PDA

View Full Version : Canada warning US



Dennis
02-05-2014, 12:57 PM
http://www.youtube.com/embed/03XEUPfD0qM

3Hummers
02-05-2014, 01:18 PM
We may be a ways away from that but incrementally we are headed there. That is why it is important to fight even the smallest infringement of our right to keep and bear arms, defend ourselves, etc. Castle laws, Stand Your Ground, etc, should be the law of the land everywhere. No one should have to worry about confronting a intruder in your home or on our property. They have already proven nefarious intent by entering without permission. When confronted in a public setting why should you have to give ground?

RamRod
02-05-2014, 01:36 PM
I tell you it was a great day when the long rifle registry ended here!

It is sad your not allowed to defend your life here, but if it came down to it and I was in a situation where I would have to make that decision I'd fight it in the courts!

3Hummers
02-05-2014, 01:51 PM
You have to. If you lose early you never get to court.

cgalpha08
02-05-2014, 02:13 PM
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

RamRod
02-05-2014, 03:26 PM
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I'll have to remember that one!!

ArtHummer
02-05-2014, 05:11 PM
...same thing happened in Australia, England, Russia etc... Everyone knows where it goes.

LoJac963
02-06-2014, 09:01 AM
That's sickening. It would honestly be interesting to see how far something like that would go in the U.S. The last statistics I saw and this was years ago, 83% of Americans own at least 2 guns. Not to mention the vast number of military personnel who I have spoken to and who have been on TV stating they will never fight against their own citizens and/or turn their weapons over. I think the gov would be opening pandoras box with that one.

ABNTROOP
02-07-2014, 02:51 AM
That's sickening. It would honestly be interesting to see how far something like that would go in the U.S. The last statistics I saw and this was years ago, 83% of Americans own at least 2 guns. Not to mention the vast number of military personnel who I have spoken to and who have been on TV stating they will never fight against their own citizens and/or turn their weapons over. I think the gov would be opening pandoras box with that one.
That's why billy who you grew up with as the kid down the street is being pushed out in favor of enlisting illegal aliens with the promise of citizenship in exchange for military service. Think Jose is going to think twice about following orders? Doubtful..

Kurt
02-18-2014, 09:31 PM
Yeah Canada dumped the long gun registry plans. Too expensive and pointless of a system. You have to register restricted firearms however [Ar-15, FAL etc]. I do like the Possession and Acquisition license Canada has, makes everyone into a dealer, want to sell a rifle to someone else? If they got a PAL card too, then its a straight transaction. The 5 round limit up there is crazy. With the PC Government in charge I'm surprised there isn't a push to enact some basic form of castle doctrine law in Canada.

abearden
02-19-2014, 01:57 AM
Yeah Canada dumped the long gun registry plans. Too expensive and pointless of a system. You have to register restricted firearms however [Ar-15, FAL etc]. I do like the Possession and Acquisition license Canada has, makes everyone into a dealer, want to sell a rifle to someone else? If they got a PAL card too, then its a straight transaction. The 5 round limit up there is crazy. With the PC Government in charge I'm surprised there isn't a push to enact some basic form of castle doctrine law in Canada.
Except that's all completely retarded. Wheeling in a Prius is less retarded. In the free states here you don't need any damn license to buy a firearm from someone else. That's the way it should be.

LoJac963
02-20-2014, 07:46 AM
Except that's all completely retarded. Wheeling in a Prius is less retarded. In the free states here you don't need any damn license to buy a firearm from someone else. That's the way it should be.

Private sale has always been a long time debate on selling weapons. It seems more and more people are starting to ask for a drivers license or either a CCW. Those should be copied and a proper bill of sale should be written. If you sell a weapon to someone who goes and murders a family of 5, who's door are they going to be knocking on if they have the weapon in hand? As much of a PITA it is, private sales should really do an FFL transfer.

abearden
02-20-2014, 12:22 PM
Private sale has always been a long time debate on selling weapons. It seems more and more people are starting to ask for a drivers license or either a CCW. Those should be copied and a proper bill of sale should be written. If you sell a weapon to someone who goes and murders a family of 5, who's door are they going to be knocking on if they have the weapon in hand? As much of a PITA it is, private sales should really do an FFL transfer.
Do you get a bill of sale when you sell a hammer or chainsaw at a garage sale? How about a pocket knife? Those can be weapons too in the wrong hands. Ideally, they wouldn't be tracking them at all so their first plan of action should be fingerprints.

LoJac963
02-20-2014, 06:24 PM
I don't disagree with you at all and I am by no means a supporter of all this anti gun crap going around. I am an avid gun collector and collect mostly assault type weapons. My above post was talking about best case scenario, things you can do as a seller of a firearm to protect yourself. The items you mentioned above don't have to be registered or a background check done at purchase like a firearm. Not really the same comparison.

Kurt
03-30-2014, 02:31 AM
In the free states here you don't need any damn license to buy a firearm from someone else. That's the way it should be.

