Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/16/2014 1:15 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:50:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Rioting and civil insurrection in this country is a possibility I guess
but registration of firearms isn't going to take your guns or mine away.


You just contradicted yourself in one sentence.

Rioting and civil insurrection is exactly when the government is going
to stomp on constitutional protections.



That wasn't the way I intended the comment but since you bring it up:

Not having a clue who owns guns isn't going to prevent riots and
civil insurrection.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:17:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 11:40:27 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

Harrold wrote:
On 11/16/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 22:03:46 -0500, Roger wrote:


The way I see it is if a gun is used in a crime and still has a serial
number on it the first step would be for the police to contact the
manufacturer. From there they would know the dealer who sold who will
give them the buyers name. When they contact the buyer they will be
looking for the gun and I would prefer to know who I sold it to if I
didn't have it. If it was sold privately, I only have a bill of sale
and a copy of their drivers license (not required but that's what I
do). By transferring through a dealer we aren't forcing registration
but we a taking ourselves completely out of the loop.

Cops seldom even care where a gun came from. Maybe some day they might
but I am not sure what purpose it would actually serve.
If the gun is not fairly new, it will usually have "been around" and
there will be gaps in the ownership chain.
4473s are not required to be sent to DC and the dealer can destroy
them after 20 years. If the dealer goes out of business or simply
dies, his 4473s and his "bound book" may just languish in a dusty box
until his family throws them out..
The current system was purposely designed NOT to be a registry.

Let's take, for example, one of the guns Harry bought in Virginia.
Harry has the gun, there is a Maryland dealer with the 4473 in his
files but if Harry doesn't say who he is and know how to get in touch
with him, there is no way to find him. If you do, there will be a
direct link to the dealer in Virginia and the person who sold it to
him but if they can't locate that person, the trail goes cold again.
If they do find him and he can't locate the dealer he got it from you
are still dead in the water. Every private owner is a break in the
chain and there is no national database linking them.

That all assumes every transaction went through a FFL to begin with
and that those dealers and their records still exist.

I doubt more than 10% of the dealers I bought guns from over the years
are still in business or that the FFL holders are even alive.
Most were used when I got them (from a dealer) and the chance of
getting back to the manufacturer is nil.

I have some that were sold in a number of private transactions before
I bought them. They are total dead ends.




Maybe not. Ballistics checks on those guns might tie them to unsolved
crimes. I hope you keep your bills of sales for gun purchases.

I can not find a bill of sale for luggage I bought 6 months ago that went
bad. How are we to keep track of a bill of sale, even if we had one, for a
gun bought 50 years ago? I sold a Ruger RedHawk to a ,friend of a friend
in about 1970, and replaced with a Colt that was for sale on a note on the
wall of the Martinez gun range same year. Was not required to have FFL
transfer, receipt, or even to know someone in those days. You plopped down
pictures of dead presidents and took possession. Same way it is still
done in the inner city.

I doubt I could even come up with the name of the dealers I bought
most of my guns from and if you went there it might be a Starbucks.
I don't know of a single one of them that is still in business.
Even my 2 most recent purchases were from dealers run out of business
by Bass Pro Shop.
I don't have paperwork on any of them.


Another good reason for a state by state or national data base.

Only if he needs the paperwork.

Greg - do you need the paperwork?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:57:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Not having a clue who owns guns isn't going to prevent riots and
civil insurrection.

===

Of course not, but that isn't the point. If the country was in a
state of anarchy wouldn't it be nice to be able to defend your home,
family and neighbors without fear of prior confiscation?

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/16/2014 1:28 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:50:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 11:32 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 06:46:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Assume 300 million of these files existed in a data base. Not much of a
server required to maintain all those files.

===

A database and accurate registry is total anathema to those who firmly
believe in the 2nd ammendment and its original intent. Why? Think
about France and the Scandinavian countries after they were overrun by
the Germans in WW2. Think about East Germany and Poland after they
were annexed by the USSR. Think about eastern China after they were
overrun by the Jappanese. Think about Venezuela after their former
democracy was co-opted by a left leaning ultra socialist dictator.
Think about the possibility of widesperad rioting and civil
insurrection in this country.

Can't happen here? I wouldn't be so sure about that.



Just for the sake of argument:

The "original intent" of the 2A remains a topic of debate. Agreed, the
SCOUS recently rendered a ruling in terms of how it should be
interpreted but for at least 50 years prior constitutional scholars and
legal beagles have felt otherwise. Goes back to what constitutes a
"militia".

As for all those countries that were over-run ... I really don't think
the USA is in any danger in the near future. Even if it was .. what
difference would it make? (to quote a famous Secretary of State). :-)

Rioting and civil insurrection in this country is a possibility I guess
but registration of firearms isn't going to take your guns or mine away.



...unless Bloomberg has his way, or Rep. Robin Kelly....what would be
the ultimate purpose of the legislation below?


Regulate Guns Like Other Potentially Dangerous Consumer
Products (H.R. 2464 -- Rep. Robin Kelly).

The Improving Gun Safety Standards Act would amend the Consumer
Product Safety Act to include firearms in the definition of “consumer
product”—thereby permitting the Consumer Product Safety Commission to
issue consumer safety rules for firearms in the same manner as
other potentially harmful consumer products like fireworks, bicycles,
car safety seats and cribs. Firearms are currently specifically
excluded from the statutory definition of “consumer product.”

http://robinkelly.house.gov/sites/ro...lyReport_1.pdf



To answer your question, the ultimate purpose of this proposed
legislation is to drive people like yourself nuts. :-)

In some ways, this proposed legislation sounds similar to the way
handguns have been regulated here in Massachusetts since 1998. Every
model that a manufacturer wants to sell here must meet certain criteria
in terms of safety, as determined by a state testing agency and the whim
of the Attorney General.

It's why I can't legally buy a Kimber .45 and many other gun models.
They don't pass the safety criteria established by the state.

This is a component of the argument I've been making John. Eventually
legislation like this will be coming to Virgina and other states with
lax gun control laws, regardless of how legitimate the regulations are.
Look at what just happened in your neighboring state of Maryland.
Their new laws aren't too far away from those here in Massachusetts.

So, rather than trying to fight the tide, why not give a little?
Background checks and a gun registry in exchange for dropping much more
restrictive legislation? Everyone can claim victory and relax.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/16/2014 1:52 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:55:07 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 11:54 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 22:03:46 -0500, Roger wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:36:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/14/2014 6:06 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
You'll find that both Luddite and Krause tend to ignore arguments they
can't refute.


Refute what? None of the questions or comments have anything to do
with the issue being discussed.

This whole subject centers around the strange wording of the 2A that
historians and legal scholars have been scratching their asses for a
couple of hundred years trying to figure out what the hell Madison was
talking about. He lived in the days of Red Coats, Minute Men, muskets
and flintlocks not 30 round magazines, semi-automatic rifles and
pistols. When he drafted the wording of the 2A, the "militia" consisted
of farmers and fishermen who were expected to bring their own musket or
flintlock to the fight when needed.

The subject had to do with the paperwork you'd like to see to enable
authorities to establish a 'chain of custody' in the even the firearm
was used to commit a crime.

Do you not remember all the pushing you've been doing on this issue?
Now you're wanting to go back and argue about the 'milita' definition?
Well, now the 'militia' consists of farmers, fisherman, business
owners, business workers, government workers, and all the retirees
therefrom, and anyone else I've missed.

As to your 'chain of custody', please explain why you think it's
necessary - again. Try to use some arguments that haven't been
debunked.


The way I see it is if a gun is used in a crime and still has a serial
number on it the first step would be for the police to contact the
manufacturer. From there they would know the dealer who sold who will
give them the buyers name. When they contact the buyer they will be
looking for the gun and I would prefer to know who I sold it to if I
didn't have it. If it was sold privately, I only have a bill of sale
and a copy of their drivers license (not required but that's what I
do). By transferring through a dealer we aren't forcing registration
but we a taking ourselves completely out of the loop.

As long as I have a record of transfer, I don't really care if the
cops come by.



Your homemade bill of sale *might* keep you off the hook if a gun you
previously owned ever ends up being used in a crime and it's traced
back to you, but there's no guaranty of that. Anyone can make up a
bill of sale or transfer document and claim they sold or gave the gun
away. It also doesn't tie that firearm to subsequent owners.

John will still have his bill of sale. That 4473 at the dealer might
be more elusive, particularly if the dealer moved.
A lot of times, the FFL is not really the business owner and he is the
one charged with maintaining ther transfer records. My machine gun
dealer was using a Lehigh pawn shop as his address but that shop was
long gone. We was working out of his van and home as best I could
tell. This is a class III dealer, not just a garden variety FFL.


Cars used to be able to be sold with a simple bill of sale. Now you
need the title in most states. The title reflects a chain of custody
or ownership and proves that the vehicle was obtained legally and not
stolen.

Yeah, nobody steals cars anymore and they only kill about 43,000 a
year.
Cars are simply an example of how states are using the tag and title
process as a profit center.
Do you really think, driving around the block when you were 16 and
parking the car proved you were ever (or are still) a good driver?
You don't want to go down that "road"



I don't know about Florida but try to put a car on the road without a
title up here. You can't. There used to be a grandfather clause that if
the car was over 10 years old a Bill of Sale was good enough. No more.

When I bought the "General Lee" (1969 Dodge Charger) from a car museum
in Florida several years ago I ran into a major problem getting it
registered to put it on the road. It originally came from a shop in
Michigan who supplied Warner Bros. with some of the cars and it didn't
have a title. Plenty of provenance and a paper trail that
showed subsequent ownership but no official title.

I finally got around it by having the police visit my house, verify the
VIN number and take copies of the documentation I had. The DMV accepted
it and created a title for it.

So, it's not just tax money they are looking for.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/16/2014 2:12 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:57:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Not having a clue who owns guns isn't going to prevent riots and
civil insurrection.

===

Of course not, but that isn't the point. If the country was in a
state of anarchy wouldn't it be nice to be able to defend your home,
family and neighbors without fear of prior confiscation?



That was my point when I said that background checks and registration
wasn't a means to confiscation. It's a means to start limiting the
number of guns available "on the street". Won't happen overnight, but
it's a start.

If the country was in a state of anarchy, all bets are off. I might be
able to defend my family and property against an intruder or two but
certainly not a marching mob.

I think your example is a little extreme, but makes a good argument I
suppose for those opposed to *any* reasonable gun control laws or changes.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On 11/16/2014 2:02 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:17:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 11:40:27 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

Harrold wrote:
On 11/16/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 22:03:46 -0500, Roger wrote:


The way I see it is if a gun is used in a crime and still has a serial
number on it the first step would be for the police to contact the
manufacturer. From there they would know the dealer who sold who will
give them the buyers name. When they contact the buyer they will be
looking for the gun and I would prefer to know who I sold it to if I
didn't have it. If it was sold privately, I only have a bill of sale
and a copy of their drivers license (not required but that's what I
do). By transferring through a dealer we aren't forcing registration
but we a taking ourselves completely out of the loop.

Cops seldom even care where a gun came from. Maybe some day they might
but I am not sure what purpose it would actually serve.
If the gun is not fairly new, it will usually have "been around" and
there will be gaps in the ownership chain.
4473s are not required to be sent to DC and the dealer can destroy
them after 20 years. If the dealer goes out of business or simply
dies, his 4473s and his "bound book" may just languish in a dusty box
until his family throws them out..
The current system was purposely designed NOT to be a registry.

Let's take, for example, one of the guns Harry bought in Virginia.
Harry has the gun, there is a Maryland dealer with the 4473 in his
files but if Harry doesn't say who he is and know how to get in touch
with him, there is no way to find him. If you do, there will be a
direct link to the dealer in Virginia and the person who sold it to
him but if they can't locate that person, the trail goes cold again.
If they do find him and he can't locate the dealer he got it from you
are still dead in the water. Every private owner is a break in the
chain and there is no national database linking them.

