More mass shootings

[Hooknswoop 19]

“How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law I bought it without a background check? ”

You didn’t answer the question.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Unfortunately, you've avoided using any of that in this discussion

I guess when you can’t go after the message, go after the messenger. Good talk.

Derek V

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Hooknswoop

Quote

The only evidence you have shown that it was unenforceable is that it was not enforced. Got anything else?

Logic? For example. I buy a firearm from a friend without complying with the background law. How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law I bought it without a background check?

Derek V

Derek,

When I bought a shotgun at a gun shop last year they did a background check. I'm curious, do you know what information is given by the shop? Name only? Type of Gun? Serial #?

Joe

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Hooknswoop

“How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law I bought it without a background check? ”

You didn’t answer the question.

Derek V

Didn't we have this discussion 20 pages back (or something like that)?

Absent proof (pictures, receipts, something like that), it will be basically impossible to prove that a gun was sold after the law was put in place.

Without such proof, the law is unenforceable. Not just "not enforced."

Without a registry, there will be no proof in the vast majority of cases.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

When I bought a shotgun at a gun shop last year they did a background check. I'm curious, do you know what information is given by the shop? Name only? Type of Gun? Serial #?

Yep, all of that has to be kept by the dealer for 7 years, I think.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Didn't we have this discussion 20 pages back (or something like that)?

Absent proof (pictures, receipts, something like that), it will be basically impossible to prove that a gun was sold after the law was put in place.

Without such proof, the law is unenforceable. Not just "not enforced."

Without a registry, there will be no proof in the vast majority of cases.

Yep, but apparently that isn’t logical.

Derek V

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Hooknswoop

Quote

When I bought a shotgun at a gun shop last year they did a background check. I'm curious, do you know what information is given by the shop? Name only? Type of Gun? Serial #?

Yep, all of that has to be kept by the dealer for 7 years, I think.

Derek V

By the dealer only? Interesting. You'd think the Fed's would slurp that up before giving me the nod. That would then be a record showing that I got it playing by the rules not from my cuz.

[Bob_Church 7]

SkyDekker

******And if someone can conduct an indectible murder, does that mean that we shouldn’t legislate against murder?

Wendy P.

But there's a big difference between laws that some people will break anyway and laws that can't be enforced. The latter undermine our faith in our legal system and cause a lot of damage. They show a disconnect between the people making the laws and reality.

Most laws can't be enforced under the logic hooknswoop is using. The majority of laws are written as a deterrent, many only applied after the fact or as an addon charge to something else.

No, this is different. People who don't know gun owners and gun culture are unaware of certain things that happen and other things that aren't going to happen.
Imagine people with absolutely no knowledge of skydiving and who have never jumped writing up rules to make The Sport safer.
A lot of gun control laws may sound reasonable to the people proposing and passing them but have absolutely no connection to the reality of gun ownership. These laws don't help in any way.
Think about this. Some states have actually made it illegal to forget that your child is in the back seat. Some haven't. There are people, organizations even, who honestly believe that children are dying in back seats because some states haven't made it illegal to forget that they're back there.
Let's completely ignore the real problem because too many people aren't willing to deal with the fact that they run their mouths on the phone to the exclusion of everything else, including the life of their children and pretend that passing an insultingly stupid law will take care of it instead.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

JoeWeber

***

Quote

When I bought a shotgun at a gun shop last year they did a background check. I'm curious, do you know what information is given by the shop? Name only? Type of Gun? Serial #?

Yep, all of that has to be kept by the dealer for 7 years, I think.

Derek V

By the dealer only? Interesting. You'd think the Fed's would slurp that up before giving me the nod. That would then be a record showing that I got it playing by the rules not from my cuz.

Well, there is a law that the info in NICS background checks can't be kept. The government is supposed to destroy them after the check is conducted.
This part of the law was included to make sure that 'background checks' didn't become 'backdoor registration'.

There was a bit of a kerfuffle a few years ago when someone found that the government was not destroying the info as required.

OTOH, when a gun dealer surrenders his FFL, he is required to turn all his records over to the BATF. In the later 90s, when FFL fees went up by a huge amount, a lot of part time dealers gave up their license. So a lot of sales record info is now held by the government.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

By the dealer only? Interesting. You'd think the Fed's would slurp that up before giving me the nod. That would then be a record showing that I got it playing by the rules not from my cuz.

