(August 25, 2019 at 6:49 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(August 25, 2019 at 6:41 pm)Fireball Wrote: When purchasing a firearm, the purchaser fills out paperwork that goes to the gov for vetting. This is Federal law. There is a mandatory 2 week wait, and the time is literally kept. If you finalized a purchase of a firearm at 11 AM, you may not get delivery until after 11 AM two weeks later. This delivery is also recorded in a database with a time stamp. If you show up early you stand around until the clock ticks over. Here in California, it was a three-week wait, but the Federal law superseded that a few years ago (don't recall how many years, can't be bothered to look, doesn't matter). The purchaser is further required to take training (can be self-study) and pass a test to get a Firearm Safety Certificate. No pass, no cert, can't have gun. Further, the operation of the firearm is explained to the purchaser, who must sign off that they have been instructed on how to use said firearm prior to delivery. New rules have been instituted for ammunition purchase (California only at this time, but coming for the rest of the states eventually). Every purchaser must be registered in a database with their respective state's Department of Justice. Not registered? Can't buy ammunition. Once registered, every purchase of ammunition is recorded with the State DoJ, complete with the number of rounds purchased. Since my firearm purchases were prior to 2014, I had to do that last registration recently. Those purchases had a 3-week waiting period under the old California law.

Use of Federally controlled substances such as marijuana means one is prohibited from possessing or purchasing firearms or ammunition, whether the states have allowed them to be used or not.

Handed out like candy, eh? Shee-it.

Wow, then that still means we STILL hand out firearms like candy.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

Does anyone really think these same laws, if we go by this post APPLY in Australia or New Zealand?

I SERIOUSLY FUCKING DOUBT IT!

I'll make any American firearm cum guzzling ammo facial porn lover a deal. Get America to the same level of firearm death as say Australia or New Zealand or Japan, then I WILL be happy to shut the fuck up.

---

(August 25, 2019 at 6:44 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: See, all of that makes perfect sense to me.  But Brian seems to think that, even after all of the proper procedures have been gone through, the seller can stop the sale at the last second because he has some sort of a gut feeling about the buyer.

Boru

It isn't a matter of the seller cant stop the sale, it is a matter of far to many sellers assuming a bullshit utopia that "no record" means nothing can go wrong after a legal buy.

If sellers DID give a shit, what they lose in profits they would gain in MORALITY!

Firearms in America today, is not about fighting tyranny, or hunting, but about a fucking greedy industry pitting red and blue states against each other. Firearm sales today are no different then when Nadar told car companies their products sucked. No different than when big tobacco was forced to ditch Joe Camel.

I wish more shop owners would stop a sale..... But they do not.

You are fucking demented, Bryan.

There's "BrianLogic ®" for ya.


He wants to reduce firearm deaths 
- so the FIRST thing he comes up with for a solution.   - is to go after the one class of weapon that is used the LEAST in homicides - rifles.

FBI STATISTICS 
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/201...able-4.xls


Rifles account for HUNDREDS - wheras handguns account for THOUSANDS of deaths per year....(twenty times as many handgun)

And he says " sane people this and sane people that".


Jesus....

Anybody noticed the guy ain' t pulling with both oars?

Brian needs to quit before he has an aneurysm.

(August 25, 2019 at 6:43 pm)chimp3 Wrote:

(August 20, 2019 at 8:19 am)onlinebiker Wrote: I used to think they were a good idea. Taking guns away from a deranged individual sounds good on the face of it - but would it work?

Probably not.

Why not? Very simple.

It depends on the honest cooperation of a deranged individual.

Consider - when the cops go into someone's house to confiscate guns - how do they know when they have them all? Answer - they have to ask - and trust - the deranged individual in question if they have all the guns.

See the problem?

You think that just MAYBE the guy might have a gun - or 30 stashed somewhere?

Think about this - prisoners in maximum security prisons manage to hide weapons. You think a guy who is free can't manage that trick?

Then also consider - might confiscating some of the guy's guns push him over the edge - and send him out on a killing spree?

Nope. You can't make the world safer by taking away a few guns. You can make it somewhat safer by locking people up.

Are you ready to start locking people up without a trial?

These propositions have huge potential for abuse by the state.

And even more by demented neighbors and angry soon to be ex wives.....

