Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

    Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a prominent Democratic Senator proposed a complete ban on assault weapons, and confiscation only of the assault weapons covered by the ban. No other weapons.
    At first. You can bet your last penny that once she got that confiscation done, she'd find a new class of "scary" guns to confiscate.

    Not the ones carried by the people who protect her and her family, though.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

      Originally posted by Slon View Post
      How many mass killings (via shooting) do we get at gun shows? Shooting ranges?
      None. Exactly. I've never heard of it.

      I wonder why?

      (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

      Anyone dumb enough to trust ONLY the government with guns is a well, dumb.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

        Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
        Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a prominent Democratic Senator proposed a complete ban on assault weapons, and confiscation only of the assault weapons covered by the ban. No other weapons.
        Why should anyone have to give up their legally purchased AR to appease the liberal knee jerk reaction to this shooting?

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

          Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
          How about the European Gun Policy where homicide by firearm is 90 times lower than the US.
          How does the UK have it 90 times lower?
          Are you going for the cultural thing? The UK have strict gun laws, simple as... In UK and Ireland we don't see guns often...
          Gun ownership in England and Wales is less than a tenth of US.
          If the US had a UK homicide by firearm rate (per 100,000) then 12,000 lives a year would be saved. That is all US casualties in Iraq, Afganistan and 911 in 9 months...
          I am not saying get rid of guns, just can you justify the cost.

          You have shot five times so one of two things have happened the person you are shooting at
          1) Runs away
          2) Returns fire and kills you


          Cause the TV doesn't have collateral damage.. These guns do(as pointed out earlier)...

          Gun deaths in America projected to soon top car fatalities - Americas - World - The Independent

          People need cars and to drive you need a licence because you could hurt yourself or others.

          So do you agree that 12,000 people die a year for American freedom on gun ownership....
          1. The UK's gun crime rate has skyrocketed ever since their gun ban:

          Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade | Mail Online

          Article from 2009 on decade long gun ban

          2. TV's kill dozens of children every year from tipping over, especially those heavy, big flat screens that you don't need:

          Tipping televisions kill record number of U.S. kids, gov't warns - CBS News

          A record number of curious kids are getting hurt by falling televisions in their homes, a government report warns.

          The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) released a report on Thursday that estimates about 43,000 people are injured in a television or furniture tip-over related incident each year, more than 25,000, or 59 percent, of whom are children.

          "Small children are no match for a falling dresser, wall unit or 50- to 100-pound television," the CPSC said.

          The report also showed that 349 people were killed between 2000 and 2011 by a falling television, appliance or piece of furniture -- 84 percent of them were kids younger than 9 years old. Falling televisions were more deadly, accounting for 62 percent of these fatalities. Last year alone, a record 41 tip-over related fatalities occurred.

          The worrisome trends the report spotlighted indicated that three children are injured by a tip-over every hour -- or 71 children per day -- and one child is killed every two weeks. Seventy percent of injuries involving children were caused by televisions, followed by 26 percent caused by furniture like dressers or tables.
          Maybe we should just register and then ban everything in your living room. Look, you don't need a 72 inch TV that can kill. We should limit you to a 12 inch TV no heavier than 10 pounds. Now go register every new TV purchase. It might be a burden, but it's for the children. Don't you care about the children?

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

            Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
            Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a prominent Democratic Senator proposed a complete ban on assault weapons, and confiscation only of the assault weapons covered by the ban. No other weapons.
            And of course that will NEVER EVER in any possible scenario, eventually mutate into a different kind of gun ban and eventual confiscation. Nope, the slippery slope is a fantasy.

            Also, ever heard of the UN Small Arms Treaty? Not talking "assault weapons", we are talking hand guns and pistols. Many folks in the Congress and even the President have expressed interest in signing that treaty.

            Oh, us Right wing radicals just a making stuff up about slippery slopes.

            Now of course I know what you are going to say "yeah but the UN Small Arms Treaty is just to protect the children and stop the illegal arms trade".

            Completely ignoring of course the fact that the US government and its intelligence agencies are the BIGGEST arms dealers in the history of the world. We trade arms to everyone - friend and foe. You want to stop arms trading, stop the NSA, the CIA, US military contractors and the Defense Department. Not a pistol your average American has in their home.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

              Originally posted by ericams2786 View Post
              We weren't founded on Democratic principles. We were founded on Republican principles. The Founders detested democracy.
              Our nation was founded on democratic principles. Our form of government is a democratic republic; a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law. ref.


              "The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                Originally posted by AdamKadmon View Post
                Hmm. Up until now, the fear voiced by gun owners has always been confiscation (which seems exceedingly unlikely in the foreseeable future). Taxation has not been a big concern.

                That said, it seems to me that if someone wants to tax guns, they could tax guns at the point of purchase, as they are doing in Chicago right now. Heck, they could tax ammunition, too, if they wanted. Why is registration necessary?

                And, as we have discussed, it's not a question of trusting the government; rather, it is the belief that guns do not really protect our rights... with the exception of the right to own guns. But obviously, we disagree on this.
                There are a myriad of gun laws on the books now, and besides infringing on the rights of lawful gun owners, I don't see that they accomplish anything else.

                Guns and ammunition are already taxed at the point of sale, but to use taxation as a tool to suppress ongoing gun ownership, registration is required.

                Yes, we do disagree on this.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                  Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                  You've been shown a prominent Democratic Senator who proposes a complete ban. And you've ignored it. Which makes me wonder - were you every actually interested in knowing?
                  I still don't see a proposed confiscation of presently owned firearms.

                  Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                  I'm sure you already know that there are no "online sales" of firearms in the manner you imply here. Yes, you can buy a gun from a licensed dealer from out of state - through the internet, by phone, or even in person. But that dealer does not give you or ship you the gun. The gun must be shipped to a licensed dealer in your home state, where you undergo the same process for picking it up as you would if you bought the gun there. A background check, waiting period (if applicable), etc.

                  You can't just order a gun over the Internet and have it shipped to you (unless you, yourself are a licensed dealer).

                  But you already knew that, right?
                  Well darn. I guess that settles it then? Not quite. I hate to quote Politifact but I've examined their argument and it's acceptable.

                  PolitiFact | Mayor Michael Bloomberg says 40 percent of guns are sold without a background check

                  Bloomberg’s office pointed us to a 1997 study by the National Institute of Justice on who owns guns and how they use them.The researchers estimated that about 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed dealers. They based their conclusion on a random survey of more than 2,500 households.

                  In 1999, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives released a report on gun shows. Investigators found that a quarter of the vendors were private sellers, not licensed dealers, and reported that "felons and other prohibited persons who want to avoid Brady Act checks and records of their purchase buy firearms at these shows." They said guns from such shows had been used in drug crimes.
                  It's the most up to date info there is, even if it's 10 years old. One can only imagine how much worse it is today. My statement is correct and anyone who thinks this is ok should be ashamed.


                  Originally posted by ericams2786 View Post
                  1. The UK's gun crime rate has skyrocketed ever since their gun ban:

                  Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade | Mail Online

                  Article from 2009 on decade long gun ban

                  2. TV's kill dozens of children every year from tipping over, especially those heavy, big flat screens that you don't need:

                  Tipping televisions kill record number of U.S. kids, gov't warns - CBS News



                  Maybe we should just register and then ban everything in your living room. Look, you don't need a 72 inch TV that can kill. We should limit you to a 12 inch TV no heavier than 10 pounds. Now go register every new TV purchase. It might be a burden, but it's for the children. Don't you care about the children?
                  This is complete bullshit. They are talking about felonies. And they went from 50-380. OMG an increase of 89%!!! These aren't even deaths. The UK has 24 gun deaths a year with a third of your population 24!!!!!!!!!!!. There is no data to support the gun argument. IF you live in constant fear of someone taking your guns away you can probably seek help for that. It'll likely be covered under Obamacare.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                    Originally posted by CYDdharta View Post
                    My point is that gun sales to suspected prohibited persons already require a background check, but the law isn’t being enforced. We don’t need new laws; we need to enforce the laws that are already on the books.
                    I get that. My point is that everybody should require a background check, not just "suspected prohibited persons."

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                      Originally posted by Mrs. M View Post
                      I think it's crazy for any state to require a permit to carry in your car! Thank God Louisiana doesn't.
                      Honestly, I wouldn't consider Louisiana a model of good governance... even compared to California, where a live. But hey, if you are happy there, I am happy for you. (Sincerely.)

                      As to the punishment thing, are you not taking that too literal? The point I've been trying to make is that the laws pertaining gun ownership can get expensive and time-consuming to the legal gun owner while the criminal bypasses it all so exactly who are the feel-good laws hurting? The legal gun owner, of course!
                      I am curious what percentage of guns used in crimes were actually bought legally. I honestly don't know, but I'm sure the information is out there. I will keep looking.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                        Originally posted by ericams2786 View Post
                        1. It has the potential to be a pretty damn bad punishment. Are you aware of the history of the 20th century? Ever heard of the dozens of countries where gun registration laws and gun control laws by governments preceded mass genocide...of like at least 150 million people? I mean I know 150 million isn't very much, but still being dead is a pretty big punishment.
                        20th Century... 20th Century... Sounds familiar. Oh, right, I bought my house through them!

                        Look, you are welcome to believe that gun registration will send the United States on the inevitable path to genocide... but I will not be joining you. And of course, there is nothing to stop you from defending yourself from the government with your registered gun, is there? Honestly, I think that one problem that some gun owners have is that they are so focused on the government kicking in their front door that they are blinded to the ways our rights actually are disappearing.

                        2. As far as car registration goes - it sort of is a punishment. I mean think about it really hard for a minute. What does registration mean? In real terms? It mean you don't actually own your vehicle, even if you have it paid off. You can't drive it or own it without the STATES's permission. Usually in a scenario where you have to register things to own or use them - at least from an historical perspective it is for one reason - you are subject to a sovereign who grants you the PRIVILEGE of doing something. In this country YOU are supposed to be the sovereign, not the government and YOUR property is an inalienable right (in other words if you own your car, you should be able to use it without a permit - therefore the State actually owns your car - not you).
                        Well, that is an interesting perspective (and I am not being sarcastic... for a change) but I think it is a misuse of the word "punishment." The way you are defining it, any requirement becomes a punishment.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                          Originally posted by AdamKadmon View Post
                          I get that. My point is that everybody should require a background check, not just "suspected prohibited persons."

                          Why would my uncle, who has never had so much as a speeding ticket, need to go thru a background check if I sell him my .22 single-shot bolt action? How would you get all everyone to perform a background check for every private gun sale?

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                            Originally posted by Danny View Post
                            I still don't see a proposed confiscation of presently owned firearms.



                            Well darn. I guess that settles it then? Not quite. I hate to quote Politifact but I've examined their argument and it's acceptable.

                            PolitiFact | Mayor Michael Bloomberg says 40 percent of guns are sold without a background check



                            It's the most up to date info there is, even if it's 10 years old. One can only imagine how much worse it is today. My statement is correct and anyone who thinks this is ok should be ashamed.




                            This is complete bullshit. They are talking about felonies. And they went from 50-380. OMG an increase of 89%!!! These aren't even deaths. The UK has 24 gun deaths a year with a third of your population 24!!!!!!!!!!!. There is no data to support the gun argument. IF you live in constant fear of someone taking your guns away you can probably seek help for that. It'll likely be covered under Obamacare.
                            Why are you so obsessed with gun ownership in the usa

                            you have no fear of mass shootings from us crazy americans

                            you have no stake in the game in regards to loss of liberty

                            yet you cry the loudest on the board


                            It is your blind devotion to Obama... your cult like fervor that makes you do this?

                            Danny in 2016 Obama will no longer be in a position of power... will he still be your god?

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                              Originally posted by smurf View Post
                              There are a myriad of gun laws on the books now, and besides infringing on the rights of lawful gun owners, I don't see that they accomplish anything else.
                              Yeah, I've said the same thing: That gun control succeeds mostly in annoying gun owners.

                              I'm not saying that gun laws have had no positive effects, but to the extent that they work at all, they work around the margins. But that doesn't make the arguments of the pro-gun crowd any more valid. For instance, the "right go carry" laws don't really lower violent crime. But — and this is important — they also don't seem to make violent crime any worse. And because they don't make violent crime any worse, I am fine with right to carry laws (ideally, with a certain amount of training).

                              Guns and ammunition are already taxed at the point of sale, but to use taxation as a tool to suppress ongoing gun ownership, registration is required.
                              Not at all. Levy a high enough tax on ammunition and — voila! — guns become prohibitively expensive to own. (I think Chris Rock had a joke about this. He said we shouldn't ban guns, but bullets should cost $5,000 each.)

                              Yes, we do disagree on this.
                              But that's what makes life interesting, eh?

                              I am heading off on vacation with my family now, so I won't be posting for a while. Have a great New Year and on the off chance that this gun debate isn't settled by the time I'm back, we can pick it up then.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • Re: Here it comes - federal registration of gun owners

                                Originally posted by Rakkasan View Post
                                Why are you so obsessed with gun ownership in the usa

                                you have no fear of mass shootings from us crazy americans

                                you have no stake in the game in regards to loss of liberty

                                yet you cry the loudest on the board


                                It is your blind devotion to Obama... your cult like fervor that makes you do this?

                                Danny in 2016 Obama will no longer be in a position of power... will he still be your god?
                                Since Obama took office, here is the bills he signed relating to the 2nd amendment:

                                The President has signed separate pieces of legislation that expanded gun rights. These rights include the ability of citizens to carry firearms in national parks as long as they comply with state laws, and the ability of certain passengers to carry unloaded firearms in the luggage on Amtrak trains.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X