did I sin?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

14 minutes ago, Belo said:

legally you're not responsible no. As a gun owner you should do the best you can to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. And if that still doesn't do it for you, you'd think that protecting your kids and the valuables that have sentimental value would. 

Don't we constantly hang our hat on the ideae that criminals don't follow laws? So why not prepare and store your guns with this idea in mind?

https://www.nssf.org/safety/

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/09/the-gun-lobbying-group-you-dont-hear-about/279616/

https://gunsafetyrules.nra.org/

https://www.nrafamily.org/articles/2016/4/14/6-ways-to-safely-store-your-firearms/

there is no requirement on the seller to ask about a criminal record, you're only in trouble if you knowingly sell to a felon, for example the lady who bought the gun for the guy who shot the webster firefighters. Otherwise, you're just judging a book by its cover if you assume a guy with lots of tats is a convicted felon.  And billy bob at the gun show could be a felon too. I think you're missing the point about a convicted felon not passing a nics check. That's exactly why he would buy privately and bypass the check through the legal loophole.

You're not going to win this one.

Do you have any idea how many guns there are out there that have no documentation concerning who bought them and when?  Personally one of those are more valuable than one that is "on the books".  That is really why the Safe Act is so BS and a feel good law that only effects the law abiding. If I wanted to sell you a gun we could literally take a ride to the first parking lot over the PA line and make the transaction or we could say that we did. 

[Five Seasons]

28 minutes ago, WNYBuckHunter said:

My kids have been taught from a young age that guns are not toys. Even at 14, my daughter wont touch one unless Im there or know about it. The rest of the kids refuse to touch them unless I am right there with them. There are few guns I have sentimental attachment to, I mainly keep them in a cabinet/safe to make sure they stay clean and are out of the way. Regular gun safes are easily broken into for anyone that wants to get into them. Trigger locks can be removed pretty easily. The only way to truly secure them is to have close to the equivalent of a vault, everything else is really a half-measure or feel good type thing.

As far as responsibility goes though, there are things in my house that can be used to kill just as easily as any gun I have. Should I be responsible if say, someone steals my ATV and runs it down the road and causes a fatal crash?

My family is the same way. But I am not home all the time and my kids have friends. Nothing is impenetrable. We've seen enough Ocean's 11 movies to know that. But I bet you still lock your doors to your house and car even though a simple rock renders them useless. You do the best you reasonably can. If you're robbed and your gun safe is broken into, I doubt anyone looks at you sideways. Robbed and your guns are stolen from your dresser drawer might lead to some more scrutiny. Their are worse things that could happen as well that might make you wish you locked your guns up.

18 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Do you have any idea how many guns there are out there that have no documentation concerning who bought them and when?  Personally one of those are more valuable than one that is "on the books".  That is really why the Safe Act is so BS and a feel good law that only effects the law abiding. If I wanted to sell you a gun we could literally take a ride to the first parking lot over the PA line and make the transaction or we could say that we did. 

I think some of you are missing the point. And it's simply that we should do the best we can to control what we can. Bad will always be there. Why contribute to it? So you can save $20 on an FFL?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

3 minutes ago, Belo said:

I think some of you are missing the point. And it's simply that we should do the best we can to control what we can. Bad will always be there. Why contribute to it? So you can save $20 on an FFL?

Honestly no. Because these "steps" are geared towards good law abiding people while these crooked politicians step over themselves to cater to the criminals and illegals. And they won't have any impact on the crime rates. so what is the next logical "step"? Because we all know that any step is worth the loss of a right to save just one life. (unless it is an unborn life that is). SO that next step IS full registration of all firearms and what better way to get a leg up than to have years of information to look back on. The Left is incremental and they have proven this. That is why that gun rights folks are not willing to give an inch. The other side has shown that once you do they will grab for the mile.  That is why the SCOTUS was so important and why the left is shitting themselves with RBG on life support. 

[G-Man]

I did the same sold 4 rifles 5 pistols 3 muzzleloaders  and 7 shotguns that were never used.. kept browning bps game gun in 12 ga, mossberg 835 12 ha , marlin 1895 in 45-70, a couple of .22 rifles 2 cva muzzleloaders, as well as my 50 cal pistols . The rest were seldom if ever used some were still nib. 

[Rattler]

15 hours ago, Belo said:

I think some of you are missing the point. And it's simply that we should do the best we can to control what we can. Bad will always be there. Why contribute to it? So you can save $20 on an FFL?

The point being missed here is the government wants to require NICS checks on all firearm transfers so it can deny as many of those transfers as possible.  It is already trying to add all sorts of minor offenses to NICS as disqualifiers.  Plus, the system won't work unless all firearms are registered.  Registration leads to confiscation.

Knowing that criminals are not getting their firearms from private sellers in the majority of their gun buys, knowing most of their guns are stolen or from straw buyers, knowing this harsh NICS dream will have no effect at all on criminals getting guns, knowing that this NICS dream turns your right to own a firearm into a government granted privilege, knowing that a "universal background check" law is prone to massive government abuse, knowing it will require registration of ALL firearms, making it easy to confiscate firearms declared banned for whatever reason, knowing all of that, do you still think we should trust the government not to abuse this system to take away people's guns at will?

That is the point that matters.

I support serious penalties for criminals that use a firearm to commit a serious crime.  They should fear the penalty for such actions.  Today, they don't fear the law at all. 

Yet responsible gun owners who get caught with a 30 round magazine in their car, that don't even have a firearm to put it into, can go to prison for 10 years.  How is that even remotely referred to as "common sense"?