Mass shooting of the week, high school in parkland, FL.

#2,301
#2,301
Grand Vol said:
I'd bring universal background checks to the table.

And ask that suppressors be taken off the NFA. The Hughes Amendment get a valid vote. The Sporter Clause be reviewed. And the State Department gets out of the FFL business.

In a free market, a P2P transfer can and should be inexpensive.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not on the universal background checks. If I want to sell a firearm, I’ll sell it to who I damn well please. No background check required.

A case can be made that universal bgc will lead to a massive registration database. As we all know, registration leads to confiscation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,302
#2,302
K-town Vol Fan said:
Im sure when the founding fathers wrote the constitution they imagined a scenario where an 18 year old mentally ill kid can legally purchase an AR (which didnt exist in those days) and attenpt to kill everyone in his school.
Click to expand...

they could come up with the foundation for the greatest nation the world has ever seen, but they couldn't foresee advancements in weapons tech?

Automatic, or near automatic (handcranked) already existed about 40 years before our revolution. Puckle Guns. You already had grenades and artillery at the time. you had warships with more than 100 cannons on it. Rockets were out there if not widely used.

you also had a bunch of "one off" handheld weapons that could fire multiple shots at once or in sequence (multiple barrels).

shells, magazines, and belts were already a thing. Again they existed even if not in widespread military use.
 
#2,304
#2,304
Give every member of the house of misrepresenitives and the senate an assault rifle and let 'em shoot it out. The survivors decide ban or no ban. Noting more democratic than that. :crazy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,305
#2,305
zeppelin128 said:
Can't do it GV. Not until it stops.
Click to expand...

It's an argument that's not related nor is it valid.

Sadly, we live in a world where having a Sam Brown belt and carrying a six shooter isn't valid any longer. Now, I fully support only allowing police to have what citizens have, but you're getting ignorant about this.
 
#2,307
#2,307
Grand Vol said:
I'd bring universal background checks to the table.

And ask that suppressors be taken off the NFA. The Hughes Amendment get a valid vote. The Sporter Clause be reviewed. And the State Department gets out of the FFL business.

In a free market, a P2P transfer can and should be inexpensive.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If you are a responsible gun owner, there's no reason to oppose UBC's, or even registration. If that's a mechanism for seizure down the road, then we'll fight that battle when we get there.

Suppressors and bump-stocks. Outlawed tomorrow. I cannot think of a single valid reason for either one to be in the hands of a civilian. One function of the suppressor is to make it harder to locate the shooter. I'm totally fine with that if it's a Marine sniper or a SWAT team member, but if you need a suppresser to kill prairie dogs, work on hitting with your first shot.

Okay, I really gotta go do the yard.

Keep it civil in here, huh?
 
#2,308
#2,308
GreyWolf1129 said:
Agreed. If you are a responsible gun owner, there's no reason to oppose UBC's, or even registration. If that's a mechanism for seizure down the road, then we'll fight that battle when we get there.

Suppressors and bump-stocks. Outlawed tomorrow. I cannot think of a single valid reason for either one to be in the hands of a civilian. One function of the suppressor is to make it harder to locate the shooter. I'm totally fine with that if it's a Marine sniper or a SWAT team member, but if you need a suppresser to kill prairie dogs, work on hitting with your first shot.

Okay, I really gotta go do the yard.

Keep it civil in here, huh?
Click to expand...

Lmao!! Hell no.
 
#2,309
#2,309
GreyWolf1129 said:
Agreed. If you are a responsible gun owner, there's no reason to oppose UBC's, or even registration. If that's a mechanism for seizure down the road, then we'll fight that battle when we get there.

Suppressors and bump-stocks. Outlawed tomorrow. I cannot think of a single valid reason for either one to be in the hands of a civilian. One function of the suppressor is to make it harder to locate the shooter. I'm totally fine with that if it's a Marine sniper or a SWAT team member, but if you need a suppresser to kill prairie dogs, work on hitting with your first shot.

Okay, I really gotta go do the yard.

Keep it civil in here, huh?
Click to expand...

How about no on the suppressors.

WTF are they regulated to begin with?

