Common Sense Gun Laws


Seems it is only the anti-civil rights crowd that writes the gun laws, so I figured I’d throw out some ideas and see if the pro-civil rights crowd would be okay with the compromises laid forth.

  1. This is a voluntary Federal program. I know those of you in Free States will grown a lot here, but you can “opt out” of this program, and nothing will change than is now. You’ll be subject to the state and local rules already in place, and as they change. (For example, you are CCW in NJ without a non-res, you are going to prison if caught. Or, a state could completely outlaw firearms, and you would be forced to enter the program in order to have access to those weapons.)

  2. All suitability cases will have the onus on the GOVERNMENT to prove a citizen is disallowed to have access to firearms, and bear the costs of such a petition upto and including the initial trail. All subsequent appeals or legal battles, the state will only be responsible for their legal fees, not the citizen’s. So, if you get a Federal License, and your local LEO thinks its a bad idea, he can send a letter to the Feds to reconsider. If the feds agree, you can disagree, and the Feds will then be required to prove you unsuitable. During this determination period your initial Federal License will be VALID, and weapons purchased during the determination period will be grandfathered if your license is revoked. Purchases will be limited to one per month during the determination period.

Suitability will determined by previous behavior, criminal record, or daily, observable, detrimental behavior provable in court. Jumping on Facebook and posting “fuck the police, I hate liberals/conservatives” or personal grudges/opinions LEO has will NOT qualify as a suitability issues. Jumping on Facebook and posting “we need to kill insert politician, Jews and insert racial slur” on a regular basis CAN qualify as a suitability issue.

Gun owners should be and will be held to a higher standard of civility and responsibility. And they should be proud to be a “cut above” in terms of being decent people who benefit society.

  1. Licensing:
    Class Fv - This is the only license a person convicted of a felony involving a firearm can ever qualify for, for life. This is a MAY issue license (Prior conviction overturned on appeal is NOT applicable.) (An applicant can petition the DOJ to waive the restriction resultant of the previous conviction upon pardon, or if they feel appropriate time has passed since the end of their prison term has ended. The DOJ is justified to use extreme prudence in waiving the Fv restriction. Any Fv restrictions waived for political, kickback, or otherwise corrupt reason will constitute treason and the DOJ official signing the waiver and AGOTUS will be held responsible, with no statute of limitations.)

Class Fv is limited to pump action shotguns strictly for use in the residence of the individual, and limited to two shotguns in the house at one time. The shotgun is not to have a detached ammunition feeding device, nor an attached feeding device that has a capacity of more than 5 shells, and shell holder attachments to the outside of the device are prohibited. All transportation of firearms (purchase, smithing, selling, etc) MUST be done by a local LEO.

See Class Fo for education, training & inspection requirements.

Class Fo - This is for people with a felony conviction NOT involving firearms. Same rules apply, accept the education, training & inspection requirements are lesser.

To receive any Class F license the applicant must pass an 8 hour training course lead by a Federally licensed instructor. The course must consist of 4 hours of classroom study and 4 hours of actual usage of the firearm. The applicant must demonstrate ability to safely handle the firearm and clear understanding of safety rules and federal regulations in order to “pass” the class. Any instructor passing an unqualified applicant will face 5 years in prison and it will be considered a Felony involving a firearm. (Being a novice or new to firearms is NOT grounds to fail an applicant except in the case of a Fv applicant, where greater denial leeway is appropriate, or if the applicant is completely and demonstrably not serious or not able to handle the weapon. An additional 4 hours of class can be requested by the applicant, or any private instruction.)

To maintain a Class Fv, the applicant must pass the 8 hour class yearly, perform 52 hours of community service a year, and allow inspection of his/her home no more than twice a year, but no less than once every two years, at local LEO’s discretion, with no less than 48 hours notice of intent to inspect or no more than 72 hours notice. (Class Fo is not subject to inspection.)

If the applicant’s residence (including each and every time they move) is rented, the landlord must be informed of the license and CAN discriminate based on it. If the applicant owns their home, all neighbors within 100 yards of their home will be notified, and in that case, fines & penalties for firearm offenses will be tripled.

Felon’s can defend their home, but should have to jump through a lot of hoops to do so, and be subject to high levels of scrutiny. Outside of outlines above a felon caught with possession of a firearm will similar punishments as they have now. Practice with their firearms outside of yearly classes must be one-on-one with agreeable LEO at 100% the cost of the Felon, including paying the LEO wage to instruct & observe.

Class 1
A class 1 covers pump action shotguns, bolt action (or otherwise non-semiautomatic) rifles, and any .22 caliber rifle(non-automatic). Applicant must be at least 16 years of age (issuance and purchase of firearms need parent or guardian approval) and is Shall Issue to a non-felon if over 18 years of age. Class 1 Holders under 18 cannot carry or transport a rifle except: when hunting, sportsman’s events and practice on legal areas including appropriate personal residents, it is clearly unloaded and locked. (Padlocks through the chamber render a gun “locked” however in a locked case is preferred.) This law DOES NOT prevent a child (even under 16) from enjoying the listed activities with a parent or guardian, or person’s approved by the parent or guardian. The Class 1 for those 16-18 just allows them to go to league practice or hunting with their troop without a “permission slip” from their parents, and allows them to handle the firearm while doing the activities listed about in a capacity other then shoot and hand back to instructor/parent.

Class 1 requires an 8 hour instruction course described above to apply, and upon renewal. License needs to be renewed every 5 years. Signed letters of recommendation from local LEO will be accepted in place of re-taking classes for each renewal.

Class 2L covers all activities and firearms covered in lower Classes and semi-automatic rifles (less certain attachments/modification covered later). A 2L is a shall issue to non felons. A 2L limits magazines based on caliber. Mag limits will be no less than 10 and no more than 18. Smaller the caliber the more the Mag can carry. Same Class and renewal requirements as Class 1. Can be petitioned to upgrade to Class 2UL every 366th day.

Class 2UL covers all activities and firearms covered previous, with no magazine limits. This is a May Issue, with onus of suitability on the Government to prove, clearly, why applicant should have magazine limits. (low scores or recommendation of class instructor being the primary driver of issuance of 2L licenses.

Class 3LS covers all activities and firearms covered previous, but also includes semi-automatic pistols and revolvers. Must be 18. Mag limits apply (same petition rules as 2L) no conceal carry. CAN open carry on property where it is allowed. (Sportsman ranges, hunting (local law applies), etc). Shall issue to any non felon and non-violent misdemeanors. Violent misdemeanors makes the license a MAY issue, time & behavior since conviction the determination of suitability, with government having to prove unsuitable as before. Same class requirements and renewals as before.

Class 3UL covers previous, must be 21 (unless active LEO or military with commander’s recommendation.), allows concealed carry. (Note: businesses can request a person known to be carrying to leave the premises.) Shall issue for those over 25 (LEO and military exemptions apply) non-felons and no misdemeanors. May issue, government’s responsibility to prove unsuitable, for those 18-25, or over 25 with any misdemeanors, prior convictions of crimes are valid unsuitability proof.

This license requires a 3 year renewal period, and must have 16 hours of professional instruction (tactical classes!) every second renewal (so every 6 years). This license will cost 150% of the previous licenses, which will start at $50.

Class 4 cover all previous, must be 25 (LEO & Military exceptions apply), and addresses small arms and weapon’s firing non-explosive arms attachments. Namely like silencers,(non-pistol)barrels less than 16", pistol’s with magazine outside the grip, larger than factory standard mags (100 round drums), bayonets longer than 6", etc. (Stuff in the AWB is gone, totally. Adjustable stocks and commercial flash suppressors are all good if you can posses the rifle it goes on.) Shall issue with clean criminal history, costs 150%, same class & continuing ed as Class 3UL.

