What would we actually accept?

[g+16]

After all, new anti-gun laws worked well for Hitler & Stalin did'nt it.

 

[Kedric]

My acceptable solution is to remove or repeal any past restrictions or infringements.

 

[VN Vet]

If anti-gunners in Government agree to: Not one more inch nor one more dollar spent on talking about gun control and the repeal all infringements to our Freedoms. Then we can think about not trying them for Treason.

 

[GunsNstuff]

Absolutely no new restrictions whatsoever. Leave my magazines alone. I do not agree with this background check for private sales nonsense. That is a fancy way of saying Total & Complete Gun Registration, which we all know leaves the door open for confiscation at a later date.

Repeal any gun free law that exists.

 

[right winger]

Repeal some of the current laws. i will not support anything else.

 

[throttletony]

THe sad part is we will accept (read: be FORCED to accept) what they pass... but we can sure make our voices heard. Overall, I understand NFA/Class III stuff

This may not be popular, but...
I would be ok with a more stringent background check, or an across-the-board 3 or 7 day waiting period.
I do NOt want them to touch my magazines, and I definitely don't want them to think about general registration or databases, that is the MOST slippery slope and will lead to serious further violations of our 2nd amendment rights.

I would love to see them pull back where they've already overstepped the constitution, but I don't see that happening in the next 4 years.

 

[Lucas156]

I don't understand what a more "stringent" background check is? Do they only do "light" background checks right now? These are just a bunch of feel good words for pansy asses IMO

 

[JoshuaW]

Background checks have been used as a method of "registration". A few years ago the US Congress with held funding in order to make the ATF destroy the records regarding the sale of guns. Seems the ATF were archiving all names and gun sales for a period of time. This was against the Constitution and the rules of operation set by Congress. If you think this won't (or isn't happening right now), I have some land to sell cheap about 250 mile south of Key West. As to harsher penalties - if they would enforce the ones they have (against the Attorney General also) it would be a bigger help than making new ones.

The ATF is not responsible for the NICS system, the FBI is. It is possible that the incident you are referring to is simply before my time, but I have not heard of what you are referring to. I would be very interesting in reading an article though, if you can point me in the right direction.

I don't understand what a more "stringent" background check is? Do they only do "light" background checks right now? These are just a bunch of feel good words for pansy asses IMO

In a way they dont even do a background check. They check you against a database of people who cant own a firearm, if you match then it is no sale. If they have trouble determining if you are a match, then it is a wait and if you dont come back as a match, then it is a sale, and if you do come back as a match, then it is a no sale. If you dont match, then it is a sale.

They could actually conduct real background checks like they do for the LTCH and NFA items. I think the technology is there that it could be theoretically be done in a few hours if they had the proper funding and staff. Im not in any way, shape, or form advocating for this, and I would be strongly opposed to such a system. If we think long NICS backups are bad now, think of how badly an actual background check system could be.

As for more stringent background checks go, they can actually perform background checks, which isnt practical for the above reasons, or they could improve the system in place for getting people on/off the NICS list. That is what people are referring to when they talk about "more stringent background checks" typically.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

My acceptable solution is to remove or repeal any past restrictions or infringements.

No restriction, no treasons, no compromise.

If they want them that badly, they're going to have to openly attempt to take them - I'm not going to give 'em to them. Not for free.

To paraphrase Heckler and Koch: keine Kompromisse.

 

[richardraw316]

we have let these people push us to far already.
everytime something bad happens, they try and make new laws, and we let them push us just a little bit farther. SBR, suppressors, aow. and other nfa items. this is one of their pushes that we have somehow learned to live with. i agree with most of you. it is time we pushed back. they introduce a new law, we beat that law down, and a current gun law with it. if every time they try to enact a new law, they lose ground on gun control, they will eventually stop trying to put out new laws.
we push back, we push back hard, do not stop until every one of these stupid laws are gone.

thats as far as i am willing to compromise.

 

[Smokepole]

we have let these people push us to far already.
everytime something bad happens, they try and make new laws, and we let them push us just a little bit farther. SBR, suppressors, aow. and other nfa items. this is one of their pushes that we have somehow learned to live with. i agree with most of you. it is time we pushed back. they introduce a new law, we beat that law down, and a current gun law with it. if every time they try to enact a new law, they lose ground on gun control, they will eventually stop trying to put out new laws.
we push back, we push back hard, do not stop until every one of these stupid laws are gone.

thats as far as i am willing to compromise.

Or, the next time they have a virtual veto proof Congress the way Obummer did his first 2 years they will ram everything they want down our throats the way they did ObamaCare.

It is a never ending fight with these Pukes.

 

[TopDog]

Well I don't know about the rest of you, but if they take another inch...


I'M GUNNA START SHOOTING PEO.....

Man I cant even say it. I know its what all the cool kids on INGO are saying these days, but I just cant get it out.

Such a failure.

There are consequences to going full Yeager...

 

[Stschil]

What I consider acceptable :

1: National Lost/Stolen firearms registry with provisions outlined for the return of items to the owner when recovered. This would give LEO's a leg up with enforcing existing laws
2: Curiculum changes at the primary and secondary education levels that include firearms safety and basic marksmanship (Make it a part of phyis Ed) In depth Government studies, and Constitutional History.
3: Increased Mental Health care access, monitoring, and reporting. Especially where use of phsycotropic drugs are prescribed. Many of these wacko's have been prescribed these medications (ones that have been proven to cause aggressive tendancies in some people) and are not monitored by the Doc's correctly.
4: A Legal Requirement and Responsibility for any business/school/facility who chooses to make their campus a Gun Free Zone, to provide adequate means to ensure the safety of all who visit/use such facility. Eg: If Simon Malls wants a gun free zone, they MUST have trained, armed security personell or they are to be held legally liable for any incident that occurs such as Clackmas, OR. Same thing with pubic school buildings, State and Federal Facilities.
5: No AWB
6: Repeal of GCA 1986 and Gun Free School Zones. I would love to see NFA '34 gone as well, but its a compromise. Keep the registration of NFA items in tact in exchange for striking down the ban on firearms and accessories made post 1986, thus allowing access to modern technology manufacturing for all who wish to go through the process.

(Added) BATFE to become a convieniance store not a govt run office.

 

[shibumiseeker]

I'd take the repeal of the NFA for a start.

I don't compromise on weapons rights. Period, full stop. The laws and regulations we currently have are far more than enough.

 

[Hotdoger]

I should have known it would derail into a barrage of "not a damn thing".

I dont disagree, our goal is not to compromise, but they will want SOMETHING. Congress may very well be incapable of passing ANYTHING, which is all we can hope for, but I am more interested in what people could actually live with. We are talking amongst ourselves, not in a negotiation with the other side. If we had to chose "X new rules" or "Feinstein's AWB Ban" what would "X new rules" be?

Children throwing temper tantrums want something too but giving into them is never helpful for either party.

Truth is they need a good swat on the butt!

 

[Cowboy1629]

Compromise? Lets start with reinstating our second amendment rights. Then we can talk about what Obama will give us and what constitutional rights we will give him.

Until they are ready to do that I would say we have already compromised too much.

 

[kjf48197]

I will compromise.....they leave me alone and repeal any law that tells me when and where I can carry and I will not break any laws.

 

[LP1]

Obviously there are is a lot of emphasis on what might happen, or what could happen, but in all likelihood it will come down to a compromise. If we have to accept new legislation, what could you live with?

I could live with a practical way to perform NICS checks for private parties, provided it was not required by law, but provided as an option to vette out buyers who shouldnt be buying. Personally, I would actually feel comfortable doing transactions on Armslist or similar sites if I could check someone out. The check would in some way have to be mutual, and it would have to be free.

I would also like to see existing laws enforced to a much stricter degree to prevent sudo dealers who are selling stacks of new guns as a "private party". If you are operating a business, you should have an FFL. I would also support better contribution of mental health records, as long as it was court ordered. Among those records I would also include things like court ordered anger management. Lastly, I would support an improvement to NICS so that when someone was denied (not delayed, but denied) that it would notify the local police immediately. If that person was already being monitored by local LEOs, that information could be helpful.

What benefit would there be to private NICS checks if they are voluntary? As with so many other ideas, this would only affect the law-abiding. It would do very little to stop illegal transfers.

Nothing is "free" - every action has a direct cost to the taxpayer. This mindset explains a lot of what is wrong with our society. The cost of any background check should be passed along to the parties involved.

Why should a denied NICS lead to immediate police notification? What if it occurred due to a records snafu, or identity fraud? I strongly doubt that very many people who are trying to buy illegally will fill out a 4473.

 

[Classic]

Anyone suggesting compromise here is a danger to all gun owners. We all have to stay together or they will take us down one group at a time. First "military grade" weapons, Big magazines, short barreled handguns, semi-auto rifles, semi-auto handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns. Any one of these groups suggesting compromise is acting in a self-centered and short-sighted manner IMO.

 

[jb1911]