Bump fire stocks are ignorant and I could care less either way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,310
#2,310
zeppelin128 said:
We surrendered enough liberties with the Patriot Act.

If we go down this road it will spiral. We can not continue to militarize our cops, schools, etc. if we expect to retain any sense of personal freedom. When you give power, they don't give it back.

Israel should never be a model for the US.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I stated my position; you stated yours.

How many is too many? I'm already there. I guess you're not.

Yard, yard, yard, yard......
 
#2,311
#2,311
GreyWolf1129 said:
Agreed. If you are a responsible gun owner, there's no reason to oppose UBC's, or even registration. If that's a mechanism for seizure down the road, then we'll fight that battle when we get there.

Suppressors and bump-stocks. Outlawed tomorrow. I cannot think of a single valid reason for either one to be in the hands of a civilian. One function of the suppressor is to make it harder to locate the shooter. I'm totally fine with that if it's a Marine sniper or a SWAT team member, but if you need a suppresser to kill prairie dogs, work on hitting with your first shot.

Okay, I really gotta go do the yard.

Keep it civil in here, huh?
Click to expand...
You can shove that valid reason for a civilian use.

This rings a little like the ole refrain, if you ain’t got nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about bs.





Edit
So I overreacted at first.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,312
#2,312
Grand Vol said:
That's what I'm talking about.

Person to person via a dealer.
Click to expand...

Make sure LG knows the requirements a dealer must adhere to in order to LEGALLY transfer a firearm between private citizens so he just doesn’t throw turds.

Which is, correct me if I’m wrong, the same criteria a citizen must meet in order to take possession at the initial firearm sale.

Edit: and this is the EXACT method I used when I took possession of my Browning O/U in an Internet purchase.
 
Last edited:
#2,314
#2,314
Why does the fed need to know how many and what weapons I own?

It’s none of their business if I have a couple Ruger 22’s... browning A-5 etc...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,316
#2,316
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Absolutely not on the universal background checks. If I want to sell a firearm, I’ll sell it to who I damn well please. No background check required.

A case can be made that universal bgc will lead to a massive registration database. As we all know, registration leads to confiscation.
Click to expand...

You mean like how they have confiscated our cars?

Also, UBC does not have to be attached to any specific weapon. Get one done and it's valid for a year. Update when necessary.
 
#2,317
#2,317
GreyWolf1129 said:
Agreed. If you are a responsible gun owner, there's no reason to oppose UBC's, or even registration. If that's a mechanism for seizure down the road, then we'll fight that battle when we get there.

Suppressors and bump-stocks. Outlawed tomorrow. I cannot think of a single valid reason for either one to be in the hands of a civilian. One function of the suppressor is to make it harder to locate the shooter. I'm totally fine with that if it's a Marine sniper or a SWAT team member, but if you need a suppresser to kill prairie dogs, work on hitting with your first shot.

Okay, I really gotta go do the yard.

Keep it civil in here, huh?
Click to expand...

When’s the last time a crime was committed with a suppressor? Europe mandates them for hunting in many places to keep from bothering neighbors. I’m sure the subdivisions that have popped up around our rifle club would love for silencers to be more available. I don’t know that I would get one but I don’t understand the irrational fear of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,319
#2,319
Grand Vol said:
How about no on the suppressors.

WTF are they regulated to begin with?

Bump fire stocks are ignorant and I could care less either way.
Click to expand...

I do not know what the hell the BATF reviewers were thinking upon initial classification of the slide fire stock category. WTF?!😳
 
#2,320
#2,320
ClearwaterVol said:
You mean like how they have confiscated our cars?

Also, UBC does not have to be attached to any specific weapon. Get one done and it's valid for a year. Update when necessary.
Click to expand...

Why would they confiscate your car? They get sales tax, titling/registration fees, emissions fees, gas tax, etc. They’re a goldmine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,321
#2,321
Obsessed said:
Why does the fed need to know how many and what weapons I own?

It’s none of their business if I have a couple Ruger 22’s... browning A-5 etc...
Click to expand...

Can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with you.

Someone mentioned a yearly updated UBC that isn't tied to what you purchase. Might be something to that.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top