Class 5 cover all previous, must be 25 and address all small arms automatic weapons. Continuing ED increases to 32 hours per 6 years, and initial & renewal classes increase to 12 hours, 4 classroom, 8 handling weapons, no letter exemption, you need to complete the classes every 3 years, classes count towards 32 hours continuing ED for the 8 hours handling the weapons. Fees increase to 250%. This is a MAY issue without recommendations (3) from non-related local LEO. Recommendations need to be updated with every renewal.

Class 6 covers all previous, MAY issue, onus to prove suitability on APPLICANT and covers explosives, explosive projectile weapons and attachment, large arms, canons etc.

I get this is fairly restrictive to some, but what do you think? Is this a workable idea?

TL:DR - don’t be a lazy shit, whether pro or anti civil rights, read it and let me know if it is even a good starting point to make everyone happy.

TL:DR.

What a nightmare.

Mag limits, trigger locks, may issue, onerous fees and training requirement, and an overly complicated licensing regime…where do I sign up?

A regime where everyone is happy isn’t the goal; recognition of 2A rights is.

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
What a nightmare.[/quote]

Agreed however, you have the uninformed that vote (and some that get elected) that think a MINI with a wood stock is okay, but a MINI in tactical should be banned, even though they are the same firearm.

I had to explain that an “AK” is just a platform and no more deadly than any other rifle of the same caliber 3 or 4 times, and people were still like “no one needs an AK.”

In short:

Isn’t going to happen in any sort of uniform way. Too many anti-civil rights moonbats.

I guess my goal here was to flesh out a common ground, that is consistent across the states so one didn’t need to do 12 hours of research to bring a rifle on vacation with them.

Isn’t that one of the strengths of our Republic, though? That Idahoans can decide what works for them and Illinoisians can decide what works for them, albeit tempered by our Constitutional rights?

I also find the use of mag limits to be intellectually dishonest. By codifying them the way you did, you’ve tacitly given them legitimacy when in fact none exists.

Edit: I think we are moving towards a more uniform recognition of 2A rights. However, the process is slow. Illinois was notorious for their restrictive guns laws. Local DAs would intentionally allow offenders to plea down their weapons charges (UUW - unlawful use of weapon) so that the constitutionality of the law couldn’t be challenged in the courts. I believe you will see more and more laws getting overturned in the next 5 years as they make their way through the courts.

As an aside, if the GOP doesn’t win a presidency soon and we start having Justices retire with a D in the White House, we may see the pendulum swing back the other way.

Fuck that, as a felon, I’m not going to have my house torn apart every two years by the state and have my neighbors notified about me like I’m some kind of sex offender. What kind of Orwellian shit it that? I stopped reading after that part. The second amendment really isn’t too hard to understand. ALL of the existing gun laws are unconstitutional, including those against felons.

“SHALL NOT be infringed” pretty much makes licensing and/or restricting gun ownership in any way unconstitutional. Why don’t people get that?

My son will be 18 in less than a year and HE can legally own all the guns he wants. We’ll be going SHOPPING!

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Isn’t that one of the strengths of our Republic, though? That Idahoans can decide what works for them and Illinoisians can decide what works for them, albeit tempered by our Constitutional rights?[/quote]
Sure, however a single mother CCW traveling through NJ without a non-res will do a mandatory 2 years, her only crime? Being honest.

That is the shit I’m looking to avoid.

http://www.my9nj.com/story/25996007/nj-gun-permit-problems

Agreed, mag limits are bullshit. However the moonbat’s love them. This is a compromise, and only for certain grade licenses in the over hypothetical.

I’m pretty sure LIz Warren is going to win and you’ll all know what it is like to live under the AWB again, lol, like I do.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Fuck that, as a felon, I’m not going to have my house torn apart every two years by the state and have my neighbors notified about me like I’m some kind of sex offender. What kind of Orwellian shit it that? I stopped reading after that part. The second amendment really isn’t too hard to understand. ALL of the existing gun laws are unconstitutional, including those against felons.[/quote]

The intention would be to allow felons to have something to protect themselves with legally.