---

(August 25, 2019 at 7:53 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Brian needs to quit before he has an aneurysm.

Ever see the movie "Scanners" where their heads blow up?


I suspect it will look a bit like that...

Quote:It isn't a matter of the seller cant stop the sale, it is a matter of far to many sellers assuming a bullshit utopia that "no record" means nothing can go wrong after a legal buy.

Of COURSE things can go wrong after a legal buy, but it's pretty fucking stupid of you to make this an issue.  What may go wrong at some point in the future doesn't justify denying a sale today.  You want better vetting at the point of sale for this reason, but that's impossible.

Quote:I'll make any American firearm cum guzzling ammo facial porn lover a deal. Get America to the same level of firearm death as say Australia or New Zealand or Japan, then I WILL be happy to shut the fuck up.

This is a completely different issue and is fantastically off point.  NZ has one of the higher firearms ownership rates in the developed world - the issue isn't access to firearms, it's a difference in firearms culture.

Boru

(August 25, 2019 at 7:53 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Brian needs to quit before he has an aneurysm.

(August 25, 2019 at 8:08 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: This is a completely different issue and is fantastically off point.  NZ has one of the higher firearms ownership rates in the developed world - the issue isn't access to firearms, it's a difference in firearms culture.

Boru

New Zealand requires a license to buy a gun.  New Zealand has also banned most semi-automatic weapons.  

America requires a background check that takes less than ten minutes unless of course, you're buying from an individual.  In which case, no background check required.  

Also, the estimated civilian firearm rate per 100 people:

US: 120.5
Second place Falkland Islands: 62.1 (Nearly half)
New Zealand (your choice) 26.3
Switzerland (in case its brought up) 27.6

There are more guns than people in the US, the ONLY country in the WORLD to have such a statistic.

(August 26, 2019 at 10:04 am)Divinity Wrote:

(August 25, 2019 at 8:08 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: This is a completely different issue and is fantastically off point.  NZ has one of the higher firearms ownership rates in the developed world - the issue isn't access to firearms, it's a difference in firearms culture.

Boru

New Zealand requires a license to buy a gun.  New Zealand has also banned most semi-automatic weapons.  

America requires a background check that takes less than ten minutes unless of course, you're buying from an individual.  In which case, no background check required.  

Also, the estimated civilian firearm rate per 100 people:

US: 120.5
Second place Falkland Islands: 62.1 (Nearly half)
New Zealand (your choice) 26.3
Switzerland (in case its brought up) 27.6

There are more guns than people in the US, the ONLY country in the WORLD to have such a statistic.

Don't know about the rest of the US, but, "... transfer of ownership of any firearm requires transfer through a licensed California firearms dealer, as defined in Penal Code sections 26700 through 26915, per Penal Code sections 27545 and 28050 et seq."

(August 26, 2019 at 10:04 am)Divinity Wrote:

(August 25, 2019 at 8:08 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: This is a completely different issue and is fantastically off point.  NZ has one of the higher firearms ownership rates in the developed world - the issue isn't access to firearms, it's a difference in firearms culture.

Boru

New Zealand requires a license to buy a gun.  New Zealand has also banned most semi-automatic weapons.  

America requires a background check that takes less than ten minutes unless of course, you're buying from an individual.  In which case, no background check required.  

Also, the estimated civilian firearm rate per 100 people:

US: 120.5
Second place Falkland Islands: 62.1 (Nearly half)
New Zealand (your choice) 26.3
Switzerland (in case its brought up) 27.6

There are more guns than people in the US, the ONLY country in the WORLD to have such a statistic.

If firearm ownership rates were the whole story, then NZ with 25% as many guns in private hands as the US should also have 25% as many gun-related deaths. We have less than 9% as many.

I'm not arguing for loosening restrictions on firearms (just the opposite). I'm pointing out that Brian's notion of stopping gun sales at the point of the sale  is a fatally flawed one.

Boru

(August 26, 2019 at 11:21 am)Fireball Wrote: Don't know about the rest of the US, but, "... transfer of ownership of any firearm requires transfer through a licensed California firearms dealer, as defined in Penal Code sections 26700 through 26915, per Penal Code sections 27545 and 28050 et seq."

That's new since the '80s?