That all assumes every transaction went through a FFL to begin with
and that those dealers and their records still exist.

I doubt more than 10% of the dealers I bought guns from over the years
are still in business or that the FFL holders are even alive.
Most were used when I got them (from a dealer) and the chance of
getting back to the manufacturer is nil.

I have some that were sold in a number of private transactions before
I bought them. They are total dead ends.




Maybe not. Ballistics checks on those guns might tie them to unsolved
crimes. I hope you keep your bills of sales for gun purchases.

I can not find a bill of sale for luggage I bought 6 months ago that went
bad. How are we to keep track of a bill of sale, even if we had one, for a
gun bought 50 years ago? I sold a Ruger RedHawk to a ,friend of a friend
in about 1970, and replaced with a Colt that was for sale on a note on the
wall of the Martinez gun range same year. Was not required to have FFL
transfer, receipt, or even to know someone in those days. You plopped down
pictures of dead presidents and took possession. Same way it is still
done in the inner city.

I doubt I could even come up with the name of the dealers I bought
most of my guns from and if you went there it might be a Starbucks.
I don't know of a single one of them that is still in business.
Even my 2 most recent purchases were from dealers run out of business
by Bass Pro Shop.
I don't have paperwork on any of them.


Another good reason for a state by state or national data base.

Only if he needs the paperwork.

Greg - do you need the paperwork?



That's fine John if all you are interested in is protecting your own ass.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 14:25:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I finally got around it by having the police visit my house, verify the
VIN number and take copies of the documentation I had. The DMV accepted
it and created a title for it.

===

At one time, and it may still be true, you could title just about
anything in Georgia by showing a bill of sale. You can then transfer
the Georgia title to the state of your choice.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 14:12:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 1:28 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:50:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 11:32 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 06:46:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Assume 300 million of these files existed in a data base. Not much of a
server required to maintain all those files.

===

A database and accurate registry is total anathema to those who firmly
believe in the 2nd ammendment and its original intent. Why? Think
about France and the Scandinavian countries after they were overrun by
the Germans in WW2. Think about East Germany and Poland after they
were annexed by the USSR. Think about eastern China after they were
overrun by the Jappanese. Think about Venezuela after their former
democracy was co-opted by a left leaning ultra socialist dictator.
Think about the possibility of widesperad rioting and civil
insurrection in this country.

Can't happen here? I wouldn't be so sure about that.



Just for the sake of argument:

The "original intent" of the 2A remains a topic of debate. Agreed, the
SCOUS recently rendered a ruling in terms of how it should be
interpreted but for at least 50 years prior constitutional scholars and
legal beagles have felt otherwise. Goes back to what constitutes a
"militia".

As for all those countries that were over-run ... I really don't think
the USA is in any danger in the near future. Even if it was .. what
difference would it make? (to quote a famous Secretary of State). :-)

Rioting and civil insurrection in this country is a possibility I guess
but registration of firearms isn't going to take your guns or mine away.



...unless Bloomberg has his way, or Rep. Robin Kelly....what would be
the ultimate purpose of the legislation below?


Regulate Guns Like Other Potentially Dangerous Consumer
Products (H.R. 2464 -- Rep. Robin Kelly).

The Improving Gun Safety Standards Act would amend the Consumer
Product Safety Act to include firearms in the definition of “consumer
product”—thereby permitting the Consumer Product Safety Commission to
issue consumer safety rules for firearms in the same manner as
other potentially harmful consumer products like fireworks, bicycles,
car safety seats and cribs. Firearms are currently specifically
excluded from the statutory definition of “consumer product.”

http://robinkelly.house.gov/sites/ro...lyReport_1.pdf



To answer your question, the ultimate purpose of this proposed
legislation is to drive people like yourself nuts. :-)

In some ways, this proposed legislation sounds similar to the way
handguns have been regulated here in Massachusetts since 1998. Every
model that a manufacturer wants to sell here must meet certain criteria
in terms of safety, as determined by a state testing agency and the whim
of the Attorney General.

