Write the New Federal Firearm Law
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Thread: Write the New Federal Firearm Law

  1. #1

    Write the New Federal Firearm Law

    I read a lot of complaining about Federal and State Firearm Laws. I'm a believer that there must be some law governing the sale and use of firearms and I'm also OK with Background Checks because of the need to prohibit those who may suffer from mental illness and those who may have violent pasts.
    Most everyone here on the boards knows that no matter what is done criminals will always get their hands on guns.

    So what would you do? The answer is right in front of us. Maybe we, the "Gun Community" can self govern our way to being heard if we are unified in what is needed, what is not, and what we believe is fair for all.

    I am fine with a background check when I purchase a firearm from a dealer or vendor.
    Friend to friend sales are a different situation and should only require a bill of sale that includes who sold what to who and when and both party's signatures.
    Prohibited sales should remain as they currently are.
    One exception is we absolutely have to find a way to prohibit the mentally ill from purchasing, owning, or having access to any type of firearm.
    Medical professionals have to be the answer as I do not want the government to decide who is mentally ill, or the definition of mentally ill.

    I do not believe there is ever a reason for your firearms to be registered.

    Don't be lazy or shy, put into words your ideas. If we brainstorm long enough we may just come up with something.
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  2.   
  3. #2

    Write the New Federal Firearm Law

    Mandatory 50 year minimum for the use of a firearm in the commission of a felony... Other than that no restrictions on any firearm, magazine, method of carry, transport etc..

    And a prohibition of anyone deemed mentally incompetent, or convicted of a felony, from owning a firearm. Repeat offenses get life.
    Guns.??? What Guns???

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalamity023 View Post
    Mandatory 50 year minimum for the use of a firearm in the commission of a felony... Other than that no restrictions on any firearm, magazine, method of carry, transport etc..

    And a prohibition of anyone deemed mentally incompetent, or convicted of a felony, from owning a firearm. Repeat offenses get life.
    I can easily agree with most of this.
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  5. #4
    Kramer1113: Everything you have said is currently covered by numerous laws with the exception of the mental stability of a person. That is not something that is readily apparent to identify a potential killer. A person may look perfectly normal, act perfectly normal and then later shoot someone. You can not make every person trying to buy a gun undergo a psychiatric evaluation. First the cost for such an evaluation would be enormous and who would foot the bill? The gun buyer, of course. If there is a legal means by which a psychiatrist/medical doctor could report a questionable person to the police without being sued, that would be OK except for the fact, if cleared of any problems, the person would remain on a list of questionable characters for the rest of his life. Not too sure how that would go over. If the police would report criminals to the FBI for inclusion on the NICS list each time they are arrested, that would help. If we would just apply the laws we currently have there would less problems.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgrunt View Post
    Kramer1113: Everything you have said is currently covered by numerous laws with the exception of the mental stability of a person. That is not something that is readily apparent to identify a potential killer. A person may look perfectly normal, act perfectly normal and then later shoot someone. You can not make every person trying to buy a gun undergo a psychiatric evaluation. First the cost for such an evaluation would be enormous and who would foot the bill? The gun buyer, of course. If there is a legal means by which a psychiatrist/medical doctor could report a questionable person to the police without being sued, that would be OK except for the fact, if cleared of any problems, the person would remain on a list of questionable characters for the rest of his life. Not too sure how that would go over. If the police would report criminals to the FBI for inclusion on the NICS list each time they are arrested, that would help. If we would just apply the laws we currently have there would less problems.
    I understand most of what I wrote is already covered and I agree with most of the law.
    I am not suggesting anyone undergo a psychiatric evaluation. I'm speaking to those who are diagnosed when they enter the medical system.
    Again, What I am suggesting is a better way for people who are diagnosed with a mental illness to be classified so that they are red flagged when trying to buy a gun, or, the penalties are so stiff that families and friends of the mentally ill would lock their guns away.
    Wow, you deep ended me on that one.
    Biggest hurdle is dealing with the mentally ill.
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,865
    You stole my thunder Oldgrunt. My solution is to enforce our current laws. It's not likely anyone can predict who is going to commit a crime with a gun. Just as it's unlikely anyone can predict who is going to drive drunk or cause an auto accident. More people die on our hyways then with guns, yet I don't hear a national cry for more driving laws. Background checks have been the law of the land for several years. This has had little effect on violent crime. Even though it's illegal for a felon to own a gun, very few are ever prosecuted when they try.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenville SC
    Posts
    1,086
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yet another so called 2a supporter willing to carve the first slice as the government systematically whittles away our rights.

    You know who else was a proponent of "reasonable compromise"?
    Benedict Arnold

    Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
    Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by fuhr52 View Post
    You stole my thunder Oldgrunt. My solution is to enforce our current laws. It's not likely anyone can predict who is going to commit a crime with a gun. Just as it's unlikely anyone can predict who is going to drive drunk or cause an auto accident. More people die on our hyways then with guns, yet I don't hear a national cry for more driving laws. Background checks have been the law of the land for several years. This has had little effect on violent crime. Even though it's illegal for a felon to own a gun, very few are ever prosecuted when they try.
    Yerkillinmehere....
    Background checks are like locks on lockers in the dressing room. They keep the honest people out.
    Background checks have a huge effect... On the stats in our favor. What are the stats? I believe legal gun owners are responsible for something like .20% of gun crimes committed, and some of those are murder suicide. No convictions there.
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by kerb View Post
    Yet another so called 2a supporter willing to carve the first slice as the government systematically whittles away our rights.

    You know who else was a proponent of "reasonable compromise"?
    Benedict Arnold

    Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
    kerb,
    Do you believe you are EVER going to do away with background checks?
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,865
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    Yerkillinmehere....
    Background checks are like locks on lockers in the dressing room. They keep the honest people out.
    Background checks have a huge effect... On the stats in our favor. What are the stats? I believe legal gun owners are responsible for something like .20% of gun crimes committed, and some of those are murder suicide. No convictions there.
    Never said anything about eliminating the backgroud checks we currently have. The government admits they only prosecute about 5% of the felons that attempt to by guns. But if you need some emotional feeling of satisfaction for your good intentions, knock yourself out. In your spare time you might want to read the second amendment. We loose this fight the rest will be soon to follow.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast