Did you remember to turn your clock forward?

[texasmade]

i dont like people telling me what to do...when the next guy will do it anyways... :x

[TBD]

Not illegal YET. Look up and read the Ammunition Accountability Act.

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

This is a state bill, not federal and many of us are watching it closely. With all the other stuff coming quickly I think for now this idea is dead. Ohio is one of the states that shut it down pretty fast. It is being pushed by the company that has a patent on the idea. As yet no one has the technology to implement it. Even if it does pass, I doubt anyone will be standing at the range checking all my emptys.

[Condor]

This is a state bill, not federal and many of us are watching it closely. With all the other stuff coming quickly I think for now this idea is dead. Ohio is one of the states that shut it down pretty fast. It is being pushed by the company that has a patent on the idea. As yet no one has the technology to implement it. Even if it does pass, I doubt anyone will be standing at the range checking all my emptys.

My understanding of it, and what I have heard and talked about with some fairly "in the know" folks in state gov't (judges and such) is that the folks who are pushing it DO have the means to do it.....people just werent going for it so basically they get a special interest group to help push the idea....they hold the patent on it, so then......they basically want the use of their product legislated.

maybe all the info i have received on it is off or weird or maybe it differs state to state...im not sure. Georgia will shut it down, no doubt.
What blows my mind is as a nation...we are even remotely considering registering ammo??? Just the simple fact that it is being proposed just really frightens me. The nuts are taking over....

[ShaulWolf]

*insert unnecessary amount of obscenities and expletives here. If you think there aren't enough that can be used on the topic of registering ammo, add a few more just for good measure*

And those are my thoughts on registering ammunition. As if the ****tards in Jersey didn't make it bad enough. Only state worse is California I think.

[sentry103]

I live in TX and you've seen my toy collection .. nuff said. Very nice puppies Condor

[snusjus]

I think law-abiding citizens have the right to own firearms. However, I think background checks need to be more thorough (Virginia Tech incident for example). My view may seem unorthodox coming from an ultra leftist, but it's simply common sense in my opinion.

[ShaulWolf]

You know what I'd like to see but probably never will? A single CCW permit that's effective nationwide. To get it you'd need:
-21 years of age
-Federal background check
-State background check
-US citizen for 3 months (just throwing a number out there. it's something we can discuss later)
-10 hour safety and law course
-completion of a shooting course
-displaying aptitude in shooting including
---accuracy in shooting a man sized target center of mass
---able to draw and shoot accurately

Why it'll never happen? Each state has different laws on when you're legally allowed to draw and shoot. And too many conservatives and anti-gun advocates.

[TBD]

I think law-abiding citizens have the right to own firearms. However, I think background checks need to be more thorough (Virginia Tech incident for example). My view may seem unorthodox coming from an ultra leftist, but it's simply common sense in my opinion.

No background check would have been thorough enough to prevent that, without serious privacy invasions. Nothing in the Vtech guy's file would have prevented him from buying a gun under the current law. Even now in Ohio mental health records are protected from review in such cases. Plus unless there is instant, or almost so, updates to the system things will be missed.

I don't mind the background checks too much, but not many felons or other prohibited people are stupid enough to go through a dealer.

[ShaulWolf]

This is very true, but I think the background checks would be more for the sake of saying "there are some checks in place". And I think it'd still be a good idea since it prevents anyone who does have some criminal history from getting one if they do try.

[Condor]

The only think a backround check does is assuage liability concerns. You have no way of knowing what is in a man's heart or mind. It's not possible.
And did you mean too many liberals and anti- gun people?

[ShaulWolf]

The only think a backround check does is assuage liability concerns. You have no way of knowing what is in a man's heart or mind. It's not possible.
And did you mean too many liberals and anti- gun people?

Yep, that's what I meant. There are too many liberals and anti-gun advocates. Hey, don't you give me that look. =P

[Judge Faust]

At the risk of becoming extremely unpopular on these forums, I must say that I am a proponent of strict gun control. In fact, I would like to see a blanket ban on any and all firearms in the hands of civilians.

Many of you would vehemently object on the basis of "rights." But does your right to prance around with a loaded weapon really outweigh all of my rights? How about:

1) My right to not get shot when you snap and go on a rampage?
2) My right to not get shot when your children snap, steal your guns, and go on a rampage?
3) My right to not get shot when a criminal steals your guns and goes on a felonious rampage (how do you think criminals get their guns, anyway)?

Seems to me to be a no-brainer.

And the argument about needing a small arsenal to protect yourself against attackers is bizarre. Most criminals are not armed. Those that are usually do not intend to use them. However, they WILL use them in self-defense. On the off-chance that an armed intruder breaks into your house and catches you off-guard, you starting a firefight is more likely to decrease your life expectancy than it is to increase it.

All facts considered, gun ownership is a terrible idea. All it does is give the US one of the highest murder rates in the industrialized world - right up there with Brazil and South Africa. Isn't it time to become more civilized?

[ShaulWolf]

Opinion respected, but I don't agree with it.

1. If I were to snap and go on a rampage not having a gun wouldn't stop me. If I were to really set my mind to it a knife would suffice, or if I wanted mass carnage a home made bomb. Hell, I could just burn a building down full of people and really do some damage then.

2. Children, teens, and whoever else snap are in the same position as number 1. If they're really set on killing someone, they'll do it. Firearms makes it easier, yes. I'd say having the weapons secured better might cut that down, but someone set on murdering will murder.

3. Criminals who want weapons will find weapons. There's enough of them worldwide to trickle in illegally to be bought without stealing them. I'll refer to #1 as well, that a knife could just as easily be used, and often are. stealing a gun is just one way of doing it.

A small arsenal isn't necessary, but it would be something I'd like. Not for self defense, but because I enjoy the hobby of target shooting and tactical shooting. Truthfully, I think most of us here would able to say one weapon for self defense is all that's needed. Some of us are law enforcement with our own weapons for work, others just like having weapons to shoot for fun, like me. Others hunt different seasons and have different weapons for different game. Us saying we have x amount of weapons for intruders is more dark humor than reality.

A criminal with a weapon is probably going to use it if they think they'll need it for a job. If it's a robber they're probably going to use it for intimidation at first. But chances are it won't just end there if they see an opportunity for something else, ie rape and murder if it looks remotely like I'm not going to cave easily. Robbery isn't the same as burglary where they're trying to steal without force. Robbery is a forced theft. Personally, I'd rather stop them before they can do anything more than break down my door or window. And I'd sooner die trying to defend my loved ones than even let the potential of harm come to them. Likewise, I want the ability to defend my home and property to the utmost against anyone trying to visit harm to it, ie robbery. Some kid hopping my fence? Fine, dandy. If he's not someone playing pranks no problem (if he is that doesn't mean shoot him). Someone busting into my home forcefully? High potential of harm, and like hell I won't try to defend myself and my home.

Ideally it'd be great if an outright ban on firearms was plausible. Fact is even then there would be deadly weapons around. The method of violence would simply shift to other means of doing it. And I'd still have to deal with it, armed or not, if I ever encountered it. I would rather have a CCW knowing I could defend myself and not need it than to need it and not have. Sad mentality maybe, but a realistic one at least.

[Coffey]

So after a lot of research, it turns out people did kill each other before firearms were even around! How about that!?!

[texasmade]

in jesus days they used stones....to stone people to death...in large mobs...