congress everytime it has been proposed.  They want registration and eventual confiscation.  And they will never allow anyone to buy any gun they want, or any capacity magazine they desire.  Direct your rage at the ones who are at fault here, and it ain't the NRA!  Your ignorance of the NRA and it's vision, is beyond comprehesion, for one who so freely attacks them.  You prove what I have been saying, if you ain't NRA, you're nothin'!

[Mr VJP]

The only way that you could control private sales would be to require registration of every gun, accessory, magazine and bullet you own. You want that?

Why exactly are so many of you guys opposed to the idea of registering our guns.  I wouldn't have a problem with it.  But, I've gotten the impression that those opposed to gun laws hate the idea- i'm curious as to why.  It seems to work for cars, why not guns?

Here's why......REGISTRATION IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS CONFISCATION!

If they know what you have and where you have it, it's very simple to come and get them.  History has many cases on file where a government has done just that after registration was enforced.  Don't you guys study the history of gun control in the world?

[nyantler]

That's the best response you could come up with??  Why don't you address the issue that ALL guns leave the manufacturing plants legally, yet end up in criminals hands anyway??  Bringing up liquor during prohibition is a lame comparison.  Lets keep this to the subject at hand.  And by the way, not that I agree with Washington DC's gun law, but it actually DOES work.  It's the bordering states that have loose gun laws that help funnel the guns in, not the strict one in Washington.

That makes no sense...lol... the laws in Washington do work, but the criminals are still getting guns? You just proved my point... Washington, even with its strict no gun policy, still hasn't kept guns out of the hands of criminals... what does it matter where they come from?... So lets just say Washington didn't have strict gun laws... the criminals would still have guns. So, that would mean with or without the strict laws they still would have guns .... hmmm .. now tell me again how their strict gun laws are working. Oh Yeah, It keeps the guns out of the law abiding citizens hands... because they are the ones selling the guns to criminals... hmmm... no that can't be true... because the citizens don't have any guns with the strict laws... Oh NO.. that means the criminals are getting them somewhere else... Oh I get it... you must be joking... you almost had me there Steve

You obviously have trouble seeing past your own shadow.  The problem is that gun laws are not uniform in this country.  Uniformity is what is needed.  You can dilly dally around the subject all you want.  It is up to YOUR type to prove to the rest of society that gun owners are responsible enough to implement and accept regulations that will at least put some safeguards that guns don't fall into the wrong hands.  NO, any law won't work in all cases, but having NO laws like YOU would prefer will work even less.  You think society should have total trust in you owning any gun you want with NO questions asked.  Good luck with you thinking that!  With some of the senseless, bullheaded rants you guys exhibit here, I as a gun owner don't even have much faith in you, so why in hell should anyone else?? LOL

You can go on and on about us pro 2nd Amendment guys ranting about gun laws all you want.. if not for our stance and that of the NRA... nobody would own a gun. And as for you not having faith in those of us that stand strong against bullshit gun laws.. neither do the anti-gun people.. and I don't care much what that minority of individuals thinks either..but at least you have them to stand by your way of thinking.

Like I said before.. prove to me that one gun law has served the purpose of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and I'll be all for it... as for nationwide gun laws... I believe it is a federal law that one cannot own a fully automatic weapon.. for example an uzi... yet gang members seem to still be getting them... but I will admit that the law did keep the automatic weapons out of the hands of law abiding gun owners. So tell us all again how the that law kept the guns out of criminal hands.

[Mr VJP]

[Dave]

Says it all in a nut shell.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

The only way that you could control private sales would be to require registration of every gun, accessory, magazine and bullet you own. You want that?

Why exactly are so many of you guys opposed to the idea of registering our guns.  I wouldn't have a problem with it.  But, I've gotten the impression that those opposed to gun laws hate the idea- i'm curious as to why.  It seems to work for cars, why not guns?

A list of who owns what and where its kept makes it real nice and easy for whomever holds that list to take them away. Thats my problem with it. Its bad enough that the government has a list of my handguns, I personally dont want them having a list of my long guns as well.

[WNYBuckHunter]

You can dilly dally around the subject all you want.  It is up to YOUR type to prove to the rest of society that gun owners are responsible enough to implement and accept regulations that will at least put some safeguards that guns don't fall into the wrong hands.

steve, this is where you fail to see the forest through the trees. The regulations that are already in place are more than enough if they were enforced.

What CAN be enforced?  You have a maze of laws, none of which are uniform across state lines.  Have some sort of national system where one set of laws is the law of the land and we will be getting somewhere.  As the main representative of gun owners the NRA should be pushing for this sort of gun law reform, instead of having coronaries at the mere mention of any gun law.  If they represent gun owners and want the rest of society to accept us as responsible citizens who don't want guns to easily fall into the wrong hands, it would be to the gun owners benefit to propose such sensibility.  I won't be holding my breath though.  I have often thought that it wouldn't be to their financial benefit if some sort of sane law was devised where it would benefit gun owners in the long run and at the same time make it tougher for criminals to get guns.  That's the reason NOTHING ever get solved in this country.  Too many greedy scumbags making money on both sides of any issue for it to ever come to a sensible resolution.

What in the world are you talking about steve? Its pretty simple, enforce the laws that are on the books. No plea deals, no early release, etc. If you commit a crime involving a gun, you pay the price. You dont need the exact same law everywhere to do that. I am not arguing that the same law everywhere wouldnt be more simple, but thats not the way it is, and it will more than likely not be that way anytime in the foreseeable future, so its a moot point. Remember, this country is formed by different states, which are all able to have their own laws. One law may benefit one state, but not another. As a responsible gun owner, it is your job to check the laws that apply to the area you are in or will be traveling to and abide by them. If thats too much for you to handle, then you will pay the price for your lack of responsibility. Again, no law will ever keep illegal guns out of the hands of those that have no regard for the law, because they arent following the law to begin with. That is about as simple as it gets.

[Doc]

Why exactly are so many of you guys opposed to the idea of registering our guns.  I wouldn't have a problem with it.  But, I've gotten the impression that those opposed to gun laws hate the idea- i'm curious as to why.  It seems to work for cars, why not guns?

So now we are hot to register ALL guns. That is exactly the escalation that I have come to expect from the anti-gun crowd.

Anyway, aside from the many more important reasons against gun registration that have already been mentioned, let me also point out that with every registration system comes another huge government bureaucracy which of course requires a fee. And fees have a way of starting out rather small until they are fully accepted and then steadily growing until they become simply another route to practical confiscation. Not quite the same thing as auto registrations where the administrators have no desires to restrict car ownership. Yes, I can see where the anti-gun gang would love to have registration powers over all guns. At that point they could apply the lessons learned from cigarette taxation. That would provide yet another weapon to beat over the heads of law abiding gun owners ...... and by the way would provide yet another worthless system that would have no effect on crime or criminals. There really is no end to the inventiveness of the enemies of the 2nd amendment.

[Dave]

Why exactly are so many of you guys opposed to the idea of registering our guns.  I wouldn't have a problem with it.  But, I've gotten the impression that those opposed to gun laws hate the idea- i'm curious as to why.  It seems to work for cars, why not guns?

So now we are hot to register ALL guns. That is exactly the escalation that I have come to expect from the anti-gun crowd.

Anyway, aside from the many more important reasons against gun registration that have already been mentioned, let me also point out that with every registration system comes another huge government bureaucracy which of course requires a fee. And fees have a way of starting out rather small until they are fully accepted and then steadily growing until they become simply another route to practical confiscation. Not quite the same thing as auto registrations where the administrators have no desires to restrict car ownership. Yes, I can see where the anti-gun gang would love to have registration powers over all guns. At that point they could apply the lessons learned from cigarette taxation. That would provide yet another weapon to beat over the heads of law abiding gun owners ...... and by the way would provide yet another worthless system that would have no effect on crime or criminals. There really is no end to the inventiveness of the enemies of the 2nd amendment.

Doc, talk about fees how about Nassau County $200 pistol license renewal and for what? To carry to and from the range and hunting where legal . Don't get much for $200 . can you see a criminal anting up the $200 ?

Dave

[Doc]

Doc, talk about fees how about Nassau County $200 pistol license renewal and for what? To carry to and from the range and hunting where legal . Don't get much for $200 . can you see a criminal anting up the $200 ?

Dave

That's a pretty good example of a government body using fees in a confiscatory way...... and I'm sure that if that doesn't do the job, they will have no problem with raising it some more in the future. And it all starts with registration. So anyone who is confused about all the opposition to gun registration, there (among other good reasons) is why.

[virgil]

So now we are hot to register ALL guns. That is exactly the escalation that I have come to expect from the anti-gun crowd.

I never said that i was in favor- I was asking what all the fuss is about.  I don't buy the idea that anyone's guns would ever be confiscated.

[Mr VJP]

Really?  It happens all the time already!  Any false accusation against your caracter and good name by anyone who doesn't like you will get them confiscated by a Judge until you prove your innocence.  When they are returned, they will surely be pretty beat up and rusted.  It will cost you plenty to get them back too!

Do you honestly think they wouldn't confiscate any gun that was suddenly deemed illegal to own?  Talk to people in NJ who had to give up M1 Carbines and so called "assualt weapons" when they were banned there.

You trust the government a lot more than they trust you friend.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I don't buy the idea that anyone's guns would ever be confiscated.

you might want to make a review of history. It has happened before throughout the world and the past. I bet those folks didn't believe it would happen either. The thing that keeps it from happening here is the Constitution and the efforts to marginalize it further only supports the abilility to let it happen.

I know we are never going to change your mind on this, Virgil, but I just ask you to consider what benefit would come form registering them. What benefit could it serve? I am not looking for a response...just asking you to reflect on it.

[virgil]

I know we are never going to change your mind on this, Virgil, but I just ask you to consider what benefit would come form registering them. What benefit could it serve? I am not looking for a response...just asking you to reflect on it.

You guys are getting yourselves all wound up again.  My mind is not made up.  I simply asked for the reasons against it.  As I said, registration works for cars- I'm curious as to why there are such strong opinions against it for guns.

As far as potential benefit, I think that accountability would be the primary benefit.  If registration were ever to be considered, maybe it would involve 'grandfathering' guns manufactured before a certain date.  That could protect people who have bought their guns legally before the law went into effect.  It sounds to me though that the primary issue on this subject (and many others) for some of you guys is the distrust of the government.

[Dave]

I know we are never going to change your mind on this, Virgil, but I just ask you to consider what benefit would come form registering them. What benefit could it serve? I am not looking for a response...just asking you to reflect on it.

You guys are getting yourselves all wound up again.  My mind is not made up.  I simply asked for the reasons against it.  As I said, registration works for cars- I'm curious as to why there are such strong opinions against it for guns.

As far as potential benefit, I think that accountability would be the primary benefit.  If registration were ever to be considered, maybe it would involve 'grandfathering' guns manufactured before a certain date.  That could protect people who have bought their guns legally before the law went into effect.  It sounds to me though that the primary issue on this subject (and many others) for some of you guys is the distrust of the government.

Virgil, did you believe them when we went into  Viet Nam, Iraq, Lybia. I don't trust this government but for one thing to waste our money and the lives of our military. Wake up don't be so nieve.

Dave

[virgil]

Virgil, did you believe them when we went into  Viet Nam, Iraq, Lybia. I don't trust this government but for one thing to waste our money and the lives of our military. Wake up don't be so nieve.

Dave, thanks for confirming the obvious.  I usually prefer to ignore your posts for exactly this reason.

[Dave]

Virgil, did you believe them when we went into  Viet Nam, Iraq, Lybia. I don't trust this government but for one thing to waste our money and the lives of our military. Wake up don't be so nieve.

Dave, thanks for confirming the obvious.  I usually prefer to ignore your posts for exactly this reason.

Virgil you brought up the topic of not trusting the Gov't , I just gave some reasons why, sorry if that bothered you. I guess you probably believed Anthony Wiener too

Dave

[virgil]

Virgil you brought up the topic of not trusting the Gov't , I just gave some reasons why

You didn't give any 'reasons' for anything.  And, exactly which government are you referring to when you mention Vietnam, Iraq, and Libya?  Each of these conflicts was entered into by three different administrations.  Are you referring in general to the government of the USA, regardless of who the elected officials are?  Is there any administration in recent history that you found trustworthy, or do you have a general distrust of anyone in charge?

[Dave]

Virgil you brought up the topic of not trusting the Gov't , I just gave some reasons why

You didn't give any 'reasons' for anything.  And, exactly which government are you referring to when you mention Vietnam, Iraq, and Libya?  Each of these conflicts was entered into by three different administrations.  Are you referring in general to the government of the USA, regardless of who the elected officials are?  Is there any administration in recent history that you found trustworthy, or do you have a general distrust of anyone in charge?

As far as I can remember there is only one Gov't in this country. You want reasons, do your homework and you will find the answers if I gave them to you , you wouldn't believe me anyway. Let the facts speak for themselves. I do question the motives of our elected officials, just look what shape this country is in, almost every state is broke. Who got us to this point????? Elected Officials, the people we should be able to trust, are you kidding me? I don't know how old you are but some of your responses on this thread are very juvenile . You just keep questioning every ones response and have none of your own you like to play the devils advocate. You have to be able to listen to learn, not just react.

Dave

[virgil]

As far as I can remember there is only one Gov't in this country. You want reasons, do your homework and you will find the answers if I gave them to you , you wouldn't believe me anyway. Let the facts speak for themselves. I do question the motives of our elected officials, just look what shape this country is in, almost every state is broke. Who got us to this point?http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]? Elected Officials, the people we should be able to trust, are you kidding me? I don't know how old you are but some of your responses on this thread are very juvenile . You just keep questioning every ones response and have none of your own you like to play the devils advocate. You have to be able to listen to learn, not just react.

Noone implied that there is more than one government.  However, 'the government' is constantly changing due to the fact that we hold elections and have term limits.  My point was that you stated your distrust of 'this government' and then sited three wars spanning fifty years as examples as to why you feel that way.  The people responsible for our involvement in Iraq were probably children when we got involved in Vietnam.  My point is that you seem to distrust the government no matter who is in charge.

And, it is not my posts that are juvenile- it is your response to them that is juvenile.  I find it interesting to see how some people fly off the handle when asked to explain their position on something.  If find it funny to see how you confuse opinion and propaganda with fact.  I think it's even funnier that you call me 'juvenile' and 'naive' while using run-on sentences and mispellings(nieve??).

And it's convenient to assume that I'm too young to have a valid opinion.  You're wrong again.  Simple minds usually seek simple answers.  Again, this is why I usually prefer not to respond to your silly posts. 

[Dave]

Virgil, read your post you asked what gov't are you referring to, did you not. I didn't think that spell check and punctuation mattered that much on a hunting site. I thought it was the issued, that's how lame your responses are when we are discussing gun ownership and crime. You come up with the crime of poor gramma and run on sentences which at times I must plead guilty. Hope no one else on this site is committing this crime. That is what makes your responses juvenile and childish :'( Who can take you serious??????????

Dave

[virgil]

Virgil, read your post you asked what gov't are you referring to, did you not. I didn't think that spell check and punctuation mattered that much on a hunting site. I thought it was the issued, that's how lame your responses are when we are discussing gun ownership and crime. You come up with the crime of poor gramma and run on sentences which at times I must plead guilty. Hope no one else on this site is committing this crime. That is what makes your responses juvenile and childish http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/cry.gif[/img] Who can take you serious?http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]

I only point out your grammar and spelling in response to being called naive and juvenile.

I did ask which government you were referring to.  Again, I asked this because the government of fifty years ago is not the same as today's government due to the fact that none of the elected officials from years ago are in office today.  Again, my point is that you state that you didn't trust the government fifty years ago(Vietnam), you didn't trust the government twenty years ago(Persian Gulf), and you don't trust the government today (Libya).  So, maybe the issue is that you simply do not trust the government, no matter who is in charge.  Maybe you are just one of those people that second guesses and complains.

[Dave]

Virgil, read your post you asked what gov't are you referring to, did you not. I didn't think that spell check and punctuation mattered that much on a hunting site. I thought it was the issued, that's how lame your responses are when we are discussing gun ownership and crime. You come up with the crime of poor gramma and run on sentences which at times I must plead guilty. Hope no one else on this site is committing this crime. That is what makes your responses juvenile and childish http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/cry.gif[/img] Who can take you serious?http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]

I only point out your grammar and spelling in response to being called naive and juvenile.

I did ask which government you were referring to.  Again, I asked this because the government of fifty years ago is not the same as today's government due to the fact that none of the elected officials from years ago are in office today.  Again, my point is that you state that you didn't trust the government fifty years ago(Vietnam), you didn't trust the government twenty years ago(Persian Gulf), and you don't trust the government today (Libya).  So, maybe the issue is that you simply do not trust the government, no matter who is in charge.  Maybe you are just one of those people that second guesses and complains.

First of all you don't know me to make such a statement. That seems to be what you do, make assumptions. I don't second guess or complain, I am a veteran and I stepped up for this country so don't assume you know me. It's the same Govt just different people that represent us. With Congress having a 17% approval rating more people are complaining than ever . They make the laws and set the policy that I feel is not in the best interest if this country especially the law biding citizens.Who pay the freight!!!!!!!!

Dave

[virgil]

First of all you don't know me to make such a statement. That seems to be what you do, make assumptions. I don't second guess or complain, I am a veteran and I stepped up for this country so don't assume you know me. It's the same Govt just different people that represent us. With Congress having a 17% approval rating more people are complaining than ever . They make the laws and set the policy that I feel is not in the best interest if this country especially the law biding citizens.Who pay the freight!!!!!!!!

I never claimed to know you any more than you know me.  I've made no more assumptions about you than you've made about me.  Try not being so confrontational if you're going to be so sensitive when challenged.  I have nothing but respect for anyone who has served this country.  However, being a veteran doesn't exempt you from ever being asked to explain your position or back up your statements.