Well That Didn't Take Long - More Proposed Gun Control

[ltstanfo]

It's not like I didn't see this coming (from several miles away):

For those who may not know...

House Bill 45

The first bill introduced (in the house) that mandates licensing for all firearms owners:

In short:

- You will have to carry a photo ID firearms license.
- A training class is required to be licensed.
- Disclosure of your storage method is required for license.
- A thumb print is required for license.
- Every sale recorded by the federal government.
- If you move, and don't tell the Attorney General within 60 days, you are a criminal.
- If a firearm is stolen and you don't report it, you are a criminal.
- There will be no grandfathered firearms.
- If you do not obtain a license and report every firearm you currently own, you are a criminal.
- There will be a license fee and a fee for the "services" provided at purchase time.
- Licenses must be renewed every 5 years.

Recall that I have been worrying about (call it warning) "incrementalism" on this topic for some time. In my way of thinking this is clearly the first step (if it passes the house and the senate enables a similar bill). First you have to know where everything is and more importantly who has them. It seems eerily similar to how the gun ban in the UK started.

Now I don't expect this to be worked on immediately, there are certainly much bigger (political) fish to fry in the near term. However, given the current makeup of Congress and the voting record of the new president... Write your representatives now folks and tell them NO! 8)

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[Glaucus]

I don't expect a gun ban in the US any time soon. Or ever actually. But better control of firearms is a good thing. I see this as no more an issue then having to register your vehicle. Driving your car without a license or without it being registered also makes you a criminal - and yet the world isn't about to end. Why should guns be any different?

Finally, some change I can believe in!

 

[ltstanfo]

I don't expect a gun ban in the US any time soon. Or ever actually. But better control of firearms is a good thing. I see this as no more an issue then having to register your vehicle. Driving your car without a license or without it being registered also makes you a criminal - and yet the world isn't about to end. Why should guns be any different?

Finally, some change I can believe in!

I am so glad you asked! 8)

There are SEVERAL flaws with this (sole purpose) proposed legislation but lets start with my "short list" as posted above (comments beside them as needed):


- You will have to carry a photo ID firearms license. - this is already done by most states that have concealed carry laws. For the rest of my examples, I will use Alabama as an example. Why is the federal government taking over a state item?

- A training class is required to be licensed. - always recommended but not legally required in all states (Alabama does not require). I have no objection to taking a class, I have encouraged it in the past but do not see the need to mandate it.

- Disclosure of your storage method is required for license. - Required in California, likely elsewhere but this is no one's business (IMO). Now the government knows exactly where they are and if *OOPS* they are out of said storage case (for any reason) and a crime takes place, this is another potential way to prosecute you or have reason to deny said license.

- A thumb print is required for license. - Why? *IF* they make this a requirement for Passports, state drivers licenses, etc... then I would not be able to complain. What makes a federal gun license so special, especially when everyone likes to compare a gun license to a driver's license? Alabama does not require any finger / thumb prints.

- Every sale recorded by the federal government. - DUPLICATION OF EFFORT - already done during NICS process at time of sale/purchase *AND* required by gun shop to maintain records of all sales - government can shut down gun shop for not maintaining records. What this is saying is that unlike NICS (which deletes records after 24 hours), these records will be permanent. So the ATF doesn't want to have to visit gun stores now and see the records?

- If you move, and don't tell the Attorney General within 60 days, you are a criminal. HUH? - People with driver's licenses don't have to tell the attorney general when they move.. why should gun owners? Heck, even when a person moves from state to state and gets a new driver's license it is done at the state level (either within 90 days of move or when existing license expires). Can't the government trust state gun laws?

- If a firearm is stolen and you don't report it, you are a criminal. - This is one item that (on the surface at least) I have no objection to. People should report lost / stolen firearms, especially if they hope to ever recover them. My concern is the details of this section (still not clearly defined).

- There will be no grandfathered firearms. - This is a good one... so the government only cares about the guns in people's homes? What about the millions in illegal circulation? This sole purpose clause fits in quite nicely with fifth and sixth clauses above as a starting point for gun confiscation (should it get to that point).

- If you do not obtain a license and report every firearm you currently own, you are a criminal. - Same as above, this is a sole purpose clause with only one (eventual) intent... confiscation. Incrementalism plain and simple.

- There will be a license fee and a fee for the "services" provided at purchase time.
- Licenses must be renewed every 5 years. - Duplication of effort. Already done at state level. Here in Alabama it is a yearly renewal (by the Sheriff's department).

So, how exactly does this help people who already obey the "rules"?

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[Robert]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

 

[redrumloa]

The saying to hell in a handbag comes to mind :x

 

[ltstanfo]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

Now now Robert, you gave me the ICBM several years ago. I still keep it at the quarry, ready to launch at any time. :wink:

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[Robert]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

Now now Robert, you gave me the ICBM several years ago. I still keep it at the quarry, ready to launch at any time. :wink:

Regards,
Ltstanfo

Damn-straight and don't let that gun-rustler Osam.... - I mean Obama take it away from you! ;-)

 

[ltstanfo]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

Now now Robert, you gave me the ICBM several years ago. I still keep it at the quarry, ready to launch at any time. :wink:

Regards,
Ltstanfo

Damn-straight and don't let that gun-rustler Osam.... - I mean Obama take it away from you! ;-)

So I finally have permission to target something out of state?