What free states? Unless I'm mistaken, the states that allow private party transactions without an FFL still limit that to residents of the same state, ie. no interstate transaction. In all those cases I've seen sellers ask for a state photo ID at a minimum.

When I say license, I mean FFL, make it easy to get like the 1980s where you don't have to have a physical store/retail space and can just sell anywhere you want. Make things easier to do, not harder.

What happens to the guy in the free state who sells a pistol to a felon?

mantracker
03-30-2014, 07:19 AM
I think that alot of people in California, as well as New York have been brain washed by their government into thinking that any infringement on the second amendment is okay...IT'S NOT!
3 Hummers is right when he stated that,"incrementally, we are headed there". If you give in, and let it be taken away one tiny bit at a time, you wake up one day and your second amendment right to keep and bear arms is gone. Look at Australia and England. Research what happened in Germany while Hitler was in power. Those who do not know history, are doomed to repeat it. Do not be fooled. The ultimate goal is to completely abolish the second amendment, one step at a time, and make all firearms illegal so that tyranny can reign.
So forgive me, if I don't agree with those that think that private sales should be registered or reported. That is an infringement on my second amendment right. If I choose to give or sale a gun to my adult daughter or son for self defense, that's my business. If I choose to trade or sale to a friend of mine, my business. No law abiding person would knowingly sale a gun to a convicted felon. However, felones, by their own nature do not abide by the law They will obtain a gun by theft, or any other illegal means.
I think it's ridiculous that a habitual DUI offender can go into any dealership, buy a car and get registration and tags without showing a valid driver's license and get in the car and drive away without any consequences, until he or she crashes and kills another motorist.... again. Far more people are killed by drunk drivers than by firearms. If our politicians really want to save lives, why don't they focus their attention on that issue.
Last I heard, Tennessee was ranked as third freest state in the union, while California and New York have the strictest gun laws in the nation. Guess which one of those states has the lowest crime rate with firearms?

abearden
03-30-2014, 12:14 PM
What free states? Unless I'm mistaken, the states that allow private party transactions without an FFL still limit that to residents of the same state, ie. no interstate transaction. In all those cases I've seen sellers ask for a state photo ID at a minimum.

When I say license, I mean FFL, make it easy to get like the 1980s where you don't have to have a physical store/retail space and can just sell anywhere you want. Make things easier to do, not harder.

What happens to the guy in the free state who sells a pistol to a felon?
Given they've served their sentence, I don't care. Additionally, states like CA give out felonies for ridiculous stuff like violating their horrid gun laws, even by accident, so I don't take that as a measure of a man anymore. If felonies were still limited to truly serious infractions of law (i.e. violent felonies) then I would care.

Kurt
03-31-2014, 03:04 PM
California

I think you guys are ****ting on California too much. California is the 2nd largest market for guns after Texas, and we're fighting to get those laws thrown out one by one. There's lots of groups going to war on our behalf, and I support them, CA is already moving back to being a Shall Issue state for CCW which is a step in the right direction.

And both of you two are side stepping the felon argument (which is a federal issue, not a "NON FREE vs FREE states issue")

There should be a felon/mentally ill check for any fire arms transaction in my opinion (again my opinion).. all you need to do is open DROS up to public access [without an FFL] and just have the system respond with PASS/FAIL....states without a waiting period can already do this at a retail location, so extend that to private sales and you'll shut up the gun ban/loophole people in one fell swoop.

OR

Make the seller fully responsible to who they sell the weapon to and open sales up to everyone. Because as it stands right now you can't seem to have it both ways. Come to think of it, it already is illegal , its just no one is enforcing it, so I guess it does go both ways :)

Oh and I'll answer this one:


Guess which one of those states has the lowest crime rate with firearms?

Depends on what metric you are using. You would have to use per capita numbers, as NY and CA have a lot more people than TN. CA has more guns than there are people in TN so the the raw numbers would be higher. Break down per capita for gun crimes and you'll find the states don't differ that much on average.

But that doesn't have anything really to do with private sales or background checks if any.

Personally I think have a 50 state wide CCW standard is an more important issue...

abearden
03-31-2014, 04:19 PM
Kurt, we get them thrown out at a rate much lower than they pass them. But, I wish you guys luck with that: I'm leaving.

Biggest problem with felonies? The states define a lot of them and states like CA define some trivial stuff as felonies. Even if the law is thrown out down the road as unconstitutional, those busted by it are still stripped of their rights.

Hmm, yeah, let's open up a system that allows anyone to look up dirt on anyone to the general public. That can't be abused at all. How about we just stop regulating it as if that really made any difference?

mantracker
03-31-2014, 06:39 PM
It was not my intent to offend Kurt or anyone else from California or New York. I have family and friends in both states. I was simply posting my opion and thoughts on this thread. If you or anyone else disagree, so be it. You are entitled to your opion, as am I. We will have to agree to disagree. However, California and New York do have the strictest gun laws in the nation and if you look at the jurisditions in those states with the strictest gun control laws, almost without exception, they have the highest crime rates and highest murder rates. You and I, both can find statistics to suport our individual opion, so what's the point. I believe in the Constitution, the way it was written and intended by our fore fathers. Not just part of it, but all of it. What part of "Shall not be infringed" do they not understand?