And, based on all the requirements establishing a good relationship with LEO, particularly someone in your position where it was a long time ago and you’re doing good in the world, the inspection is less a SWAT raid, and more coffee with Tony while you discuss the Mossy you have.

Guys, this is not going to happen. Not now, not in the future, not ever. Look around, look at the 2012 election. Fucking pro-gun “liberal’s” voted for Obama who is a confiscatory statist.

This isn’t going to ever be again.

We have to establish a framework that recognizes our rights sooner rather than later. So we can build on it, and not have a run on “black rifles” every time a loony tune does something stupid. The demographics tell a tale that were are heading in this type direction anyway, best get the framework right, now, than try and repeal an AWB again.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m pretty sure LIz Warren is going to win and you’ll all know what it is like to live under the AWB again, lol, like I do. [/quote]

I’m in the People’s Republic of Chicago, no scary black guns allowed here.

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m pretty sure LIz Warren is going to win and you’ll all know what it is like to live under the AWB again, lol, like I do. [/quote]

I’m in the People’s Republic of Chicago, no scary black guns allowed here.
[/quote]

lol, Comrade, I feel for you, behind the Chowdah Curtain mine can only have 1 of the evil features, which attached means the firearm is automatically soaked in the blood of 1,000 slain children and puppies.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Seems it is only the anti-civil rights crowd that writes the gun laws, so I figured I’d throw out some ideas and see if the pro-civil rights crowd would be okay with the compromises laid forth.

  1. This is a voluntary Federal program. I know those of you in Free States will grown a lot here, but you can “opt out” of this program, and nothing will change than is now. You’ll be subject to the state and local rules already in place, and as they change. (For example, you are CCW in NJ without a non-res, you are going to prison if caught. Or, a state could completely outlaw firearms, and you would be forced to enter the program in order to have access to those weapons.)[/quote]

I’m confused about your premise. Is this a federal carry law or a federal purchase law? I assume the idea is to supersede state law if you opt in? With the passing of this law will all state and local laws become null and void or can states decide to be more restrictive?

What if I can’t afford subsequent trials?

The number of purchases should be irrelevant and there should not be a limit, imo.

[quote]
Suitability will determined by previous behavior, criminal record, or daily, observable, detrimental behavior provable in court. Jumping on Facebook and posting “fuck the police, I hate liberals/conservatives” or personal grudges/opinions LEO has will NOT qualify as a suitability issues. [/quote]

How or who defines what is “detrimental behavior”. Will risky activities count, like skydiving, because now I’m screwed. How about steroid use? How about eating McDonalds 5 times a week? Legally drag racing at a track? Point being I fear “detrimental behavior” could be broadened to infinity.

[quote]
Jumping on Facebook and posting “we need to kill insert politician, Jews and insert racial slur” on a regular basis CAN qualify as a suitability issue. [/quote]
Why?

Doesn’t that nullify the first amendment?

[quote]
Gun owners should be and will be held to a higher standard of civility and responsibility. And they should be proud to be a “cut above” in terms of being decent people who benefit society. [/quote]

I think this sounds great in theory, but is a pipe dream. Gun owners shouldn’t have to be anything except law abiding citizens. Holding gun owners to a standard everyone else isn’t held to is discrimination, isn’t it?

[quote]
3) Licensing:
Class Fv - This is the only license a person convicted of a felony involving a firearm can ever qualify for, for life. This is a MAY issue license (Prior conviction overturned on appeal is NOT applicable.) (An applicant can petition the DOJ to waive the restriction resultant of the previous conviction upon pardon, or if they feel appropriate time has passed since the end of their prison term has ended. The DOJ is justified to use extreme prudence in waiving the Fv restriction. Any Fv restrictions waived for political, kickback, or otherwise corrupt reason will constitute treason and the DOJ official signing the waiver and AGOTUS will be held responsible, with no statute of limitations.)[/quote]

[quote]
Class Fv is limited to pump action shotguns strictly for use in the residence of the individual, and limited to two shotguns in the house at one time. The shotgun is not to have a detached ammunition feeding device, nor an attached feeding device that has a capacity of more than 5 shells, and shell holder attachments to the outside of the device are prohibited. All transportation of firearms (purchase, smithing, selling, etc) MUST be done by a local LEO. [/quote]

Seems like an arbitrary choice of weapon and restrictions. How do you practice with your shotgun? No way local LEOs are going to transport to gun ranges.

