Hide your guns

[fest3er]

Do you like your guns and would rather a hostile government can't find them too easily?



I had a nasty thought last evening. The next time a bunch of you gun owners get together, set down in a circle and sell your guns to the guys to your left for a dollar, and buy the guns from the guy on your right for a dollar. Write up a sales receipt for each transaction. Repeat until you have your original guns back.



Now go home, lock up your guns and keep the first sales record handy. Put all the other transaction records elsewhere (like in a different safe).



When the tyrants come looking for your registered guns, show them the receipt that says you sold them. If nothing else, it'll give you time to prepare for war.



25 participants are good, 100 are even better. Better is if the participants are scattered about the country. Best is if the participants are somewhat mobile and tend to move every couple years.



I can't think of any reason this would not be legal. Money is changing hands, possession is changing hands, and the transactions are between pairs of individuals.



Oh, wait. Maybe you have to be a licensed dealer to handle more than a certain number of transactions per day/week/month/year?



Darn. Well, it *sounded* like fine obfuscation!



Fest3er

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

I had my first gun at about 10 years of age - an old single shot . 22... While in high school, sometimes a friend and I would both take our . 22 rifles to school so we could stop by the shooting range on the way home after school for some target practice. Rifles and shotguns were a COMMON sight in rear pickup window racks...



Can you imagine any of that happening TODAY?

Can you imagine the laughter or ridicule 50 short years ago if you tried to describe what's happening today?



No kids ran for their guns when angered at school.

No drivers grabbed that shotgun or rifle over a freeway incident.



Are guns more "vicious" now than before?

Are CARS or roads more "evil" and "abusive" than earlier years?



OR, is it PEOPLE and our society that have changed?



IF so, WHY are we blaming THINGS, instead of trying to deal with the REAL problem? YEAH, I know - it's always easier to pass a new overnight "feel good" law than it is to take the longer, more intelligent path to actually FIX the basic problems in our society...



I feel like a helpless passenger on a large boat, watching incredulously as most OTHER passengers drill holes in the hull and laugh as they enjoy the cool spray of water that results. THEY think their actions are making things fun and better - but *I* see they are sinking the boat - that's fine for THEM if that's what THEY want - but they are taking ME and MY family WITH them in their stupidity...



Fact is, this "boat" we call the USA is ALREADY dead and sinking - there's too FEW of us left to change what is most certainly going to soon be the result - the BEST thing we can do is warn as many as possible, and find our own individual "lifeboats" to keep us safe as the "boat" goes under...



Bon Voyage...

 

[The patriot]

I dont think this would work in NJ. Every transfer must have paper on it. ESPECIALLY pistols.



As far as our nation going down... I think it has a lot to do with prayer in school(please no flames, I dont even go to Church), and in general a lack of self responsibility. Everything is always someone else's fault. (lets not insult anyone by telling them theyre wrong )

IMO, what one parent can do, two can do better. My . 02

Eric

 

[chuck3]

AMEN Gary.

 

[EMDDIESEL]

I seriously doubt it will ever get to the point where they will be coming to our homes and taking our guns. Highly unlikley. But i am all for serious background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

And can ANYONE come up with a loigical reason for what the big deal is with limiting mags to 10 rounds? I have a lot of guns, i collect them, i am also in the military. But i cant see any reason why anybody BUT the military and law enforcement agencies should have accsess to high capacity mags. If you cant hit somebody with 10 rounds of ammo, you should not own a gun. And if you are being attacked by more then 10 people at once, you have more serious problems to worry about. I have NEVER heard of a civilian being attacked by a dozen people at once. When was the last time you had more then 10 people break into your home at once?. I can think of SEVERAL occasions where police and civillians were killed because the "Bad Guys" had 30 round (or more) mags. Why is the NRA wasting its time fighting this? And why are they against background checks?.

I go to shooting ranges all the time and it is SCARY to see how stupid some people are with guns, they have no idea what gun safety is. A few years ago i was at a skeet range and the guy next to me lowered his shotgun and accidently shot the ground right next to my foot. A gun safety class should be mandatory too before you are allowed to buy a gun. Sorry to ramble, i am just disgusted with the NRA

 

[Ethdee]

EMDDiesel, the problem is that it's incremental. First it's 50-round magazines. Then 11+ round magazines. Do you think any of the anti-gun groups are going to say, "Okay, we've done enough. Let's disband. "?



You have to draw a line somewhere. Might as well start at the second amendment.



Jim

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

EMDDiesel sez:



"I seriously doubt it will ever get to the point where they will be coming to our homes and taking our guns. Highly unlikley. "



Funny - they thought the same thing in Germany - and more recently, Australia and Canada... THEY were wrong too...





"But i am all for serious background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. "



Yeah - as tho' MORE laws and regulations will affect criminals who ALREADY ignore the law - get serious!



"And can ANYONE come up with a loigical reason for what the big deal is with limiting mags to 10 rounds?"



So why do YOU need a truck as powerful as a diesel? Do you have MORE than one car? Why? Do you own more than one pair of shoes? WHY?



If you can't haul as much as you NEED in a single vehicle, YOU have too much stuff!



Who the heII am *I* to try to DICTATE to others what THEY "need"? Who the heII are YOU to tell ME what sort of guns *I* "need" or should be allowed? THAT is EXACTLY what the second amendment is ABOUT - PREVENTING one person's intrusion into the Constitutional RIGHTS of others!



And it ISN'T all about guns, they are merely a SYMPTOM of a much LARGER problem - it's about a runaway, out of control, dictatorial government that KNOWS it's become too abusive and intrusive into the lives of its citizens, KNOWS it will soon become even MORE intrusive - and wants to remove as MUCH ability for that society to physically resist as possible! It's NOT about caring "for the children", it's about fearful politicians lacking trust in the citizens they are SUPPOSED to be "serving", and FAR more interesten in protecting THEIR OWN a$$e$ than they are ANYONE elses - just as has happened so many OTHER times and places - but WE never learn, do we!



"Those who fail to LEARN from history, are BOUND to repeat it"



Keep your eyes wide open, there's LOTS of "repeating" much closer than most realize...

 

[midnight1black]

IT IS TO BAD THEY TRY TO MAKE ALL THESE NEW LAWS

ABOUT GUN CONTROL JUST INFORCE THE LAWS AREADY

ON THE BOOKS. P. S. I CARRY ONE ALL THE TIME

 

[merryman]

KJ6Q;

You said it well; govt, has run wild and many to the left, think it hasn't gone far enough. Its scary. EMDIESEL, throughout history, dictatorial govts. have started slowly. Read about the early Hitller moves. At first he was just going to limit firearms too! They ALLWAYS, soon have just a few MORE restrictions that are reasonble, and needed for our protection-----then just a few more,etc,etc, etc, It becomes harder to resist the further it goes We did not resist enough in the past.



Vaughn

 

[drawson]

You guys have hearts that beat to the same beat as mine.



I've always said that they can have my guns when they pry them from my dead hand.



My oldest did a paper on gun control and it failure for a class this year in JR high and the teacher didn't like it and gave him a D. I went in a raized a big stink and the principle rear the paper and awarded him an A+. There still is alittle justice left let's try to bring the one around us to the light.



GUN CONTROL IS HITTING WHAT YOUR SHOOTING AT!!!!!!

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by EMDDIESEL

I seriously doubt it will ever get to the point where they will be coming to our homes and taking our guns. Highly unlikley. But i am all for serious background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

And can ANYONE come up with a loigical reason for what the big deal is with limiting mags to 10 rounds? I have a lot of guns, i collect them, i am also in the military. But i cant see any reason why anybody BUT the military and law enforcement agencies should have accsess to high capacity mags. If you cant hit somebody with 10 rounds of ammo, you should not own a gun. And if you are being attacked by more then 10 people at once, you have more serious problems to worry about. I have NEVER heard of a civilian being attacked by a dozen people at once. When was the last time you had more then 10 people break into your home at once?. I can think of SEVERAL occasions where police and civillians were killed because the "Bad Guys" had 30 round (or more) mags. Why is the NRA wasting its time fighting this? And why are they against background checks?.

I go to shooting ranges all the time and it is SCARY to see how stupid some people are with guns, they have no idea what gun safety is. A few years ago i was at a skeet range and the guy next to me lowered his shotgun and accidently shot the ground right next to my foot. A gun safety class should be mandatory too before you are allowed to buy a gun. Sorry to ramble, i am just disgusted with the NRA

Can you explain to me, using good, intellectually sound logic (not emotion, just cold reason) WHY limiting the rounds law-abiding people can carry in a magazine or clip should be done?



I'm sure you can't. There is no rational reason to do so. This is supposed to be a country founded upon a single, all encompassing princple - liberty. LIberty - the concept that the individual is free to do anything and everything, so long as it does not endanger another directy, or cause harm or loss. I can own 3000 guns, and have clips with 4000 bullets in every one. It's not going to be any danger to anyone. Regulating ME has no effect on safety... . It only limits MY freedom, and at the same time has ABSOLUTELY NO beneficial effects. Law-abiding people don't kill or otherwise shoot others en masse. Those who do such things are law-breaking, by definition, and therefore have no obligation to carry only the smaller clips.



These types of regulation are like saying that cocaine is illegal, but we need laws to regulate the purity and handling of the illegal cocaine as well. I mean, we need to protect people from polluted cocaine, right?



Still, people like you claim we have to protect people from the rage of the determined killer, by make sure his knife is shorter, his guns shoot less bullets, and his lead pipe will bend into uselessness over the head of his first victim. No mention of putting the miscreant in jail away from us or making sure he gets caught, or his intended victim having the means of defending himself, no we can't do that, we have to write laws that have NO practical value, but sound good to the unthinking, restricting the freedom of the law-abiding - all in the name of the law abiding NOT NEEDING that freedom?



Since when is freedom to be given out only AS NEEDED? Who determines what freedoms I <b><I> need </I> </b> and what ones I don't? And what rationale is there for saying that only the freedoms that EVERYONE agrees on are to be allowed?



I mean, why do you drive that big huge diesel pickup? I feel threatened by it in my Omni. I think your dangerous vehicle should be banned. It should be confiscated, as a danger to society, and you be compensated with a nice ribbon that says "I was a danger, but I've been reformed". You owe money or invested $55,000 in it? Well, it's not my fault you invested money in something dangerous looking. I have a right to not have people like you drive big trucks like that. They make me feel threatened, just knowing you could be around the next corner and smash into me.



For that matter, HOW DARE you drive that big, noisy, obnoxious and dangerous thing? Do you not care about safety and children? Your selfish wishes are a danger to me and my family. It's people like you that have made this country so dangerous and expensive to live in. And, all we need to do is just pass a simple law and the problem is solved. I mean, you can travel in a bus or car, I'm not restricting your freedom any, right?

 

[The patriot]

Originally posted by EMDDIESEL

I seriously doubt it will ever get to the point where they will be coming to our homes and taking our guns. Highly unlikley. But i am all for serious background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.



>I think the current NICS would be a good system... . only if they didnt keep records of people being checked. That WAS the way the law was written!! I dont want outlaws having guns either, but they do, and do you think theyre doing the background checks??



And can ANYONE come up with a loigical reason for what the big deal is with limiting mags to 10 rounds? I have a lot of guns, i collect them, i am also in the military. But i cant see any reason why anybody BUT the military and law enforcement agencies should have accsess to high capacity mags.



