If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   You can "gift" your gun to your felon daughter. Thanks Obama   (latimes.com) divider line 161
    More: Scary, President Obama, assault weapons ban, straw buyer, gun dealers, UCLA School of Law, gun controls, poll taxes, background checks  
•       •       •

1763 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Feb 2013 at 8:59 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



161 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-18 08:41:56 AM
This is what we get for electing a gun-toting yahoo who murders innocent skeets like you or I would swat a fly.
 
2013-02-18 08:47:12 AM
Typical bending over to the Republican demands by the pacifist appeaser-in-chief.
 
2013-02-18 09:04:26 AM
No worries, the gun lobby has now shifted to "there are no loopholes" in background checks. It's all a mass delusion.
 
2013-02-18 09:09:52 AM

hinten: Typical bending over to the Republican demands by the pacifist appeaser-in-chief.


Yup.  Consistently caving in to Republicans, who hate him no matter what and blame him for everything, only serves to disappoint his supporters.

FTA:  [In a bow to the gun lobby, Obama has endorsed an exception to universal background checks for transfers of firearms within families.... In studies of prison inmates, nearly 35% obtained their guns from friends and family members - the largest single source of criminals' guns.  ]


The whole point of gun reform at a point where the current special-interest-controlled laws are not working is NOT bowing to the very same people whose AGENDA it is to prevent significant change.  And in this case, there's a capitulation on a significant source of guns used in crimes, and an enormous loophole.

This is even more convincing evidence that Obama is just trying to pay lip service to gun reform.
 
2013-02-18 09:11:25 AM
No, background check or not gifting a gun to a felon is a crime.  A crime for them to accept it and a crime for you to give them a gun if you know they're a felon.
 
2013-02-18 09:15:03 AM

jbuist: No, background check or not gifting a gun to a felon is a crime.  A crime for them to accept it and a crime for you to give them a gun if you know they're a felon.


And how exactly could that be enforced?
 
2013-02-18 09:15:50 AM

Lost Thought 00: jbuist: No, background check or not gifting a gun to a felon is a crime.  A crime for them to accept it and a crime for you to give them a gun if you know they're a felon.

And how exactly could that be enforced?


The same way it's always been enforced! That is, not at all.
 
2013-02-18 09:18:54 AM
I'm no expert (so please feel free to correct) but this appears to have existed  long before in California, not something the president just created as the submitter is implying. Unless the LA Times is implying this has currently been  extended to federal? Or is the article saying that this loophole in CA needs to end?
 
2013-02-18 09:22:15 AM
VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.
 
2013-02-18 09:23:10 AM

hinten: VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.


That's the first step to confiscating all guns and furthermore,
 
2013-02-18 09:23:58 AM
Transfer to a known felon is a crime, so if you did not know your child has a felony conviction you fail as a parrent.
 
2013-02-18 09:28:38 AM
I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.
 
2013-02-18 09:29:58 AM

qorkfiend: hinten: VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.

That's the first step to confiscating all guns and furthermore,


Yeah, like they obviously intend to confiscate all automobiles. And all medical transplants.
 
2013-02-18 09:30:05 AM

hinten: VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.


Firearms are already marked with a serial number.
 
2013-02-18 09:30:30 AM

qorkfiend: hinten: VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.

That's the first step to confiscating all guns and furthermore,


Licensing gun dealers and charging VAT on every arm transaction is the first step to confiscating all guns and furthermore.
 
2013-02-18 09:31:26 AM

mksmith: qorkfiend: hinten: VIN numbers for guns. GIN for every weapon and 100% tracking of all, at all times, forever. No infringement at all.

That's the first step to confiscating all guns and furthermore,

Yeah, like they obviously intend to confiscate all automobiles. And all medical transplants.


To provide fair consideration: firearm confiscation efforts have demonstrably occurred in the past. I am unaware of any previous confiscation efforts for automobiles or medical transplants.
 
2013-02-18 09:32:41 AM
For non violent felons, there should be an expeditious process to recover those alienable 2nd amendment rights.