It's why I can't legally buy a Kimber .45 and many other gun models.
They don't pass the safety criteria established by the state.

This is a component of the argument I've been making John. Eventually
legislation like this will be coming to Virgina and other states with
lax gun control laws, regardless of how legitimate the regulations are.
Look at what just happened in your neighboring state of Maryland.
Their new laws aren't too far away from those here in Massachusetts.

So, rather than trying to fight the tide, why not give a little?
Background checks and a gun registry in exchange for dropping much more
restrictive legislation? Everyone can claim victory and relax.


Go with the liberal flow to please the liberals...in the short term.
If and when the anti-gun liberals in Virginia get powerful enough to
change the law, then I'll live with it. Doesn't mean I'll agree with
it, or think it's the right way to go.

You have a lot more faith in that 'give a little' argument than I do.

I'd really like to see the testing which showed Kimbers 'unsafe' in
your state.

Thank you, Richard!!!
 

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 14:33:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 2:02 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:17:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/16/2014 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 11:40:27 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

Harrold wrote:
On 11/16/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 22:03:46 -0500, Roger wrote:


The way I see it is if a gun is used in a crime and still has a serial
number on it the first step would be for the police to contact the
manufacturer. From there they would know the dealer who sold who will
give them the buyers name. When they contact the buyer they will be
looking for the gun and I would prefer to know who I sold it to if I
didn't have it. If it was sold privately, I only have a bill of sale
and a copy of their drivers license (not required but that's what I
do). By transferring through a dealer we aren't forcing registration
but we a taking ourselves completely out of the loop.

Cops seldom even care where a gun came from. Maybe some day they might
but I am not sure what purpose it would actually serve.
If the gun is not fairly new, it will usually have "been around" and
there will be gaps in the ownership chain.
4473s are not required to be sent to DC and the dealer can destroy
them after 20 years. If the dealer goes out of business or simply
dies, his 4473s and his "bound book" may just languish in a dusty box
until his family throws them out..
The current system was purposely designed NOT to be a registry.

Let's take, for example, one of the guns Harry bought in Virginia.
Harry has the gun, there is a Maryland dealer with the 4473 in his
files but if Harry doesn't say who he is and know how to get in touch
with him, there is no way to find him. If you do, there will be a
direct link to the dealer in Virginia and the person who sold it to
him but if they can't locate that person, the trail goes cold again.
If they do find him and he can't locate the dealer he got it from you
are still dead in the water. Every private owner is a break in the
chain and there is no national database linking them.

That all assumes every transaction went through a FFL to begin with
and that those dealers and their records still exist.

I doubt more than 10% of the dealers I bought guns from over the years
are still in business or that the FFL holders are even alive.
Most were used when I got them (from a dealer) and the chance of
getting back to the manufacturer is nil.

I have some that were sold in a number of private transactions before
I bought them. They are total dead ends.




Maybe not. Ballistics checks on those guns might tie them to unsolved
crimes. I hope you keep your bills of sales for gun purchases.

I can not find a bill of sale for luggage I bought 6 months ago that went
bad. How are we to keep track of a bill of sale, even if we had one, for a
gun bought 50 years ago? I sold a Ruger RedHawk to a ,friend of a friend
in about 1970, and replaced with a Colt that was for sale on a note on the
wall of the Martinez gun range same year. Was not required to have FFL
transfer, receipt, or even to know someone in those days. You plopped down
pictures of dead presidents and took possession. Same way it is still
done in the inner city.

I doubt I could even come up with the name of the dealers I bought
most of my guns from and if you went there it might be a Starbucks.
I don't know of a single one of them that is still in business.
Even my 2 most recent purchases were from dealers run out of business
by Bass Pro Shop.
I don't have paperwork on any of them.


Another good reason for a state by state or national data base.

Only if he needs the paperwork.

Greg - do you need the paperwork?



That's fine John if all you are interested in is protecting your own ass.


I thought that was one of your main arguments for the paperwork - to
keep the cops off my ass.