>Well, because I want one. The second amendment SHOULD NOT BE NEGOTIATED WITH!!! If you negotiate with a right, it is no longer a right, it's a previlage.



If you cant hit somebody with 10 rounds of ammo, you should not own a gun. And if you are being attacked by more then 10 people at once, you have more serious problems to worry about. I have NEVER heard of a civilian being attacked by a dozen people at once.



>You've missed the point.



When was the last time you had more then 10 people break into your home at once?. I can think of SEVERAL occasions where police and civillians were killed because the "Bad Guys" had 30 round (or more) mags. Why is the NRA wasting its time fighting this? And why are they against background checks?.



>See above. Theyre keeping records for a reason. Study youre history.



I go to shooting ranges all the time and it is SCARY to see how stupid some people are with guns, they have no idea what gun safety is. A few years ago i was at a skeet range and the guy next to me lowered his shotgun and accidently shot the ground right next to my foot. A gun safety class should be mandatory too before you are allowed to buy a gun.



> I agree!!



Sorry to ramble, i am just disgusted with the NRA



>Me too, but because I think they've given way too much!!

Also:

I agree about gun safety. I think it should be tought in school too. We have too many curious kids w/o Mom and Dad home. This could easily branch into a discussion about single family houses, no religion in school,(because it's all a part of a much bigger picture) but I'll spare you.

Eric

 

[RBrush]

Hay Power Wagon



You forgot one thing. What about those "nasty, evil assault vehicles"? After all, don't some of them shift automatically? (HHHMMM, scratching head) food for thought.



Rich

 

[Shovelhead]

The major trouble with all this "feel good" gun law stuff, is where does it end?

When you cook a crab, do you drop it in a pot of boiling water?

NO, if you did it would try to climb out. You place him in warm water then crank the heat slowly, he's cooked before he realizes the heats on.

The liberal gun grabbers, know they can't snatch our guns all at one time so they are content to "crank the heat" a little at a time until we're screwed before we realize it.

Washington D. C. has some of the strictest gun laws in the US,

(a Ruger 10-22 semi-auto is considered a machine gun in D. C. ) and ranks #2 natiowide in gun homicides. GUN LAWS DON"T WORK!





Real gun control is keeping them all in the X ring.

 

[Ramboy]

Gary,

Some more food for thought---All the great empires throughout history, once they have fallen, not one has ever recovered.

Phil

 

[EMDDIESEL]

I by no means was trying to offend anyone. And i think alot of you made some good points, especially about the magazone laws in that if you give an inch, they take a mile. I hate politics, and your right, gun control laws DONT work, if they did, there would be no need for all these assult weapons bans and mag restrictions.



A perfect example of this is i live in CT, which has an "Assult Weapons" ban. What this does is makes several guns that fall into that catergory illegal, but it is so stupid the way it is setup, get this, You cant have AK-47's or AR-15's, But an M14 is fine, and so is a AR-15 as long as it does not have a flash hider or bayonet lug, what the hell? when was the last time someone was bayonet-ed to death? and a flash hider makes a gun more dangerous? muzzle brakes are fine, they are legal, and they IMPROVE YOUR SHOT. In an AR15 less lethal if it has a muzzle brake?. They seem to think that because a gun is called an "Assult weapon" it is more dangerous.

And the most ridiculos thing about Connecticut of all is they DO allow class 3 weapons!. I CANT have an AK-47, AR15, SKS, Street Sweeper, FN/FAL, MAC10, UZI, etc,

BUT i CAN have all the M16's, M79 Grenade Launchers, M60 machine gun, HAND GRENADES, MP5's etc and SILENCERS i want, yes, it is totally LEGAL to have an MP5 with a silencer. These class 3 weapons all fall into a "Collectors" catergory. All you need to do is pay a one time $200. 00 tax to the ATF and register your self as a "Collector" and you can start building your arsenal of military weapons which are FAR more dangerous then a . 223 AR15. Who the hell was smoking crack and came up with this setup?. I think its great that i can own such cool weapons, BUT WHY CANT I HAVE AN AK47? apparently, that is too dangerous.