Live right and avoid problems for 10 years? Prove your contributing to society?

Then your alienable 2nd amendment rights are automagically restored.

Non violent offenders only I s'pose. No history of assault, domestic abuse or other violence.
 
2013-02-18 09:40:10 AM

Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.


Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.
 
2013-02-18 09:42:41 AM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.

Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.


All of those are not in the constitution.  How about we institute a $35 charge on voter registration or charged at the polls?
 
2013-02-18 09:43:27 AM
Um, this is the situation NOW. Obama is not creating this. What the White House is suggesting is better than what we have now, but it needs to be better still. Like many of the Obama things, it's merely a step in the right direction, but I will fully support any Republican who steps forward and demands closing the loophole for giving guns to family members. I will wait right here while that happens, okay?

tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-18 10:00:58 AM

Saiga410: Transfer to a known felon is a crime, so if you did not know your child has a felony conviction you fail as a parrent.


I'm sure adding another law will prevent someone from doing this.

/The people clamoring for this probably do think it'll help.  The politicians pushing for this just want a back door registry so they can know who owns the guns
//I believe the Soviets referred to them as "usefully idiots"
 
2013-02-18 10:02:05 AM

Lost Thought 00: jbuist: No, background check or not gifting a gun to a felon is a crime.  A crime for them to accept it and a crime for you to give them a gun if you know they're a felon.

And how exactly could that be enforced?


If the felon is caught with the gun, both people go to jail or get in whatever trouble.  This is how the background check rules are enforced, too, stop going all Nirvana fallacy on us.

It's also how the possession of banned guns is enforced (they have to do something that gets them caught), so even if you're in favor of completely banning firearms this is still a stupid place to put the bar for effectiveness.
 
2013-02-18 10:02:09 AM

Saiga410: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.

Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.

All of those are not in the constitution.  How about we institute a $35 charge on voter registration or charged at the polls?


It's not really the same. The background check fee is charged to the seller, not the buyer, so they're not being directly taxed (technically different, which is the best kind). Also, it applies to gun sales/purchases. You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.
 
2013-02-18 10:06:32 AM

Jim_Callahan: It's also how the possession of banned guns is enforced (they have to do something that gets them caught), so even if you're in favor of completely banning firearms this is still a stupid place to put the bar for effectiveness.


First, if I'm selling an illegal firearm I'm not going to goto a dealer for a background check.  Second, "banned guns" is part of the reason I don't support this measure.
 
2013-02-18 10:10:04 AM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.


Actually, I believe the ATF would want to have a word with you.
 
2013-02-18 10:11:54 AM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.

Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.

All of those are not in the constitution.  How about we institute a $35 charge on voter registration or charged at the polls?

It's not really the same. The background check fee is charged to the seller, not the buyer, so they're not being directly taxed (technically different, which is the best kind). Also, it applies to gun sales/purchases. You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.


Ah so I see that you would be comfortable with a surtax on abortions then.  Charged to the provider and you are free to attempt it at home if you like.
 
2013-02-18 10:13:51 AM

Saiga410: you are free to attempt it at home if you like.


The fark headlines alone are worth this idea. Stock in coat hangers just went up.
 
2013-02-18 10:18:16 AM
It is a crime to transfer a firearm to a felon.

Also that 40% don't go through background checks statistic came from a survey done in 96 or 97, about 2 years after background checks were initiated in 94 IIRC. So if you bought your firearm in 1992 odds are you didn't go thorugh a background check but it was still a felony to not be honest on the 4473 back then.
 
2013-02-18 10:19:25 AM
I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"
 
2013-02-18 10:21:45 AM

lordjupiter: In studies of prison inmates, nearly 35% obtained their guns from friends and family members


Straw purchase.  The family member did go through a background check because the person who will ultimately take possession of the firearm couldn't pass a background check.


How do they prevent booze from getting in the hands of those under 21 when someone else buys it for the minor?