How many felons do you think are actually going to go through all the above trouble to buy a single pump action shotgun?

[quote]
See Class Fo for education, training & inspection requirements.

Class Fo - This is for people with a felony conviction NOT involving firearms. Same rules apply, accept the education, training & inspection requirements are lesser.

To receive any Class F license the applicant must pass an 8 hour training course lead by a Federally licensed instructor. The course must consist of 4 hours of classroom study and 4 hours of actual usage of the firearm. The applicant must demonstrate ability to safely handle the firearm and clear understanding of safety rules and federal regulations in order to “pass” the class. Any instructor passing an unqualified applicant will face 5 years in prison and it will be considered a Felony involving a firearm. (Being a novice or new to firearms is NOT grounds to fail an applicant except in the case of a Fv applicant, where greater denial leeway is appropriate, or if the applicant is completely and demonstrably not serious or not able to handle the weapon. An additional 4 hours of class can be requested by the applicant, or any private instruction.)

To maintain a Class Fv, the applicant must pass the 8 hour class yearly, perform 52 hours of community service a year, and allow inspection of his/her home no more than twice a year, but no less than once every two years, at local LEO’s discretion, with no less than 48 hours notice of intent to inspect or no more than 72 hours notice. (Class Fo is not subject to inspection.)

If the applicant’s residence (including each and every time they move) is rented, the landlord must be informed of the license and CAN discriminate based on it. If the applicant owns their home, all neighbors within 100 yards of their home will be notified, and in that case, fines & penalties for firearm offenses will be tripled. [/quote]

I guess all this is better than felons currently have it. I don’t think most would follow the rules though

Even Felons, that have served their time, shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to defend themselves.

[quote]
Class 1
A class 1 covers pump action shotguns, bolt action (or otherwise non-semiautomatic) rifles, and any .22 caliber rifle(non-automatic). Applicant must be at least 16 years of age (issuance and purchase of firearms need parent or guardian approval) and is Shall Issue to a non-felon if over 18 years of age. Class 1 Holders under 18 cannot carry or transport a rifle except: when hunting, sportsman’s events and practice on legal areas including appropriate personal residents, it is clearly unloaded and locked. (Padlocks through the chamber render a gun “locked” however in a locked case is preferred.) This law DOES NOT prevent a child (even under 16) from enjoying the listed activities with a parent or guardian, or person’s approved by the parent or guardian. The Class 1 for those 16-18 just allows them to go to league practice or hunting with their troop without a “permission slip” from their parents, and allows them to handle the firearm while doing the activities listed about in a capacity other then shoot and hand back to instructor/parent.

Class 1 requires an 8 hour instruction course described above to apply, and upon renewal. License needs to be renewed every 5 years. Signed letters of recommendation from local LEO will be accepted in place of re-taking classes for each renewal. [/quote]

This isn’t a drivers license. You shouldn’t have to do any of the above as an adult, unless we are talking about a post second amendment world?

I wouldn’t support all the distinctions above. They’re arbitrary imo and will not result in less gun violence, which I assume is the point. Inevitably the law will become more and more restrictive over time.

You’ve said so yourself, the second amendment is pretty damn clear, yet I have to wait a month to get a hand gun in MD even though I’m a former Marine with an honorable discharge.

Laws that differentiate types of weapons, accessories, calibers, etc… are just the preamble to complete gun control, imo.

[quote]
I get this is fairly restrictive to some, but what do you think? Is this a workable idea?

