That's mighty white of you.
Now who is Cortez ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's mighty white of you.
Now who is Cortez ?
Oh. So that is "US politics and mainstream political and cultural references related to such".
being a life member of the NRA and several other organizations that would be a no...So you're pro gun control then...
True, but doesn't mean they won't try.If the federal firearms apocalypse ever comes who is going to enforce it? There is bout maybe 120,000 federal law enforcement agents? There are 3242 counties and equivalents in the united states. That what be about 37 agents per county or county or equivalents in the United States. That is if they stop all other law enforcement activities and concentrate on gun confiscation. The other question is will local law enforcement agencies assist them? The Doctrine of Posse Comitatus forbids the U.S. military from domestic law enforcement. There are about 1,290,000 members of the military on active duty. That would give you an additional 397 people per county if the military solely concentrated on gun confiscation. There is about 670,279 sworn-in law enforcement personnel in the united states. That would give us an additional 206 personnel per county if they concentrated on weapons confiscation. The big unanswered question is how many law enforcement and military personnel would support this? As far as weapons confiscation the gate has been left open and the cow is gone. We already know that there are folks in states where registration is compulsive by law and everybody has not participated and the officials know this. They do not want to been seen kicking citizens doors down and hauling productive law-abiding citizens off to already crowded jails and prisons. The gun grabbers have a wet dream of this happening they have not thought the plan through. and realized it would be a nightmare since we are talking about 100 million firearms owning families. The numbers are not on the gun grabbers side.
If the federal firearms apocalypse ever comes who is going to enforce it? There is bout maybe 120,000 federal law enforcement agents? There are 3242 counties and equivalents in the united states. That what be about 37 agents per county or county or equivalents in the United States. That is if they stop all other law enforcement activities and concentrate on gun confiscation. The other question is will local law enforcement agencies assist them? The Doctrine of Posse Comitatus forbids the U.S. military from domestic law enforcement. There are about 1,290,000 members of the military on active duty. That would give you an additional 397 people per county if the military solely concentrated on gun confiscation. There is about 670,279 sworn-in law enforcement personnel in the united states. That would give us an additional 206 personnel per county if they concentrated on weapons confiscation. The big unanswered question is how many law enforcement and military personnel would support this? As far as weapons confiscation the gate has been left open and the cow is gone. We already know that there are folks in states where registration is compulsive by law and everybody has not participated and the officials know this. They do not want to been seen kicking citizens doors down and hauling productive law-abiding citizens off to already crowded jails and prisons. The gun grabbers have a wet dream of this happening they have not thought the plan through. and realized it would be a nightmare since we are talking about 100 million firearms owning families. The numbers are not on the gun grabbers side.
If the federal firearms apocalypse ever comes who is going to enforce it?
On the other hand, it has only been self enforced by less than 1% in NZ, the last I read.It will be self-enforced, which will cover about 99% of all people.
On the other hand, it has only been self enforced by less than 1% in NZ, the last I read.
Agreed, but they are not giving up what they own.I doubt there is anybody openly selling, shooting, carrying banned guns there. I doubt any stores are selling banned guns down there.
Agreed, but they are not giving up what they own.
So then
For American gun owners, who will be our REAL choice in 2020?
cause that's not much of what I read in the last 20+ pages
I think were stuck with the imperial Trumpster and more loss of rights, without representation.
You know the evil lessor of evils
Oh I certainly know where all gun control is headed, I just haven't seen any bill on it yet. I don't think many democrats are that proficient on the current background checks, let alone what an Universal Background Check would entail. I certainly wouldn't want to suggest gun registry as part of any background check. Background checks are not on the firearm one would want to purchase, but only checks the background of the person for eligibility to purchase a firearm.Under HR8, the bill currently in Congress that sparks most of this discussion, gifts could only take place between family members and the definition of family member isn't very broad. I could not give you a gift of a gun without a background check, even though you're a member of my TGT family.
Draft UBC legislation has been drawn up by lots of people in lots of places, however. Some of that draft legislation is much more restrictive than HR8 and would prohibit most or all gifts.
Personally, I could live with a UBC law if it made NICs publicly available to check a person, wasn't linked to any particular firearm transfer, and required no checks when the seller is presented with proof of a prior and still current background check, e.g. showing an LTC when purchasing. That would completely divorce the background check process from any identifiable firearm or any particular transfer. It would be a check on the person, not the transfer. in fact, I'd be willing to bet that the most common uses of such a system would be pre-employment checks on job applicants, women checking out the status of men who are asking for their attention, and other innocuous inquiries.
IOW, I could write a UBC law that really had nothing to do with guns. Of course, the authoritarian gun-grabbers who are currently pushing UBCs would never vote for such a thing because they don't really care about making sure all gun buyers are not prohibited persons. They are working toward an ultimate goal of gun confiscation and a real UBC that looked at people, not guns, would not serve that purpose.
I doubt there is anybody openly selling, shooting, carrying banned guns there. I doubt any stores are selling banned guns down there.
If you cant use it, who cares what you own.
After a few years of not using it, anti-gunners will offer a $100 buy back, and folks will just turn them in for the money since they no longer use it. Saw lots of folks do this in NJ. They were too scared even to drive to PA and sell at a Gun Show.