• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

McCabe offers gun purchase recommendations

This is a suggestion by McCabe, he doesn't get to write the law if one is ever passed. I know I am going to get a whole bunch of crap thrown back at me, but here goes. We already have a background check, we are already inconvenienced so why not get some good out of it? A fugitive needs mean all that are facing legal action. And a bad check needs to be looked at, not ignored after 3 days. I don't see this as a bad thing. but the devil is in the details, a new interpretation would have to be a good one not some thing that is feel good and no substance and just harasses good people.
 
We have 32,000 or so gun laws. The 1968 GCA did not accomplish anything to prevent crime. Criminals never did and never will obey the law, so only law-abiding citizens will be the victims of ill-begotten legal efforts to control crime by regulating firearms and/or firearms transactions. If you have a (socialist) right to health care, someone else gets taxed to provide for your (socialist) right. We all have a (God-given) right to self-defense, yet no one is providing the means for me to defend myself. If I'm willing to pay for and plan for my own defense (through training, firearms purchasing, ammo selection), just get out of my way and leave me alone. If someone is going to pay for my self-defense (God-given) right, I'd like an M240Bravo and plenty of ammo.
 
I never realized that we had a "fugitive lobby" until now. We do have a Bill of Rights.

What we do have is speed of light computer data processing and huge data storage capacities.

Should an individual be adjudicated as a felon, gun rights need to be denied but some judicial process needs to occur. Apparently by crossing a state line to avoid prosecution or testifying in a criminal trial constitutes a crime- it apparently must be proven the individual knowingly did this. Denying a person the right to buy a firearm on the basis of a warrant could generate systematic abuse of individual rights - we have all heard that selected judges authorize more warrants than other judges. Would you ever believe judges can make decisions based on political opinion or some abstract interpretation of community standards.

Americans like guns and shooting. Like 13.6 million gun buy applications in 2018. My solution would be to issue a firearm buy permit to each citizen upon voter registration - like US citizen, non-felon, has voting rights. Like show your voter registration card combined with your firearm possession authorization and photo ID to the LGS and get on with the buy - right to vote & second amendment. No poll tax. CCW standards would be universal and apply to all states. Felons, aliens, convicted illegal drug offenders need not apply. How can you vote intelligently while high or stoned?

The inability of the Feds and some states to easily manage gun buy applications is not a good reason to force more delays into the process. Three days might extend to some indefinite time. Bureaucracy knows no boundaries; McCabe is a bureaucrat..

The "red flag" stuff has an enormous potential for abuse and little or no consequence on gun violence. Some 13.6 million applications in 2018 would translate into zillions of guns in the USA, each one having a potential to be stolen.
 
It’s all too easy to be ‘adjudicated as a felon’ after the stroke of a pen reverses prior precedent-setting court rulings as new legislation’s passed.

What I want to better understand is how swearing an oath to “uphold and defend” seems so easily ignored when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
 
This was never about "gun control", it's always been about people control. The end game is total dis-armament, they know they can't do an outright ban, but that have been very successful at piece-mealing a dis-armament, one B/S law after another B/S law.
Ask all the other people from all the other countries that their government dis-armed then how that worked out, oh wait you can't they're all dead.
 
Lawmakers are currently under a lot of pressure to "do something" that'll stop these mass murder/suicides by young, white, males. Like there's a simple answer to that!

And here is a perfect example of what happens when they do that, pencil whip a quick set of new laws in answer to public pressure.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rule-law-finally-prevails-over-133049623.html

Here it took 18 loooong years for the courts to finally say that THE RULE OF LAW PREVAILS against government overreach, and that the words written in our Constitution actually matter. This was not the result of just Democrats or just Republicans, it was BOTH. In the days after 9-11-01 attacks, Congress was tripping all over itself trying to be the first to push the Aye button on the so called Patriot Act, before it was even written and available for discussion. A whole lot of honest Americans paid a huge price for that folly.

I fear we're about to fall down that same Constitutional pit-hole again.
 
It’s all too easy to be ‘adjudicated as a felon’ after the stroke of a pen reverses prior precedent-setting court rulings as new legislation’s passed.

What I want to better understand is how swearing an oath to “uphold and defend” seems so easily ignored when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.

Good point.

Some acts are felonies in every existing society and after the required procedure or adjudication by some judicial process the felony label is applied. Apparently, Mr. McCabe thinks adjudication is not required before gun rights are denied on the basis of some warrant.

We don't live in a dictatorship (yet) and hopefully that stroke of the pen would need legislative approval, be subject to the veto process, be subject to appeal, and review right up to SCOUS for compliance with the constitution.

As far as to "uphold and defend" the constitution, most of gun control people at the very beginning of any announcement say that they support the second amendment, they apparently think modification is required because of changing times and make their plea to those who want something done no matter what - do something - like what? - just do something. They are not ignoring the 2nd amendment, just working around it.
 
Just what is the "gun show loop hole" every anti gun person is referring to?

That gun sales between individuals can occur in private, without background check being run on prospective buyer.

Said to go on frequently in parking lots at gun shows though I doubt there’s any reliable statistic about that.

Puts responsibility of transfer onto seller for following state and federal laws that apply to this kind of activity.

That individual, private citizen sellers aren’t currently allowed to access the NICS system doesn’t seem to affect the antis’ thinking much.

Making every transfer activity subject to NICS check is what “closing the loophole” amounts to. De facto registration in other words, in direct contradiction to “...shall not be infringed.)
 
Last edited:

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,841
Messages
2,224,474
Members
80,000
Latest member
Smiley96
Back
Top