TL:DR - don’t be a lazy shit, whether pro or anti civil rights, read it and let me know if it is even a good starting point to make everyone happy. [/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Fucking pro-gun “liberal’s” voted for Obama who is a confiscatory statist.

[/quote]

To be fair to those in this camp, Romney was an anti-civil rights tyrant that signed my state’s AWB, so it isn’t like that had a choice in the matter.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Fuck that, as a felon, I’m not going to have my house torn apart every two years by the state and have my neighbors notified about me like I’m some kind of sex offender. What kind of Orwellian shit it that? I stopped reading after that part. The second amendment really isn’t too hard to understand. ALL of the existing gun laws are unconstitutional, including those against felons.[/quote]

The intention would be to allow felons to have something to protect themselves with legally.

And, based on all the requirements establishing a good relationship with LEO, particularly someone in your position where it was a long time ago and you’re doing good in the world, the inspection is less a SWAT raid, and more coffee with Tony while you discuss the Mossy you have.

[/quote]I’m sure that’s what the law will INTEND to happen. But what’s to keep the officer (who effectively has a search warrant) from simply tossing my entire property? His good will? I’m sorry, I don’t TRUST the police AT ALL to do anything other than harass, frame or fuck me over in some way. I’ll be god damned if I EVER let a fucking cop in my house with out a warrant.

If I lived in a small town, perhaps we could crack open a couple of suds and talk about the traffic, but that’s not the case here. Fairfax county cops are dicks. The last time I got pulled over because I forgot to put my sticker on the place, they tossed my vehicle and wrote me a ticket. I HAD the sticker in my glove box…

There’s too many bad cops for this to work.[quote]

Guys, this is not going to happen. Not now, not in the future, not ever. Look around, look at the 2012 election. Fucking pro-gun “liberal’s” voted for Obama who is a confiscatory statist.

This isn’t going to ever be again.

We have to establish a framework that recognizes our rights sooner rather than later. So we can build on it, and not have a run on “black rifles” every time a loony tune does something stupid. The demographics tell a tale that were are heading in this type direction anyway, best get the framework right, now, than try and repeal an AWB again.

[/quote]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
The last time I got pulled over because I forgot to put my sticker on the place, they tossed my vehicle and wrote me a ticket.
[/quote]

How did they end up searching your vehicle?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Is this a federal carry law or a federal purchase law?[/quote]

Yes & yes.

Laws that restrict beyond these will be superseded, as in the State can restrict your 2nd amendment rights beyond what opting into the Federal laws do.

So, someone in a Free state, like Push (I believe) will NOT opt into this, as it would fuck him. However the Good Doctor and I would benefit from this. This is on purpose. However the advantage is with the Fed program you can cross state lines and be secure you are okay, you opt out, you have to know where you are going’s laws.

[quote]

What if I can’t afford subsequent trials? [/quote]

We would have to spend a significant amount of time on the suitability rules. We would want a few appeals as possible, and few denials as possible.

The point here is to give those under tyrannical laws some relief, without fucking over those in Free states. If I’ve gone too far, lets trim some fat.

In reality I agree. $ will be prohibitive. However we’re trying to negotiate with gun grabbers here, please keep that in mind. We’d have to put a limit on here, but we can up it to a reasonable figure. If you HAD to put a limit here, what would you put.

[quote]
How or who defines what is “detrimental behavior”.[/quote]

This will take substantial time, thought and consultation to get right. It will mostly rely on history. (doublegoodsecret pro-tip: its the same background checks we have now, that lefties don’t think happen, so it makes them feel like they “won”.)

No, see above.

Not really. There is a difference between “I hate X, we need to fix X, I wish X was never elected” and “we need to shoot X. X is a vile evil man and needs to die a painful death”. And saying the latter everyday for months on end is different than drunk posting. Plus I said “CAN” be used, implying in conjunction of other issues.

