On 11/3/14 7:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/3/2014 6:14 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
I enjoyed reading some of the thread about guns, in which luddite
called for reasonable regulations for firearms. It convinced me
there is little hope for a future for this violent country.
You have extremists like Greg who are against any sort of government
action/regulation on just about anything, crazy John Birchers like BAR
who think we are still living in the 18th-century, semi-blind racists
like herring who can't shoot straight but who load up with guns in case
they encounter a black man walking on the sidewalk, whiners like Wayne
who think the world exists just for them, and crackpots like
psychoscotty who should not be allowed within 50 feet of rubber band.

bang bang, boys...it is your future.

Please forgive my lousy typing which in reality is lousy dictation.
Can't use my right hand to type for a while, a circumstance that
provides a wonderful excuse to not spend much time in this cesspool of
self centered right wing extremism.

As always, have nice day.


The recent discussions regarding gun background checks and gun
registration was interesting to me. It made me aware of some of the
different views that exist, regional cultural differences and most
importantly they made me realize that I really didn't know or understand
what the current laws and status of each are. So, I did some research
on the subjects.

It seems that background checks and gun registration exists for all
firearms purchased through a FFL. The current federal laws governing
dealer transactions were established by The National Firearms Act of
1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968. Among other specific items, these
Acts require a background check for reported federal or state
restrictions that may exist in a purchaser's record and requires the
completion of a registry form with details of the transaction that must
be retained for 20 years by the dealer.

By the way, the NRA supported both of these Acts.

Background checks conducted by licensed dealers include data based on
court records (federal and state) and other federally mandated
restrictions. Individual state inputs to the background data base
varies by state but they contain data from police records, medical
institutions and even input by family members. Domestic violence that
results in restraining orders, known substance abuse (drugs and/or
alcohol) and other records are examples. Not all are reported however,
so it's a leaky filter and it needs to be worked on and resolved.

The debate today is on private sales, transfers, Internet sales and gun
show sales that do not involve a federally licensed dealer. Estimates
vary but it is thought that 20 to 40 percent of firearms are acquired
through these means, not involving a FFL and therefore not requiring any
form of background check, registration or even a simple record of the
transaction.

I remain of the opinion that background checks and documentation of
current ownership (registration) should be extended to include *all*
purchases and/or transfers. We don't live in the 1700 or 1800 hundreds.
It won't cover all transfers, I realize, but it makes undocumented
transfers illegal which may, over time, help reduce the number of
firearms used in violent crimes. Law abiding citizens/gun owners have
nothing to lose in terms of their "Rights".

To those who simply cling to their "rights" under the 2nd Amendment I
suggest the following:

With "Rights" come responsibilities. To claim your "Rights" but ignore
your responsibilities to society means you have haven't earned or
deserve them.

I live in Maryland a state many consider restrictive as to gun rights.
In the 11 years I've lived here I've never found maryland's gun
regulations prevented me from buying any firearm i wanted.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer