OBAMA'S ANTI GUN AGENDA URGENT NOTICE

[Hokieman]

PRESS RELEASE
November 7, 2008

For Immediate Release
Contact:
David Adams
804-382-9501
Virginia Shooting Sports Association







President Elect-Obama Announces Anti-Gun Agenda
One of many proposal found on transition web-site




Orange, VA - The following is a statement released by the Virginia Shooting Sports Association President David Adams, in reaction to President Elect Obama's anti-gun proposal posted on the official Transition web site.



"It did not take long for Barack Obama to show his hand as it relates to the threat that America's gun owners now face under an Obama Administration. Only three days after winning the presidency, he has declared war on honest law abiding gun owners by laying out an agenda that seeks to violate the privacy of gun owners and outlaw an entire class of firearms."

The transition web site, www.change.gov lists the following proposals that target gun owners in America.



"Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."



VSSA will continue to protect the right of law abiding gun owners as we have for the last 70 years. Gun owners are urged to make their views known to President Elect that lawful gun owners are not to blame for crime and we will let our representatives know in Congress that we oppose these proposals.



VSSA, founded in 1938 is the state affiliate association of the NRA, and works to protect the rights of law abiding gun owners and sportsmen.

[Daydream Believer]

I do not understand how this is bad? Keeping guns away from kids and irresponsible people? What exactly in those paragraphs would bother any responsible person who keeps guns for hunting? I'm also confused as to how this is horse related?

[caffeinated]

DB, don't you know that ANY attempt to make guns more traceable or limit the ability of people to buy them without background checks is code for "WE'RE TAKING ALL THE GUNS!!!!"?

(oops. Just replied on a thread I've reported. I keep meaning to stop doing that.)

[lorilu]

Daydream, I agree. maybe the OP uses an Uzi from horseback while hunting? THAT is something I would like to see.
L

[LexInVA]

The only reasons why they are even bitching about the proposed changes is because all the crazies who stockpile large amounts of exotic weapons for their own purposes believe that someone is going to use those registries to loot their armories, closing the gun show loophole (private sales) would effectively make a gun show pointless since you couldn't really buy anything dangerous on the spot without a background check which would eliminate a lot of the business going on there, and making the Federal Assault Weapons ban permanent would effectively curtail the sale of military and law enforcement grade weaponry which is immensely popular amongst the staunchest supporters of the NRA and other groups for all sorts of crazy reasons ranging from wanting to hunt a bear with a machine gun to wanting to have enough firepower to eviscerate anyone or anything that might step on their property.

[enjoytheride]

Not sure how this is horse related unless you plan on giving your child an uzi and sending them out on horseback to shoot something.

[Lori B]

You are just bananas, Hokieman. Back away from the crack pipe.

[vineyridge]

Command to a Hound

LEAVE IT!

[ef80]

I'm sorry, but the mental image of an 8 year old, decked out in hunting finery with stupid-pigtails flying in the breeze as she gallops along on an old trusty schoolmaster with an uzi or ak-47 flop-flop-flopping against her back strikes me as so absurd it has me in stitches. It's almost Dadaesque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dadaism).

[Poacher]

Don't you guys know anything about guns? An Uzi is useless on horseback, as the magazine requires replacing every five seconds. A Winchester is so much more convenient and traditional. :D

Yes, Hokie. Let's all worry about common sense intefering with your right to bear arms. :sadsmile:

[Guilherme]

Well, it is horse related.

Cowboy Mounted Shooting is one of the more popular and growing equine sports. There have been movements in CA and MA (and MD, too) to limit, restrict, or ban single action revolvers on "safety" grounds. Many early models cannot pass modern drop tests, do not easily adapt to "child safety locks," etc. They are not unsafe when properlyly handled. But they do require proper handling (as does any firearm, edged weapon, or ball peen hammer).

I don't own an Uzi, but I do own a number of firearms (hand guns and long guns). Many are used in either Mouted Shooting or military equine competitions. I even own two swords. :cool:

Remember where Obama comes from: Chicago. It's unlawful for a common citizen to own a handgun in Chicago. Cook Co. has even more restrictions. And who are the people he's tapping for his new administration?

Those who fear draconian restrictions on firearm ownership are not just "gun nuts" fearing a falling sky.

SQQ

[Gestalt]

Well, it is horse related.

Cowboy Mounted Shooting is one of the more popular and growing equine sports. There have been movements in CA and MA (and MD, too) to limit, restrict, or ban single action revolvers on "safety" grounds. Many early models cannot pass modern drop tests, do not easily adapt to "child safety locks," etc. They are not unsafe when properlyly handled. But they do require proper handling (as does any firearm, edged weapon, or ball peen hammer).

I don't own an Uzi, but I do own a number of firearms (hand guns and long guns). Many are used in either Mouted Shooting or military equine competitions. I even own two swords. :cool:

Remember where Obama comes from: Chicago. It's unlawful for a common citizen to own a handgun in Chicago. Cook Co. has even more restrictions. And who are the people he's tapping for his new administration?

Those who fear draconian restrictions on firearm ownership are not just "gun nuts" fearing a falling sky.

SQQ

Absolutely. To the other posters, why do you feel the need to ridicule gun owners? Many people enjoy competition shooting whether it be on horseback or not.

[deltawave]

It also says this on his website:

Barack Obama did not grow up hunting and fishing, but he recognizes the great conservation legacy of America's hunters and anglers and has great respect for the passion that hunters and anglers have for their sport. Were it not for America's hunters and anglers, including the great icons like Theodore Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold, our nation would not have the tradition of sound game management, a system of ethical, science-based game laws and an extensive public lands estate on which to pursue the sport. Barack Obama and Joe Biden recognize that we must forge a broad coalition if we are to address the great conservation challenges we face. America's hunters and anglers are a key constituency that must take an active role and have a powerful voice in this coalition.

We restrict access to all kinds of potentially dangerous things in this country. What's wrong with trying to make guns safer and less accessible to those who would abuse them? To me it's no different than not selling booze or cigarettes to minors and making it a crime to do so.

[Romany]

Well, it is horse related.

Cowboy Mounted Shooting is one of the more popular and growing equine sports. There have been movements in CA and MA (and MD, too) to limit, restrict, or ban single action revolvers on "safety" grounds. Many early models cannot pass modern drop tests, do not easily adapt to "child safety locks," etc. They are not unsafe when properlyly handled. But they do require proper handling (as does any firearm, edged weapon, or ball peen hammer).

I don't own an Uzi, but I do own a number of firearms (hand guns and long guns). Many are used in either Mouted Shooting or military equine competitions. I even own two swords. :cool:

Remember where Obama comes from: Chicago. It's unlawful for a common citizen to own a handgun in Chicago. Cook Co. has even more restrictions. And who are the people he's tapping for his new administration?

Those who fear draconian restrictions on firearm ownership are not just "gun nuts" fearing a falling sky.

SQQ


I do believe there are stricter gun controls in Canada than there are in the US, yet cowboy mounted shooting is a similarly growing sport in Canada. Indeed, last time I checked, one of the top mounted shooters lives in Canada; she's married to a hockey player.

What's so special about owning a sword or two, by the by? How else do you open a champagne bottle? ;)

[enjoytheride]

The website says they want to keep guns from criminals and children, as well as making tracing guns easier (to find criminals that use them). They also want to work on the assult weapons ban and gun show loopholes (where you can buy an illegal weapon legally as long as it is pieces in a box and only for "display"). Personally I think safety of children and limiting the number of criminals with guns is a top priority.


What part of any of that restricts guns from cowboy mounted shooting or hunting?

It seems like the best way would be to work with this administration instead of running in circles screaming about Obama being the end of the world.

[Equibrit]

Good.

[Rienzi]

Oh, I'm sure the website says many things. But what exactly do they mean by "common sense" and "making them safer"? By what mechanism? By keeping them dissaembled and locked up, with the ammo in a separate place? Very nice if, say, a pack of dogs is attacking your horse. By what means will they track each weapon and bullet to see if it has been used in a crime? By some means that is VERY EXPENSIVE.

And they aren't just talking about UZIs, I assure you. If it's like the last things Biden and his ilk have tried to push through, it will mean anything that looks like it's related to the military, regardless of whether it actually is or not. NOT very scientific. And Handguns, OMG!! They are so UNNECESSARY as we all have the POLICE to protect us and our property! (Never mind that it would take them at least half an hour to show up.)

Do you think that those people who were trying to burn down our barn in the dead of night would have waited for us to go get the shotgun out of its case, go get the separately stored ammo, and unlock the special trigger guard? Or stand around with the fuel container in hand waiting for the police to show up? I doubt it!! Our barn and all the animals in it would have gone up in flames. A double-barrel fired promptly out the window has a powerful effect on the reduction of crime.

[Rienzi]

I would also like to add that treating law-abiding citizens like criminals does NOTHING to reduce crime or to deter the real criminals -- who are already disregarding the laws to bgin with. Why would they pay attention to more laws?

[deltawave]

Requiring someone to have a license and prove that one is competent and legally entitled to manipulate a dangerous piece of equipment is treating someone like a criminal? I don't feel that way about having to have a driver's license in order to use a far deadlier piece of equipment than a gun. :confused:

A double-barrel fired promptly out the window has a powerful effect on the reduction of crime.

Could be. It's also an irrevocable piece of "deterrence" if you hit one of your own kids in the face with that blind shot in the dark. I'm willing to spend the 60 seconds it takes to make sure I need to be shooting at someone -- to make sure it's really someone who means me harm. That's also plenty of time to undo a safety and unlock the ammo.

[enjoytheride]

Deltawave, you are simply not thinking like a gun owner. Imagine if not only were you required to own a driver's license (which you have take a test to get gasp), but you had to have car insurance too. Not only that, but now they required you to keep your keys in the house and not in the ignition. This would clearly prevent you from making a fast getaway should the communists parachute into your college campus and try to take over (that might also be an 80s movie). Next thing you know they'll be taking your car away and forcing you to take the bus.

I certainly hope that not many people are stockpiling weapons in the event of Obama suddenly cancelling the 2nd amendment and knocking on your door for guns.

I think this is an awful sly way to rant about Obama winning the presidency.

[Rienzi]

Oh I'm sure Obama can keep us safe...'cause he was so good at reducing the crime in Chicago (NOT!)

[Guilherme]

The website says they want to keep guns from criminals and children, as well as making tracing guns easier (to find criminals that use them). They also want to work on the assult weapons ban and gun show loopholes (where you can buy an illegal weapon legally as long as it is pieces in a box and only for "display"). Personally I think safety of children and limiting the number of criminals with guns is a top priority.


What part of any of that restricts guns from cowboy mounted shooting or hunting?

It seems like the best way would be to work with this administration instead of running in circles screaming about Obama being the end of the world.

The First Question is which Obama policy is primary? Protecting children or honoring a tradition of hunting? Or, put another way, will the REAL Obama policy please stand up?

I suspect his model is much more Cook Co., IL than, say, Nueces Co., TX.

The "gun show loophole" is not a loophole. It's a recognition that a private citizen may sell a firearm to another private citizen if the sale is casual and not in the ordinary course of business. Rather like the difference between you selling your car to another person on CraigsList and being a car dealer. Is a private sale a "loophole" in the various consumer laws designed to protect car buyers?

I don't know where you get you information, but the idea that you can legally buy an illegal weapon as long as it's dissembled is completely wrong. You should review the rules of the ATF.

As far as child protection is concerned I'm not anxious to see kids get hurt. But the rules of game as found in Chicago and Washington, DC (where this is a major justification of the policy) are the way they are to effectively prevent any sort of handgun ownership. If you're a Mounted Shooter living in either Chicago or Washingston, DC you'd have to keep your weapons out of town (and even that might not be legal the way their ordinaces are written).

Please define for me the term "assault rifle"?

The Second Amendment guarantees me certain liberties in firearm ownership. It is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT that I possess. Like all individual rights it is not absolute and has its limits. The extent of those limits are only now being explored.

As far as Canadian law is concerned, we were scheduled to attend the North American Cavalry Competition in Markham, Ontario two years ago. I attempted to follow Provincial and Federal rules to bring in a shotgun and a .45lc Ruger New Model Vaquero. It was impossible. The Provincial office that had to send out and verify a form never answered the telephone. In three weeks of trying. They did not have an answering machine. I wonder if a person showed up if the door would be unlocked.

Canadians are free to have any firearms rules they want. But it was clear form my experience that they had no intention of making temporary importation easy. At least in Ontario. I can't speak to the other provinces.

As to tracing stolen weapons that is possible right now. No new legislation nor regulation is required.

I have no problem with reasonable, Constitutionally sound limits on firearm ownership. I have no significant problem with a permit system based upon a "shall issue" model. I have a BIG problem with the Chicago model. I have not seen Obama eschew this model. Until then, given where he comes from and who he is, I must assume he supports it and would duplicate it at the national level.

G.

[Rienzi]

Oh, and by the way, you might want to check how much $$$$ Canada has spent on their gun-control program. I want to say that it was something like 100 times the projected figure, but I could be really off on that, because they hadn't finished their program yet. I mean, I'm sure that money couldn't have been used for -- oh, I don't know -- health care? Road improvements? Alternative energy exploration? Or maybe even reducing ACTUAL crime?

Or use that money to give a horse to every citizen who wants one! I GUARANTEE that this would jump-start the economy!

[enjoytheride]

I think you have left out parts of the gun show loophole.

In my state you can go to a gunshow and purchase a gun with no background check or waiting period. You can also purchase a fully automatic weapon. The seller states he is selling guns "from a private collection" which makes him expempt from laws requring a background check. At the gun show here almost half of the dealers are "private sellers" and most of them only take cash. It's a pretty big loophole.

[Guilherme]

I think you have left out parts of the gun show loophole.

In my state you can go to a gunshow and purchase a gun with no background check or waiting period. You can also purchase a fully automatic weapon. The seller states he is selling guns "from a private collection" which makes him expempt from laws requring a background check. At the gun show here almost half of the dealers are "private sellers" and most of them only take cash. It's a pretty big loophole.

I don't know where you live. I can't comment on your local law.

Under Federal law a casual, private sale does not require a background check. Just like you can sell your car without checking to ensure the buyer has a license, insurance, etc. This is NOT a "gunshow loophole."

Under Federal law ALL Class III transactions (fully automatic weapons) are regulated. You can't legally buy one without complying with Federal law, nor can you sell one. Either privately or through an FFL dealer.

You're repeating some Brandy Bunch propaganda, here. The rules on Class III and private sales are quite clear.

G.

[houndsRus]

"Oh I'm sure Obama can keep us safe...'cause he was so good at reducing the crime in Chicago (NOT!)"

Renzi, are you referring to the over 500 children murdered (mostly African American) in Chicago this year? If so, your comment shows utter ignorance of the role and function of government and politics, especially in a city like Chicago and a state like Illinois. Chicago is “the city that works,” but it only works one way. The safety of the city and its children would only decline if the means by which it works are ignored. Something which Mr. Obama is certainly to smart to do.

As a father, a resident of the city, an African American and a politician wise and savvy enough to get himself elected so relatively early in his political career (he’s 26 years younger that McCain), one might also view this legislation as the beginning of a broader and more comprehensive plan to address the culture of gun-violence which exists everywhere in this country.

It is one thing to gun-hunt animals in rural areas (which support), it is quite another to fire a gun into a school yard and hope to hit some rival gang member or bad-pay drug customer. One is sport, one is violence and illegal; the current systems in place to end the later are failed. This legislation seems like a prudent step to fixing what isn’t working. It in no way seems to curtail sport.

Perhaps, Rienzi and Hokieman, your vehement and reactionary response is more fueled by your own un-reflected co-opting into the culture of violence than you realize.

Wishing you peaceful days,
Ol’hound

[enjoytheride]

I think it's a loophole because it's a large gun show with a huge number of weapons in the same place with an awful lot of private sellers so you don't need background checks for to buy. Yes, some of the dealers do require background checks and accept credit cards but many only take cash and do no background checks.

Then what are the federal laws for buying an automatic weapon? I know that here you can purchase an automatic weapon at a gun show either in a box of parts or with the end filled with concrete as a "display" with no background check for cash from a "private seller" that also has dozens of other weapons for sale. It's been a few years since I've been to a gun show so I'm not sure if the laws have changed.

This isnt horse related and the election is over so I'm stepping out of this thread before it gets closed anyway.

[canticle]

If we want to have a culture of nonproliferation, how about also taking guns away from:

police
military
Obama's bodyguards

The government needs to surrender its weapons first and foremost.

[cloudyandcallie]

uh guys, we needed the Brady bill, and then got it and then it was gutted.

I own guns lots of them, and worked in a profession till retirement where I saw cops daily, and I think we need some regulation.

Especially with the crazies, no, not the guys who stockpile weapons:lol:, they are a different type of crazy, but the mentally ill, like the guy who shot up VA Tech, and the guy who shot Reagan and Brady.

And I think guns should be registered, and that bullets should be fired from them and recorded beforehand (for later law enforcement purposes) (and heck our DNA should be on file too, just like the Jockey Club does with TBs now) and that people should be required to get licenses to carry guns. (except those of us exempt by legislation, thank you Steven Scarlett).

If you are not a convicted felon, and aren't crazy, well legally certifiable, then you should be able to possess a gun for protection or for hunting.

Meanwhile, does this mean that I can get more $ for that semi-auto I want to sell at the next gun show?

Horse related wise, what every happened to that black powder thread of neighbors shooting by horses.

(And I did not vote for Obama and I have the Nov. NRA magazine)

Please, give up the old 60s slogan "The West Was Not Won By A Registered Gun". the winchesters or remington rifles used by the cavalry won the west.

[Beverley]

This BS is typical 'sky is falling' mentality expressed whenever the Republicans lose. I say that as an independent who has worked for the Federal government since the Ford Administration.

It does absolutely NO good for those of us who will continue to strive CONSTRUCTIVELY for the preservation of all forms of hunting and humane use of animals.

If you were a hound and I were a whipper-in, I'd be peppering you with rat shot from my .22 while yelling 'leave it,' since you are guilty of running riot. And I'd be doing that regardless of which candidate, or which party, was in the White House.:cool:

[Nikki17]

Go Obama!!!

[lauriep]

The ususal gun-crazy rants, made by the sort who most certainly shouldn't have the guns. Hounds, you go dog!!!

Grow up.

[Carol Ames]

ydream, I agree. maybe the OP uses an Uzi from horseback while hunting? THAT is something I would like to see.
L http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3639300):yes:

[BasqueMom]

Don't usually get into these type of threads....have a handgun, have had it for 40 years,
sleep better knowing it's nearby whether I've been living in the city or in the country. Don't have kids--if anyone visits with kids, it gets tucked away.

A friend sent me this info a while back--don't know the source but found it interesting.
The bad guys always seem to be able to get their hands on them regardless of the laws.

"Recently, gun owners in Australia were forced by new
law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million
dollars. Following the first year, these were the results:
List of seven items:
Australia-wide, homicides were up 3.2 percent (and that's continuing to climb)
Australia-wide, assaults were up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was
expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens."

[Carol Ames]

This BS is typical 'sky is falling' mentality expressed whenever the Republicans lose. I say that as an independent who has worked for the Federal government since the Ford Administration.

It does absolutely NO good for those of us who will continue to strive CONSTRUCTIVELY for the preservation of all forms of hunting and humane use of animals.

If you were a hound and I were a whipper-in, I'd be peppering you with rat shot from my .22 while yelling 'leave it,' since you are guilty of running riot. And I'd be doing that regardless of which candidate, or which party, was in the White House.:cool:
http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3639787):lol:

[Rienzi]

I prefer not to be a victim. If you guys want to be victims, fine, just don't move next to me. I prefer to have armed neighbors who can (and have) helped me in crises.

houndsRus, thank you so much for talking about Chicago, and highlighting the fact that the "children" who are getting shot are often A. by rival gang members (In other words, both shooter and shootee are not 'victims' but dangerous criminals) B. in drug deals (already engaging in crinimal activity; again, crinimal-on-criminal crime) or C. Thy are shot by the police while they are engaged in other criminal activity, such as buglary, etc. And yes, these count towards that supposed figure of 500.

What percentage of these guns were obtained legally? Isn't it already illegal to attack other people, take crack, and buglarize? What makes you possibly think that reducing the rights of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves is going to make the criminals behave? THEY ALREADY HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THE LAW.

And what about the hundreds of millions that Canada is spending? What are the true results, ie, reduction of crime? I don't think so. Reduction of suicide? Unfortunately, doubtful. So, alll that money WASTED that could perhaps -- addressed why young people join gangs, supported young mothers, built job-training programs.

It is not my "fear" of regulation of guns that is apparent here -- it is the fear of GUNS, lead mostly by ignorance (bless your little hearts!) And perhaps also the prevalence of the "culture of victimhood"

PS Your doctor probably doesn't wash his/her hands; about 90,000 people die each year due to infections spread through those means. In the last 11 years, that's nearly 1 million, not counting the number who are permanently injured. Let's put the money towards reducing hospital errors. In fact, your VET probably is more careful about hygine than your doctor!

I'm out of here before this closes.

[BasqueMom]

Well, this is somewhat horse-related for those of us who keep our horses at home. In
some parts of the country, folks have to deal with large predators who go after horses/foals. In other parts, the neighbor's dogs running loose and running horses in their
own pastures are a problem. And then there's always the possibility of injury or illness
that requires immediate euthansiza because the vet can't get to the horse immediately.
And the obviously sick/possibly rabid wildlife that can come wandering by that needs to
be stopped before tangling with your dogs or kids. Most rural animal control departments
seem to take days to respond.

Personal protection aside, having a gun on hand is just part of the farm/farmette tools. It's
just one we hope not to have to use.

[Kyzteke]

What the heck does all of this have to do with horses?

When the cat is away....

[deltawave]

Allow everyone to own a gun. *A* gun. Singular. Who needs more than that, really? Need an exception to follow your life's passion? Sure. Gun(s) is(are) kept in a local armory, under lock and key. Come play with it any time you like. Check it out for the weekend, but bring it back when you're done . . . doing whatever it is you do with multiple weapons. :uhoh:

Or is that too much conspiracy theory, keeping our guns in the hands of "officials"?

I'm perfectly OK with people owning guns, but have a difficult time figuring out where the paranoia about "the government" comes from, or why anyone has to own great heaps of them?

Can also not for the life of me figure out why ANYONE "needs" an automatic weapon or assault rifle?

[enjoytheride]

Apparently for shooting rabid wild animals or putting your colicing horse out of his misery.

[Lori B]

ditto enjoytheride. This is a way to start ranting about the Obama presidency over nothing. Unless you are certifiable or a convicted felon, I don't see how this will impact your ability to stockpile an arsenal, which is completely nuts, by the way. You are all welcome to a single hunting piece, as far as I'm concerned. But civilians don't need automatic weapons, they don't need to own 47 guns and enough ammo to blow their homes to the moon. And when are y'all gonna join that well-ordered militia that is such a 'oops, I forgot that' part of the second amendment?

I like hunting and hunters. They help keep land open for trees, and horse sports, and things that aren't walmart parking lots. But when you all act like it's the end of the world when someone wants to keep guns out of the hands of folks who are completely crackers or who have restraining orders out on them for smacking their spouses around, when you get your panties in a twist over legal constraints on your ability to own military-grade assault weapons and armor piercing bullets, that's when you go AROUND the bend. I am SO not buying the constitutional sanctity of your right to own a freakin' arsenal. Sorry. Nope. Uh-uh.

[cloudyandcallie]

Allow everyone to own a gun. *A* gun. Singular. Who needs more than that, really? Need an exception to follow your life's passion? Sure. Gun(s) is(are) kept in a local armory, under lock and key. Come play with it any time you like. Check it out for the weekend, but bring it back when you're done . . . doing whatever it is you do with multiple weapons. :uhoh:

Or is that too much conspiracy theory, keeping our guns in the hands of "officials"?

I'm perfectly OK with people owning guns, but have a difficult time figuring out where the paranoia about "the government" comes from, or why anyone has to own great heaps of them?

Can also not for the life of me figure out why ANYONE "needs" an automatic weapon or assault rifle?

hmmmm, when I went to college in Virginia, we didn't fox hunt with auto weapons. Maybe times have changed?

I'm not anti-gun, read previous post. I am anti-gun nut. Guns need to be registered. And civilians don't need armor-piercing bullets, those bullets kill cops:eek:

The extreme right and the extreme left are both nuts!

And I said foxhunting, so this is horse related.

[Glimmerglass]

Well, I frankly don't see the need for anyone to own an Uzi nor should a child be allowed to use one either. From October 27, 2008 in Massachusetts: Associated Press -"Boy, 8, fatally shoots self with Uzi at gun show" (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hl-VtQImXVuBfNXTpNMvOgFOxj2wD9439PRO0)

With an instructor watching, an 8-year-old boy at a gun fair aimed an Uzi at a pumpkin and pulled the trigger as his dad reached for a camera.

It was his first time shooting a fully automatic machine gun, and the recoil of the weapon was too much for him. He lost control and fatally shot himself in the head.

I've fired a variety of weapons from those made by H&K to Beretta and even I wouldn't see the logic/benefit/rationale of me using that gun let alone a child.

I'm a resident of Chicago and linking Obama as a US Senator to any of the deaths in this city is just as stupid as saying any drunk driving accident can be blammed on the President of the United States for having not done "something". A Sentator is not a rule maker for the City of Chicago or Cook County.

[canticle]

Can also not for the life of me figure out why ANYONE "needs" an automatic weapon or assault rifle?
yeah why does the government need them? :confused:

[Guilherme]

I think it's a loophole because it's a large gun show with a huge number of weapons in the same place with an awful lot of private sellers so you don't need background checks for to buy. Yes, some of the dealers do require background checks and accept credit cards but many only take cash and do no background checks.

And you know this because...?

How many gun shows have you ever attended? How many weapons have you bought and sold? Do you know the rules for obtaining a Federal FFL?

ALL dealers must have an FFL. Private, casual sales no not need an FFL form or background check. This is true in my living room or in an auditorium.

Then what are the federal laws for buying an automatic weapon? I know that here you can purchase an automatic weapon at a gun show either in a box of parts or with the end filled with concrete as a "display" with no background check for cash from a "private seller" that also has dozens of other weapons for sale. It's been a few years since I've been to a gun show so I'm not sure if the laws have changed.

IIRC (I've never owned a Class III) you must first be in compliance with the laws of your state. Some states forbid Class III ownership (WI, IL, NY, etc.). They are permitted in TN.

Second, you must apply for a transfer permit, pay the Federal tax ($200 IIRC), and have the transfer approved. IIRC your local sheriff has to sign off on the form.

It's not just go down to the local gun show and pick one up; not if you intend to comply with the law.

This isnt horse related and the election is over so I'm stepping out of this thread before it gets closed anyway.

It is horse related if you're into cavalry re-enacting. The Thommpson Submachinegun and BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle) were issued to the horse cavalry in some numbers. I know some re-enactors who own them (some in their full auto form).

But, as you wish.

G.

[Moderator 3]

Not horse related