You're just going to dodge the question so I will stop asking. People on your side of this issue have made politicians, judges, and cash more important than the lives of my children. I would not buy guns or ammo to bring into CA. That is a crime. Its hard to believe you were once in law enforcement.
Pro-gun groups have tried to get NICS open to private sales, but every attempt to do so has been blocked by anti-gun politicians, that really telling of the and game they want UBC's, which are useless without a national gun registry, which can become a database for confiscation of firearms. They want to keep the paper trail complete all they way to the current owner of the firearm, not just the person who bought it to begin with.
Which is at best a dubious claim, in my opinion the OP has posted too much false information about firearms and law to have ever been a LEO.
correct. we would never do that. We would only sell the firearm on "consignment". I don't doubt that there are some that do. Just saying it's not something we did, or any other FFL that I knew of. that was nice of you. I'm sure she will never forget it.
Exposing the true beliefs of a anti-gunner, get a law in place and them use it to create a gun registry.
Then proceed with demonstrating the supposed factelessness of the claim regarding the united state supreme court, and how the law of the united states actually works.
That’s the objective. But, for the left, such an objective represents far more useful tool for them than their stated objective of being able to trace firearms; it represents a list of firearm owners they see as political rivals that they can use harass those of that disagree with their agendas. Don’t think it true? It’s already been attempted using the cover, that people deserve to know who has guns in their neighborhood. https://www.theverge.com/2012/12/25...-posts-map-with-names-addresses-of-gun-owners https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gun-map/ Look behind the left’s stated objectives and you often find ulterior motives in the legislation they think can be slipped by, unnoticed by voters. Think, banning ’assault rifles’ and adding language in the proposed laws referencing ‘semi auto’, ‘magazine’ limits, etc. is about banning ARs and AKs? It is part and parcel to the strategy for preparing the incremental erosion of gun rights; a strategy based on that used by the UK. https://guncite.com/journals/okslip.html Ban a gun class adding in language to prepare for next stage of enlarging banning criteria, normalize acceptance, wash and repeat.
That was tried here in Florida, the Miami Herald sued the Florida Department of State trying to force them into releasing the CCL database under the Sunshine Law, DOS policy was the database was exempt from the Sunshine Law and pushed back. The Florida legislature quashed the suit by putting into law, the database of CCL's is exempt from the Sunshine Law. The Herald's plan was to publish a list of everyone who has a Florida CCL, a list that could be used to target those license holders for any purpose.
Dodge nothing. You asked a question, I answered it, I don’t have a need to own a gun in a densely populated area where law enforcement is hard enough as it is, Obviously, you weren’t or you’d get it. I’m law abiding and I expect others to be as well. You do have a choice. Run for office or move if it means that much to you to have a gun in your hip 24/7. .
Wrong. I answered your “ what’s next ? ”: question. Now you keep asking a question that is irrelevant without context. Your l gotcha questions make little sense. Moving on.
Preventing the use and publishing of gun owner information for nefarious use was to a large extent why Congress Prohibited the creation of a national gun registration system and prohibited a the building of an electronic data base to track specific transactions through the use of the NICS, thus, the gun control advocate leftist have continually sought other means and arguments to bypass the intent of the legislation associated with current law for FFL transfer requirements and the exemptions enumerated for private transfers. They are like the Energizer Bunny...someone needs to remove their battery.
Sure, let’s only give republicans access. Sounds like a un constitutional provision the gop can live with.
There is no legitimate reason for government to be maintaining a list of individuals who are law abiding by nature, and who are simply exercising their constitutional rights in a legal manner. Nor is there a legitimate reason for such lists to be released to the public.
They can confess To some civil fraud crimes to avoid prosecution as a felon by paying fines and restitution. They can also avoid official Convicted felony registration on federal BC by serving less then one year. That’s why I try to say, “convicted felon.”
Which is still meaningless and irrelevant to the discussion. There is absolutely no so-called "loophole" in the acquisition of a firearm in the united states. Either the acquisition is legal, or it is not. And if an individual cannot legally possess a firearm, due to that possession being a felony, then the acquisition itself is illegal under all circumstances as well by mere extension.
When you pick and choose which rights you like, and which rights you don't, it's OK for -certain- people to be declared guilty w/o the benefit of a trial.
There are no provisions in the federal law for enforcement. Few of those who follow your POV having ever been in the military, ever been in law enforcement, know almost nothing about passing and enforcing laws and never do research that isn’t nra tripe. There are provisions for enforcement enacted now in 22 states. So your claim is what ? You never were aware of it ? Silly to discuss and not worth anyone chasing their tail anymore. Congrats, another well written post post with no miss used reflexive pronouns. Excellent. Good job. Now It’s time to move on.
Factually incorrect. What is being claimed is irrelevant, is the belief on the part of yourself that one can be a felon ineligible for legal firearms ownership, without being a convicted felon at the same time. The law of the united states does not work that way. One is either a felon or they are not.
There is no provision for enforcement relating to a great many laws and offenses in the united states. The so-called "provisions for enforcement" being referred to on the part of yourself, are apparently not working according to the ATF. Otherwise nearly half of all firearms found in the possession of the criminal element in the state of California, would not originally be sold in the state of California to begin with. How are over seventeen thousand registered and licensed firearms falling into the hands of prohibited individuals every single year?