Should we give serial numbers to all the alchohol containers and track their use because alchohol deaths far outweigh the number of firearm deaths.
 
2013-02-18 10:22:01 AM

Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"


Would firearm insurance cover the cost of repairs to my firearm should it be damaged through improper usage?
 
2013-02-18 10:22:36 AM

MichiganFTL: Eddie Adams from Torrance: You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.

Actually, I believe the ATF would want to have a word with you.


It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf
 
2013-02-18 10:23:59 AM

lordjupiter: hinten: Typical bending over to the Republican demands by the pacifist appeaser-in-chief.

Yup.  Consistently caving in to Republicans, who hate him no matter what and blame him for everything, only serves to disappoint his supporters.

FTA:  [In a bow to the gun lobby, Obama has endorsed an exception to universal background checks for transfers of firearms within families.... In studies of prison inmates, nearly 35% obtained their guns from friends and family members - the largest single source of criminals' guns.  ]


The whole point of gun reform at a point where the current special-interest-controlled laws are not working is NOT bowing to the very same people whose AGENDA it is to prevent significant change.  And in this case, there's a capitulation on a significant source of guns used in crimes, and an enormous loophole.

This is even more convincing evidence that Obama is just trying to pay lip service to gun reform.


Bullshiat

Did you even read the sentence you quoted?

FTFA:nearly 35% obtained their guns from friends and family members

So after removing FRIENDS and guns stolen from family members what are you left with 5%?  Surely less than 10%.
 
2013-02-18 10:25:33 AM

Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"


I think we should force insurance on firearms owners....turn firearm crime into a civil matter rather than a criminal one.

You sir are genius!
 
2013-02-18 10:26:15 AM
The 'charging for background check = poll tax' logic is like a bag of hammers dropped on my head.
 
2013-02-18 10:26:24 AM

Fubini: MichiganFTL: Eddie Adams from Torrance: You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.

Actually, I believe the ATF would want to have a word with you.

It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf


Manufacture of most federally restricted weaponry is permitted (excepting fully automatic firearms), but doing so requires explicit approval from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the resulting product must be registered with the National Firearms Act registry.

Converting a standard rifle into a "short-barreled" rifle is, legally, the creation of a new firearm and is legally doable by obtaining permission to create a short-barreled rifle.

/Considering converting my shotgun into a short-barreled firearm.
//Maybe next year.
///Already spent too much money buying a silencer.
 
2013-02-18 10:26:27 AM

Fubini: It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf


Hmm... Nice. I guess it would have to be this way now that I think about it with all of the stripped lowers and uppers people sell. Time to get going on that M41A Pulse Rifle.
 
2013-02-18 10:30:06 AM

Fubini: MichiganFTL: Eddie Adams from Torrance: You're free to make all of the guns you want in the privacy of your own home.

Actually, I believe the ATF would want to have a word with you.

It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf


Yep. I have a buddy that mills his own AR-15 receivers from 80% forgings. He's free to do that all he wants, but he's not allowed to sell them or transfer them.
 
2013-02-18 10:32:57 AM

MichiganFTL: Fubini: It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf

Hmm... Nice. I guess it would have to be this way now that I think about it with all of the stripped lowers and uppers people sell. Time to get going on that M41A Pulse Rifle.


The lower is the serialized portion of the firearm. It is what the ATF considers the rifle on ARs. You still have to go through a background check to purchase it.

On the other hand the ATF considers the upper on my FN-FAL to be the firearm.
 
2013-02-18 10:34:10 AM

MichiganFTL: Fubini: It's entirely legal to make your own guns at home, just don't create restricted classes of weapons (fully-automatic, grenades, silencers, etc.) There are  a few other restrictions you need to know on what kinds of guns are allowed to be manufactured in the US.

Question 9:  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/0501-firearms-top-10-qas.pdf

Hmm... Nice. I guess it would have to be this way now that I think about it with all of the stripped lowers and uppers people sell. Time to get going on that M41A Pulse Rifle.