Kurt
03-31-2014, 10:28 PM
Biggest problem with felonies? The states define a lot of them and states like CA define some trivial stuff as felonies. Even if the law is thrown out down the road as unconstitutional, those busted by it are still stripped of their rights.


Every state has that issue. Look at all the states that have 3 strikes and you are out laws. That's a separate, larger issue, and not just isolated to gun ownership,and definately not a California issue.



Hmm, yeah, let's open up a system that allows anyone to look up dirt on anyone to the general public. That can't be abused at all. How about we just stop regulating it as if that really made any difference?

I'm suggesting opening up NCIS/Echeck to anyone who wants to transact in a firearm sale, not just FFL's. How can it be abused? Unless you are worried about the local gun store running background checks on everyone on town without their consent... lol.

abearden
04-01-2014, 01:30 AM
Every state has that issue. Look at all the states that have 3 strikes and you are out laws. That's a separate, larger issue, and not just isolated to gun ownership,and definately not a California issue.

I'm suggesting opening up NCIS/Echeck to anyone who wants to transact in a firearm sale, not just FFL's. How can it be abused? Unless you are worried about the local gun store running background checks on everyone on town without their consent... lol.
True, but I was specifically speaking of the link between felonies and firearm ownership.

If you open it up to the general public, it will be abused. Businesses generally don't have time to do that sort of thing, and given they can be traced if abused, it doesn't happen much or at all. Open it to the public and the accountability goes out the window. That would be on par with public CCW records.

Kurt
04-01-2014, 11:54 AM
It was not my intent to offend Kurt or anyone else from California or New York. I have family and friends in both states. I was simply posting my opion and thoughts on this thread. If you or anyone else disagree, so be it. You are entitled to your opion, as am I. We will have to agree to disagree. However, California and New York do have the strictest gun laws in the nation and if you look at the jurisditions in those states with the strictest gun control laws, almost without exception, they have the highest crime rates and highest murder rates. You and I, both can find statistics to suport our individual opion, so what's the point. I believe in the Constitution, the way it was written and intended by our fore fathers. Not just part of it, but all of it. What part of "Shall not be infringed" do they not understand?

Well It's not opinion its math.

If you look at Gun Murders per capita, the only exception in your case is Washington DC which is pretty much #1 no matter what numbers you use. I'm sticking with the US Census data from the federal government. The 3 big gun control states aren't even in the top 10 for Gun Murders per 100,000 people (CA is number 12, IL is 22, NY is number 24).

A better comparison would be Texas vs California. Take the two largest gun markets in the US, one with strict gun control laws and one with next to none. If strict gun laws breed crime then Texas should have the lowest crime rates in the nation.. both states are roughly similar per capita [they are also #1 and 2 in national GDP per state, so they are big economic engines].

Well, super strict California has a gun murder count of 1257, Texas? 805. Since CA has more people lets look at the per capita numbers. CA 3.4/100,000, TX 3.2/100,000. Roughly similar.

So the conclusion? The gun laws don't make a big difference, but lets not pretend that no gun laws means less crime. What it does mean is if you want less crime, you move to the state with the least amount of people :wink:

What is opinion is I'm ok with a background check, I'm not ok with a waiting period, but that's me.

Kurt
04-01-2014, 11:59 AM
True, but I was specifically speaking of the link between felonies and firearm ownership.

If you open it up to the general public, it will be abused. Businesses generally don't have time to do that sort of thing, and given they can be traced if abused, it doesn't happen much or at all. Open it to the public and the accountability goes out the window. That would be on par with public CCW records.

A DROS isn't public so I fail how to see there would be public accountability issues.

Look, a lot of this anti-private sales stuff isn't coming from bored PTA groups and the Brady bill bunch, it's coming from brick and mortar gun dealers who have been eroding away the ability of a private citizen to become a "counter top" dealer/FFL over the past 2-3 decades. What I'm saying is open the system up so any gun owner can send in their check.

mantracker
04-01-2014, 08:41 PM
Well, I rest my case on what I said in my first post, about, "alot of people in California".
Not you, Abearden. I appreciate your gallant effort.

Kurt
04-02-2014, 12:33 AM
What? I'm brainwashed?

Whatever.....

Biggest problem in this state is gun owners not willing to do anything to protect their rights, and when other owners finally do something they bitch and complain or run away without doing anything.

I'm done with this thread.

Guns for felons... :roll:

3Hummers
04-02-2014, 08:59 AM
I will say that the California gun groups are fighting hard. The big issue they have to deal with is a state government that is firmly against them. At least there have been some court victories for CA gun rights.
i will say that I disagree with making a gun seller responsible for who they sell their gun to. That makes as much sense as making you responsible or the actions of who you sell your car to. I suspect Kurt was employing the Southern form of humor known as sarcasm there.
i am all for safe and free gun ownership. Felons, mentally ill, illegal aliens, etc should not have access to firearms. Others hold not have their rights restricted.