Right, that would equate to a national registry. That is why no one knows how many guns are out there. Just the number of back ground checks. They may not have bought a gun or have bought several with 1 background check.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/10/27/firearms-national-tracing-center-atf/74401060/

Derek V

[jcd11235 0]

Hooknswoop

“How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law I bought it without a background check? ”

Do you really believe a background check would not leave a digital/paper trail?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Unfortunately, you've avoided using any of that in this discussion

I guess when you can’t go after the message, go after the messenger.

I'm just pointing that your posts rest on faulty logic. It's tough to have a discussion with someone who doesn't understand basic logic.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

jcd11235

***“How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law I bought it without a background check? ”

Do you really believe a background check would not leave a digital/paper trail?

Ok, how about:

How would law enforcement know and then prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law that the gun was purchased without a background check after the point in time when they were required?"

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[billvon 2,400]

Quote

Absent proof (pictures, receipts, something like that), it will be basically impossible to prove that a gun was sold after the law was put in place.

Agreed. But that's true of many crimes.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Do you really believe a background check would not leave a digital/paper trail? Crazy

How in my example would I get caught?

Let’s say I bought a firearm from a friend without doing the background check. I’m driving, get pulled over and my vehicle gets searched and the firearm found. How would law enforcement know we didn’t do the background check on that firearm?

You keep saying I am wrong and not explaining how I am wrong.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I'm just pointing that your posts rest on faulty logic. It's tough to have a discussion with someone who doesn't understand basic logic.

No, you just keep saying my posts rest on faulty logic, but not how.

Derek V

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Hooknswoop

Quote

By the dealer only? Interesting. You'd think the Fed's would slurp that up before giving me the nod. That would then be a record showing that I got it playing by the rules not from my cuz.

Right, that would equate to a national registry. That is why no one knows how many guns are out there. Just the number of back ground checks. They may not have bought a gun or have bought several with 1 background check.

Derek V

Derek,

I come by my guns from my hunting history which, except for gophers, is long gone. Outside of that I have a BRNO flare launcher and a Beretta home defense shotgun.

Do you hunt or collect? I ask because it seems usual to me that hard core 2nd Amendment never give an inch gun people are more in the AR-15 shoot trees or fear the government crowd.

Where are you?

[DanG 1]

I don't know all the specifics of the Colorado law, but an effective universal background check law would require the gun owner to hold onto a piece of paper that shows the background check was performed. For some amount of time people will be able to claim they boight the gun before the law was in place. Over time that claim will become more and more spurious.

The other way this law would be enforced is through sting operations to get serial illegal gun dealers. It could be an effective way of combating the underground gun market.

No laws are perfect, and no laws have precognition. But a background check law is enforceable if the authorities want to enforce it.

- Dan G

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I don't know all the specifics of the Colorado law, but an effective universal background check law would require the gun owner to hold onto a piece of paper that shows the background check was performed. For some amount of time people will be able to claim they boight the gun before the law was in place. Over time that claim will become more and more spurious.

So by your own words, the Colorado universal background law is not effective since it does not include a requirement for firearm owners to prove the background check.

Yes, sting operations would work, but require intelligence on who to target, then more resources to conduct the sting. How prevelant are serial illegal gun dealers? How much money and law enforcement resources should be used in these operations vs. other law enforcement activities (ROI)?

I guess you know better than those in Colorado that enforce the law and those that prosecute the law......

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Where are you?

Colorado passed the magazine limit law. What is the result?

Magpul left the state, taking jobs and tax revenue with them.

You can go to another state and buy as many 30-round magazines you want and bring them back to Colorado. Since they are not stamped with a DOM, there is no way to know if you had them before the law or not.

You can go into gun shops and buy 30-round magazine kits and in about 10 seconds, assemble a 30-round magazine.

So, net result? Loss of jobs and tax revenue. Good job, idiots.

Where am I? No, I do not hunt. I haven’t bought a firearm in probably 5+ years. I don’t have a large collection. Yes, I carry a firearm. I also have several fire extinguishers, check my spare tire regularly, wear a seatbelt, have 2 smoke detectors in the house (just had to replace one), have an AAD in both of my rigs (one speed cypres and one vigil), and wear a helmet when riding one of my motorcycles. I do not believe the pro-gun control is about saving lives. It is about gun control. More gun control laws are not going to solve the problem.

Derek V

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Where are you?

Colorado passed the magazine limit law. What is the result?

Magpul left the state, taking jobs and tax revenue with them.

You can go to another state and buy as many 30-round magazines you want and bring them back to Colorado. Since they are not stamped with a DOM, there is no way to know if you had them before the law or not.

You can go into gun shops and buy 30-round magazine kits and in about 10 seconds, assemble a 30-round magazine.

So, net result? Loss of jobs and tax revenue. Good job, idiots.

Where am I? No, I do not hunt. I haven’t bought a firearm in probably 5+ years. I don’t have a large collection. Yes, I carry a firearm. I also have several fire extinguishers, check my spare tire regularly, wear a seatbelt, have 2 smoke detectors in the house (just had to replace one), have an AAD in both of my rigs (one speed cypres and one vigil), and wear a helmet when riding one of my motorcycles. I do not believe the pro-gun control is about saving lives. It is about gun control. More gun control laws are not going to solve the problem.

Derek V

Except for carrying a firearm, I know people who've been saved by each item in your list. That's the thing that leaves me baffled. Ron say's he carries as do all of his friends but could not name a single time he or his friends have been saved by their CCW or, for that matter, saved anyone else.

Have you been saved by your CCW? Sure it might happen but you might as well ground yourself from lightning every time you stop for all the likelihood of needing it. So why go to the trouble?

[Bob_Church 7]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Where are you?

Colorado passed the magazine limit law. What is the result?

Magpul left the state, taking jobs and tax revenue with them.

You can go to another state and buy as many 30-round magazines you want and bring them back to Colorado. Since they are not stamped with a DOM, there is no way to know if you had them before the law or not.

You can go into gun shops and buy 30-round magazine kits and in about 10 seconds, assemble a 30-round magazine.

So, net result? Loss of jobs and tax revenue. Good job, idiots.

Where am I? No, I do not hunt. I haven’t bought a firearm in probably 5+ years. I don’t have a large collection. Yes, I carry a firearm. I also have several fire extinguishers, check my spare tire regularly, wear a seatbelt, have 2 smoke detectors in the house (just had to replace one), have an AAD in both of my rigs (one speed cypres and one vigil), and wear a helmet when riding one of my motorcycles. I do not believe the pro-gun control is about saving lives. It is about gun control. More gun control laws are not going to solve the problem.

Derek V

The one thing I think is a bad idea, but will fight for people's right to do it, is open carry. This makes absolutely no sense to me. With concealed carry you can defend yourself and have the element of surprise on your side. And I do know one person who was saved by it. Two people were doing a thing in Charleston Wv where one would stop a person and ask for directions then the two would put them in the hospital while robbing the victim. You'd read about another victim a couple of times a week. They didn't kill anyone, yet, when they'd been caught but they put people in the hospital for a long time and with injuries that would take a lot of work to fix. Jerry was on one of his evening walks when the one stopped him. He just pulled up his shirt letting the guy see his gun and that was that, the guy and his partner who'd been waiting to the side decided they needed to be somewhere else and Jerry's description helped catch them.
But I worry that if he'd been open carrying they'd have just hit him in the back of the head with a brick before he knew anything was going on. After all, that automatic was valuable and with open carry you'd be advertising it.
But it's still a personal choice, in my opinion.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

So why go to the trouble?

I can’t say a firearm has saved me, but it did save my wallet once.

I’ve never needed a seatbelt, AAD, airbag, smoke detector, fire extinguisher, or for at least 20 years, a spare tire. So why go through all the trouble for any of these just in case items? Self reliance I suppose.

I have answered your questions. Here’s one for you. You mentioned giving an inch. What happens when they outlaw your 12 guage? I mean, you don’t need a 12 guage for home defense. A 16 guage would work and less risk to neighbors.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

I agree with all that. I would gladly trade legal open carry for concealed carry without a permit.

I woiluld also support a ban on any future sales of bump stocks.

Derek V