Bottom line, POLITICIANS ARE stupid and have no clue what they are doing. All i can do is laugh at the stupidity of it. read the new Rolling stone, there is a big article on the next big ban coming. . 50 caliber rifles, they talk about how dangerous they are and how much damage they can cause. It was also noted that there has NEVER been a reported case of a . 50 caliber rifle being used in a crime in US history. Its like they are bored and sit around and think of things to ban.

Again, i am sorry if i ruffled anyones feathers, i know this topic is a MAJOR sensitive issue, almost as much as Pre or Post Thermocouple placement and K&N versus Amsoil air filters. I hope it never comes to banning all guns, but i honestly and truly think it will never get that bad. There are too many people who LIKE guns around to stop that.

 

[Shovelhead]

"Too many people who like guns to stop them?????"







Ask some one from Australia



Since when do politicians ask US what WE really want?



The Golden Rule:

Those who have the gold..... make the rules.

 

[Karl2500]

Lots of people like guns but very few are willing to fight to keep them. There is more outrage over bumper height laws than there is about mag capacity. I agree with the crab analogy the gun grabbers are slowly turning up the heat by attacking the fringes of the issue, i. e. assault weapons, . 50 cal mag capacity flash hiders etc. They are not “on crack” or stupid and they do know what they are doing! The gun grabbers are attacking on many fronts. We just witnessed a success for them right on this post, DIVIDE & CONCOUR, we are all on the same side, but when EMDDIESEL has a problem with fighting the 10 round mag laws, he says he is disgusted with the NRA. And we waste cycles squabbling amongst our selves. Has anyone ever seen Rodham-Clinton, Schumer or McCarthy upset because a gun control law was too strict? The “antis” know all too well that most gun owners are not gun nuts, and are too lazy, misinformed or just too busy with their day to day lives to make a stink about the fringe issues as long as it does not affect their trap, target or deer gun. By the time these folks get organized it will be too late to stop the disarmament. I could go on and on but the fact is most of America is pro-gun with different levels of comfort and knowledge about firearms. While we fight each other over comfort levels the minority is winning its way toward total their goal of civilian disarmament!

 

[NVR FNSH]

Couple of questions/observations: But first step back from the 2nd Amendment 'right to bear arms' mantra & slippery slope arguement for a second.



1. What purpose does a 50 round clip serve? Besides military/para-military use, what reason do you have for the ability to shoot 50 rounds w/o reloading? It's not pratical for hunting or target shooting - except bench supported. I can just see it now - homeowner empties 50 round clip at burgalar - doesn't hit the criminal once, but kills two children sleeping in their rooms. I don't have a need for 50 round clips - you might. What are your needs?



2. Do you really think ANY person should be able to walk into a store and purchase a firearm w/o ANY background check or prior training? I'll be honest with you, I don't really want someone to be able to purchase a firearm on a whim - it should not a spontaneous decision for a first time buyer. Way back when the 2nd Amendment was written guns were much more a part of everyday life. Most people learned to shoot at a young age because it was a necessity (I don't have any stats to back this but I think it is a pretty safe assumption). Todays world does not require people to hunt/kill their own food & this has lead to people not being raised w/guns & the understanding of their purpose or how to use them.



3. Would you support a requirement for firearms training & showing proof of this training to purchase guns if the guns were not licensed/tracked? CA has the Basic Firearms Safety Test - it is a complete joke of a test but at least it something. I'm not sure what's more ridiculous - the BSFT or traffic school.



4. The 'circle-jerk' gun sale is illegal in CA. CA requires ALL firearm transactions to go thru a licensed dealer.



Brian

 

[EMDDIESEL]

My feelings exactly Nvr Fish!! well said