[quote]
Holding gun owners to a standard everyone else isn’t held to is discrimination, isn’t it? [/quote]

Lol, yes but no worse than we have it now. And it’s a “victory” for the control crowd. They can still look down at us.

[quote]
Seems like an arbitrary choice of weapon and restrictions. [/quote]

Harder to conceal, and pump is slower than semi.

Will be required by law to work WITH the felon.

Every single one that deserves to have their gun rights back. You don’t go though this effort to piss it away in a flash or something stupid. The only upside ot licensing besides appeasing moonbats is it lets you know who the good guys are.

[quote]

Even Felons, that have served their time, shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to defend themselves. [/quote]

See above, and they can’t as it is now.

[quote]
This isn’t a drivers license. You shouldn’t have to do any of the above as an adult, unless we are talking about a post second amendment world? [/quote]

We live in a post 2nd world dude. Heller has been ignored by MA a couple times now…

[quote]
I wouldn’t support all the distinctions above. They’re arbitrary imo and will not result in less gun violence, which I assume is the point.[/quote]

lol, no, the point of all gun control is confiscation. The Useful Idiots that say otherwise just don’t know they are idiots.

And no, this is meant to make the vast majority of gun ownership SHALL issue, and ensure it is “well regulated” to avoid attacking the 2nd from that angle.

Opt in and that does away… See what I’m saying?

I’d prefer those distinctions, ones based on function, than the ones based on “looks”. Because once you get to function over looks, you have the well regulated issue, and with the classes, that is taken care of, making banning things harder.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I’m sure that’s what the law will INTEND to happen. But what’s to keep the officer (who effectively has a search warrant) from simply tossing my entire property? His good will? I’m sorry, I don’t TRUST the police AT ALL to do anything other than harass, frame or fuck me over in some way. I’ll be god damned if I EVER let a fucking cop in my house with out a warrant.

If I lived in a small town, perhaps we could crack open a couple of suds and talk about the traffic, but that’s not the case here. Fairfax county cops are dicks. The last time I got pulled over because I forgot to put my sticker on the place, they tossed my vehicle and wrote me a ticket. I HAD the sticker in my glove box…

There’s too many bad cops for this to work.[/quote]

hmmm.

Noted.

Let me think on it. But being honest, getting firearms in the hands of felons is a tough sell, lol. There will need to be serious hoops to jump through. Let me see if I can come up with something better.

(Super happy you’re around today and took the time to read this, btw. Was looking forward to your input.)

I’m just gonna touch on a few of your quotes.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
In reality I agree. $ will be prohibitive. However we’re trying to negotiate with gun grabbers here, please keep that in mind. We’d have to put a limit on here, but we can up it to a reasonable figure. If you HAD to put a limit here, what would you put. [/quote]

If I HAD to put a limit it would be in thousands… Like 5G’s :slight_smile:

[quote]
Not really. There is a difference between “I hate X, we need to fix X, I wish X was never elected” and “we need to shoot X. X is a vile evil man and needs to die a painful death”. And saying the latter everyday for months on end is different than drunk posting. Plus I said “CAN” be used, implying in conjunction of other issues. [/quote]

Agree to disagree. Free speech is free speech, imo. I think actions are what matter not words. Especially when the majority of the time that “hate” speech is just hot air.

[quote]
Lol, yes but no worse than we have it now. And it’s a “victory” for the control crowd. They can still look down at us. [/quote]

I don’t support discrimination even if it makes life easier for me.

[quote]
and pump is slower than semi. [/quote]

by millisecond maybe… just nitpicking though.

[quote]
Will be required by law to work WITH the felon. [/quote]

How will we pay for this if said ex-felon can’t afford to cover the cost of transportation? They just aren’t allowed to go to the range?

And this law won’t be ignored?

[quote]
And no, this is meant to make the vast majority of gun ownership SHALL issue, and ensure it is “well regulated” to avoid attacking the 2nd from that angle. [/quote]

I don’t think you’re going to get enough “shall issue” into the law. To pass it would have to be even more restrictive, imo.