You're not allowed to sell guns you've manufactured (or, at least you can't manufacture guns for the purpose of selling them... the law is a little grey there) if you do so without a license from the ATF. You can't build your own lower and then sell them to friends, and you can't build a friend's lower for him.
 
2013-02-18 10:34:17 AM

Dimensio: Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"

Would firearm insurance cover the cost of repairs to my firearm should it be damaged through improper usage?


It depends on whether you had collision coverage, yes?
 
2013-02-18 10:35:47 AM

Fubini: and you can't build a friend's lower for him.


Though now that I read that, I don't know how gifting figures into that. I dunno if you could build a lower for a friend and just gift it.
 
2013-02-18 10:36:27 AM

Marcus Aurelius: Dimensio: Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"

Would firearm insurance cover the cost of repairs to my firearm should it be damaged through improper usage?

It depends on whether you had collision coverage, yes?


Do you recommend that I have airbags installed on my Saiga 12?

/It might reduce the bruising.
 
2013-02-18 10:36:33 AM

Saiga410: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.

Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.

All of those are not in the constitution.  How about we institute a $35 charge on voter registration or charged at the polls?


When somebody takes there voter registration and physically uses it to kill a bunch of people or commit other crimes with, then ask that question.
 
2013-02-18 10:37:37 AM
How would gun insurance work, anyway?
 
2013-02-18 10:40:12 AM

Dimensio: Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?
I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?
I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

/yeah, yeah, yeah, the answers are "gun lobby", "gun lobby", and "gun lobby"

Would firearm insurance cover the cost of repairs to my firearm should it be damaged through improper usage?


I imagine the details would be specified in your insurance plan, like all other insurance plans.
 
2013-02-18 10:40:31 AM
dl.dropbox.com
 
2013-02-18 10:46:43 AM

ongbok: Saiga410: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Saiga410: I am not against universal background as long as we take up the authors suggestion of free background checks... though I am a little uncomfortable placing the burden on FFL holders to absorb that cost.

Why should I have to subsidize gun owners? If you can afford a gun, you can afford a $35 background check.
People have to pay for marriage licenses, dog licenses, drivers licenses, building permits etc... should those be free too.

/yes, I know, dog licenses aren't in the Constitution.

All of those are not in the constitution.  How about we institute a $35 charge on voter registration or charged at the polls?

When somebody takes there voter registration and physically uses it to kill a bunch of people or commit other crimes with, then ask that question.


Some would argue voteing for Bush caused 1/2 a million deaths in unnessessary wars.
 
2013-02-18 10:56:11 AM

Marcus Aurelius: I have to register my car.  Why not my guns?


The registration of cars is mostly for taxation purposes, not for public safety.

There is already a national registry of lost and stolen guns maintained by the FBI for use by police.

Several states have required registration for all guns or a subset (e.g. handguns) of guns. There's not really any clear evidence that shows that registration has any notable effect on crime.

Since criminals cannot be compelled to register their guns, it seems that such registration would be unlikely to be effective and would primarily affect non-criminal people.

The Canadians ended up scrapping their registry of "non-restricted" firearms (i.e. rifles and shotguns) because it was a waste of money and had less than 30% compliance. I suspect compliance rates in the US would be similar, if not lower, than the Canadian rates.
 

I have to insure my car.  Why not my guns?

Cars are much more likely to be used to accidentally cause harm to another person than guns.

While one can get general liability insurance, it doesn't cover intentional acts like assaulting someone with a gun (or any other weapon, for that matter).

Criminals, who are already prohibited from owning guns, would be unlikely to get insurance for their illegally-owned weapons.

I need a license to operate my car.  Why not my guns?

You need a license to operate your car on public roads. No license is required if you operate your vehicle on private property and don't use it on public roads. Most states require that you get a license or permit to carry a gun in public, but no license is required to possess or use a gun on private property.
 
2013-02-18 10:57:56 AM
Why not have a finger print lock installed on guns?  Only gun retailers being able to "re-key" it to someone's new prints.
 
Displayed 50 of 161 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report