NEW BILL WOULD REQUIRE GUN OWNERS TO GET 5 YEAR FEDERAL LICENSE

[BuckeyeSteve]

...and you call us "uneducated".

Who, specifically, did I call uneducated? I repeat my point to the last ahole that jumped on me for being self-aware and open to new information. Apparently the thing to do here is to claim complete knowledge of every subject, and be absolutely closed off to any possibility you could ever learn anything new. I'll keep that in mind.

[streaker69]

I understand that... This site was probably too far right wing for my post -- I didn't think that centrist shit from me was going to start an avalanche of crazy, or I would have kept it to myself. I assure you though, I'm not a troll.... for all the shit here implying I'm not what I say, I can go in my basement and take the pictures to prove it. I'm just one of those weird centrist type of people who apparently are lumped in with the socialists now. You didn't say this....your reply was less hatefilled than most, I'm just lumping this in to minimize my replies -- but for all the second amendment crap people posted -- there is more to the constitution than the second amendment, and I bet 98% of people who reply with that crap love to talk about the constitution but have never actually read it. This is a common thing of the uneducated right wing.... cite things based on what you want them to say instead of what they actually say (now bring on the quotes of people who can copy and paste small pieces of the second amendment to back up my point).

Who, specifically, did I call uneducated? I repeat my point to the last ahole that jumped on me for being self-aware and open to new information. Apparently the thing to do here is to claim complete knowledge of every subject, and be absolutely closed off to any possibility you could ever learn anything new. I'll keep that in mind.

Who were you talking about if you weren't talking about the people on this forum? Oh, I guess in your mind it's ok if you just speak in generalities.

[BuckeyeSteve]

The gunshow loophole is a fiction. It is a false name given to a non problem by those that support universal background checks and registration.

I attempted to be open to this possibility above, prior to pointless attack #47 and #48 (or so).... but aside from saying it's not a problem -- is there any law that mandates someone who is a non-FFL and is selling multiple AR's at a gunshow to background check the person they are selling them too? I'm seriously asking...is it not a problem because you (and other's here) don't see it as a problem that it happens, or is it not a problem because there is a law keeping it from happening. To my understanding, there is no law, and it does commonly happen. I'm trying to be optimistically open minded to finding out that I'm wrong -- but I get attacked instead of informed, which is generally not that helpful.

[Ecclectic Collector]

Jeez guys, can we lighten the tone a bit?

OP has admitted he is still learning. A lot of us on this forum are very well educated, while some of the folks here are plain old blue collar types. We are all here due to our interest in firearms and shooting sports in general.

We have a violence problem in our country. The democratic party has decided that they can score points by blaming the gun, and legal gun owners are set to take the fall. Some of us are old enough to know just how tortured the history of gun control is in this country and how "one more law" won't work if the current ones are not enforced. Going the socialist route where we give up our rights enumerated in the Bill Of Rights just isn't gonna cut it with our history and culture.

We are not the UK, not Australia, or China where the ruling elite can simply ram through legislation. What works there (or doesn't) isn't something that we can simply copy and paste from somewhere else.

Compliance is a whole difference question and its a big one. I for one don't want to turned into a criminal by the stroke of a pen. It is a real possibility with some of the proposals being proposed. It concerns me very much.

[57springer]

I attempted to be open to this possibility above, prior to pointless attack #47 and #48 (or so).... but aside from saying it's not a problem -- is there any law that mandates someone who is a non-FFL and is selling multiple AR's at a gunshow to background check the person they are selling them too? I'm seriously asking...is it not a problem because you (and other's here) don't see it as a problem that it happens, or is it not a problem because there is a law keeping it from happening. To my understanding, there is no law, and it does commonly happen. I'm trying to be optimistically open minded to finding out that I'm wrong -- but I get attacked instead of informed, which is generally not that helpful.

There is no background check on private sales . Without complete gun registration it wont work .

[BuckeyeSteve]

Who were you talking about if you weren't talking about the people on this forum? Oh, I guess in your mind it's ok if you just speak in generalities.

Correct.... I was clearly speaking in generalities to include both people on and off of this site who love to quote second amendment shit and talk about the constitution, when in fact they know little about it. I didn't say anyone specific, I said (I believe without scrolling up) 98%.... because that is my "guess" to the amount of the American public that has any in depth understanding of the Constitution. I think it is more than safe to say that a lot of people like to talk about sticking to the constitution when they believe it serves their purpose, but most don't really know much about it. Some (my random guess of 2%) absolutely do know about it, and those people argue intelligently different sides of issues. That's why there are constitutional scholars and lawyers.... If it was all cut and dry and every issue was clear, those professions wouldn't exist.