I agree that function is better than look, but I don’t see how that will make banning harder?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Agree to disagree. Free speech is free speech, imo. I think actions are what matter not words. Especially when the majority of the time that “hate” speech is just hot air. [/quote]

You aren’t being incarcerated for what you say, however you are paying consequences. And I don’t know how many times I have to say I’m trying to work with gun grabbers. They DON’T use logic, reason and rule of law, they use EMOTION and feeling to ban guns. You are losing sight of that.

I get this is a hypothetical, and I could sit here and rip it apart all day too. The point of the exercise though, is to try and establish a framework for protecting rights, that the leftists will agree to, and we can build with.

So please, point out the short comings, but in addition to that, please offer a remedy beyond “shall not be infringed”.

[quote]
I don’t support discrimination even if it makes life easier for me. [/quote]

Sigh, lol. Neither do I. See above.

[quote]

[quote]
and pump is slower than semi. [/quote]

by millisecond maybe… just nitpicking though. [/quote]

This plays into the entire gun debate as a whole. A trained person will be more deadly with a pump and 5 shells of 9 shot than an untrained person with a 100 round drum on an AR.

Why is a pistol grip an evil AW add on? A trained person will be more effective with a non-pistol gripped rifle than an untrained loony with an AK.

That is the point. We need to get into function over form. A pump requires two movements by the shooter, where a semi takes one, a trigger pull. Skill levels being equal the pump will take more time to fire than a semi. That is why you see over/unders and semi’s on the trap field, not to mention no fucking pistol grips, lol.

[quote]
How will we pay for this if said ex-felon can’t afford to cover the cost of transportation? They just aren’t allowed to go to the range? [/quote]

Correct. Just because he is a felon doesn’t me she gets shotgun Welfare.

If I can’t afford it, I can’t go to the range. Same rules apply to the felon.

[quote]

And this law won’t be ignored? [/quote]

By criminals, obviously.

[quote]
I don’t think you’re going to get enough “shall issue” into the law. To pass it would have to be even more restrictive, imo. [/quote]

Well, we have to have our framework in place before we worry about where they will try and take their mile.

[quote]

I agree that function is better than look, but I don’t see how that will make banning harder? [/quote]

Because bans (AWB being the focus here) as of now are based on looks, with the implication it is on function.

I can have a .308, but put a fucking bayonet LUG on it, not even the actual blade, just a damn lug, I’m going to prison.

Adjustable stock? God forbid your wife’s arms are shorter than yours, prison.

Flash Suppressor? Who cares if it works, prison.

Threaded barrel. Not what’s on the threads, just that threads are there, prison.

Now… function… that is where we win. Feelings don’t determine function, facts do.

I’ve heard “ban 50 cals”. Why? Because they are big and black (I swear liberals are racist as shit) and make a loud boom. But if you look at function: to shoot things far away with a large round. Gun has an ass load of kick, is heavy as fuck, impossible to conceal, and no one that isn’t trained for HOURS and HOURS on the thing is going to hit a person at 200 yards, let alone the hundreds it is made to shoot, its function. So because of its function, you need someone to spend a couple grand on the gun, I’ve seen them in the $12k range, couple more on an optic (that is going to get destroyed due ot the back and forth recoil, so double the optic costs), and big money on ammo to train on the gun, let alone dues to join a club to learn how to use it. The 4 people on Earth willing to go through all this with the intent to harm people doesn’t make sense to ban the weapon for. 9999 time out of 10000 that person will just steal a pistol and shoot who they want to.

See what I mean, once you force the topic onto function the “we should ban that” becomes a different rifle, and then you start again, until all you’re left with is the statist saying “we should just ban all guns” which is very unlikely to pass.

Focus on function slows the slow creep towards confiscation in the non-free states.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

My son will be 18 in less than a year and HE can legally own all the guns he wants. We’ll be going SHOPPING! [/quote]

Be careful; a lot of states (and federal orders) say a felon cannot “live in a home where weapons are kept.”