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[redrumloa]

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

 

[Wayne]

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

Which, in itself, is a living document which was -- according to it's authors in it's own text -- supposed to adapt and change to meet the needs of the people by way of proper due process, ie, amendments, which can change.

The prohibition amendment and it's subsequent overturn come to mind.

Wayne

 

[redrumloa]

@Wayne

I thought you have been an on and off gun collector? How can a gun collector be happy about some left coasters dictating what they can and cannot own :?:

 

[Wayne]

@Wayne

I thought you have been an on and off gun collector? How can a gun collector be happy about some left coasters dictating what they can and cannot own :?:

I fail to note the word "happy" anywhere in my rebuttal.

Honestly, I'm more apathetic and realistically resigned to the fact that whether today, tomorrow, next week, or next decade, we the people WILL lose yet another right "guaranteed" to us by the founding fathers. Anyone who thinks differently is sadly delusional.

For the record, and to speak to apathy, I have a ccw, I often ride with my favorite sidearm "just in case". I can -- if required -- take a firearms safety course (Lee's already taken several, and I personally see NO harm in it), and if I have to pay $5.00 a year or whatever for a license or whatever, so be it.

I resigned myself long ago to the fact that no matter what, the right guys NEVER win in a politically correct society.

Dipshit throws himself off an overpass. City gets sued for "failure to make overpasses safe for pedestrians".

Dipshit spills water on the floor, then slips on it, store is held legally liable and loses millions.

Dipshit steals a weapon from his father's safe and kills someone by accident. All guns are therefore evil and must be stopped at all costs. Not my opinion, just an observation of the way things work out where anti-gun idiots are concerned.

Here's the thing though, there are a lot more crazy ass, religious right wingers out there willing to fight to get rid of people's rights than there are normal, sane citizens out there willing to fight hard to keep them.

Think of it in terms of your favorite "I like to pretend I'm not a devout Catholic" argument (abortion). Do you really doubt people who believe the way you do (staunch pro-lifers) will EVER give up and let it rest until they get Roe V Wade reversed?

This -- if anything -- just proves my point to Lee about the subtle erosion of freedom and human rights in this country. The bill may go nowhere, but the fact that the idiots in Congress won't stop trying proves the simple fact that some form of it WILL pass eventually.

Here's something you can wrap your head around Jim.. Think of a gun bill like a live antiques auction.

A pretty shiny bauble (gun control) comes up to the plate.

The auctioneer (Congress) starts off asking for a proverbial $500. When he gets no bid (the bill fails), he backs up and asks for $250 (less constrictive rules). When he gets no bids, he continually reduces what he's asking for until SOMEONE swallows the much smaller hook.

THEN the auctioneer proceeds to slowly creep the bidding (in this case, slowly introducing newer stricter rules at a slower pace) until the end, we discover that when the hammer comes down, the winner (in this case, the loser, aka we the people) ended up losing FAR more than the initial $500 opening bid.

They (the idiots) are just trying to sneak through a bill to take the rights out of citizens hands, and if they have to back up and break it down into smaller and smaller chunks, they're fine with that, because they KNOW that eventually their majority of "someone" in Congress *will* end up swallowing the bait.

Thus endeth the lesson.

Wayne

 

[ltstanfo]

Thank you Wayne for so very well illustrating (by example) my argument that this proposed legislation (let alone all gun control legislation) is incrementalism.

Sadly people will eventually become such sheep (dependent on the government) that such legislation will evoke no protest from the masses. I can only hope that enough good people still exist in my lifetime to oppose such bills (as I am actively doing).

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

What about suitcase bombs, for tourism (terrorism) purposes?

 

[faethor]

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

FIXED..Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

 

[Robert]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

What about suitcase bombs, for tourism (terrorism) purposes?

Absolutely.
And how about some mustard gas while we're at it! Dijon bombs a-go-go!

 

[smithy]

Yes this is the typical view of a softie European liberal, but I'm pleased there is a ban on handgun ownership in this country. I don't see why any citizen needs a gun.

 

[Robert]

Yes this is the typical view of a softie European liberal, but I'm pleased there is a ban on handgun ownership in this country. I don't see why any citizen needs a gun.

Well, other than to protect themselves from our trigger-happy police, I agree with you.

 

[ltstanfo]

Gimme my ICBM, Gawd-dammit! :firedup:

What about suitcase bombs, for tourism (terrorism) purposes?

Absolutely.
And how about some mustard gas while we're at it! Dijon bombs a-go-go!

Well, since the Democrats banned Grey Poupon (dijon) in favor of Heinz (yellow) our options for mustard have been limited. I'm waiting for the sunset clause to kick in as dijon is much more effective. :wink:

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[ltstanfo]

Re:

Hehe... and the snowball continues...

Holder calls for Assault Weapons Ban Renewal

Something (not really) new but again, no surprise that the Democrats are calling for this. They have bristled since they had to accept the old sunset clause to get the original bill passed.

What scares me more is the following quote by Holder, the Attorney General:

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons".

A "few" changes? Yep, he clearly "believes" in the second amendment the rights of individuals to own firearms. :roll:

So, not only are my predictions holding true but once again we see Obama's past working in the present.

Time to go spend much more money at the gun shop! :evil:

Wayne - if you want that P90 you better buy it now...

Regards,
Ltstanfo