[BuckeyeSteve]

Jeez guys, can we lighten the tone a bit?

OP has admitted he is still learning. A lot of us on this forum are very well educated, while some of the folks here are plain old blue collar types. We are all here due to our interest in firearms and shooting sports in general.

We have a violence problem in our country. The democratic party has decided that they can score points by blaming the gun, and legal gun owners are set to take the fall. Some of us are old enough to know just how tortured the history of gun control is in this country and how "one more law" won't work if the current ones are not enforced. Going the socialist route where we give up our rights enumerated in the Bill Of Rights just isn't gonna cut it with our history and culture.

We are not the UK, not Australia, or China where the ruling majority can simply ram through legislation. What works there (or doesn't) isn't something that we can simply copy and paste from somewhere else.

Compliance is a whole difference question and its a big one. I for one don't want to turned into a criminal by the stroke of a pen. It is a real possibility with some of the proposals being flouted. It concerns me very much.

Thank you, and well said. Like I said.... I didn't realize I was opening this can of worms. I'm a gun owner and sportsman, and wasn't here to fight or get attacked as a liberal.

[gghbi]

And that's what a dick looks like..... I didn't spout nonsense.... I admitted I'm open minded and don't know everything about every subject. These are two different things. Because I haven't heard a single thing supporting the side of there not really being a loophole (aside from one non-dickish comment telling me there isn't one), I will for now maintain my belief that it's not imaginary and non-FFL holders can sell guns at gunshows without a background check. If someone ever shows me that's not the case...awesome. Otherwise, I stand by my brilliant counterpoint above that the NRA would support Osama fucking Bin Laden buying guns if a mfg could sell them to him. But hey....when you're wrong and don't have anything....just say something dickish, right?

Big IF! There are occasions where long guns can be sold person to person, not so for firearms (primarily pistols) as defined in PA law which require a FFL transfer, but it is Federal law that it is illegal to sell to a prohibited person in any case, in any state, with or without a background check. Most gun show promoters require background checks as a condition of participation.

If a bad guy wants a gun, there are illegal sellers out there. In Australia which has pretty much banned semi-auto guns, the big problem they have with illegal guns is biker gangs bringing in real full auto AKs from overseas. Lots of old true weapons of war out there for the highest bidder if you are so inclined. The drug cartels that import drugs will also import guns, if they were made illegal here.

See this: https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/n...secret-library

The real problem is why do folks have the mindset that shooting people is an acceptable way to go thru life? Not the way I was brought up. Popping a cap because that dude dissed me is not a mark of civilized society.

[abner13]

I get a federal license to buy guns every 3 years for $30 now.

[Hodgie]

I get a federal license to buy guns every 3 years for $30 now.

Same here. It should apply to all guns as far as I’m concerned. The Colt SP1 made in 67-69 years is now eligible so what the F is the difference?

This link below is exactly why more gun control, background checks and universal registrations won’t ever work. Regardless if the law it will only apply to the law abiding and specific demographics that are deemed a threat to the future government.

http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=351857

I have young children in school, I worry about them too. I come from a law enforcement family both state and federal and I can tell you our troubles are not because of firearms or access to them they are deep rooted issues that have to do with our society and social behaviors. China has the same issues going on only difference is children are being hacked and stabbed to death instead of shot. Their government recognizes an issue with younger people especially males between 15 and 22 years old. They can’t blame the gun so they are actually trying to address the issue at hand. You can treat the symptom all you want but you will never solve the sickness if you don’t find the true cause.

Examples of school mass murders with no firearms.

September 2019 8 children killed
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox...ool-attack.amp

2010 8 children killed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/w...a/13china.html

2013 33 dead 130 injured by knife welding men.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbc.../amp/ncna41966

2018 19 attacked 7 children dead.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ind...516.html%3famp

July 2019 Japanese man burned down building killing 33 in mass attack.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs...pan-killing-23

One last point before I rap this one up. If you look at a lot of the mass shooting cases here in America once the investigations are over which can take up to a year, and the MSM has moved on to something else you will see that many of them could have and should have been prevented but because of local or federal government failure in some cases the police force these people went un-investigated and were free to do what they did. The boy who did the Parkland shooting should have been arrested and committed months before when he was still in highschool, however because of a piss poor sheriffs dpt, and a terribly run child services and poor federal laws encouraging funds for NOT removing minorities from school even when they are a potential danger he was ignored. Then his disgusting actions become the fault of a rifle, the NRA and the law abiding all scapegoats for government failure to protect the people.