Where did I say that? I simply asked you how the making of a law can stop illegal gun purchases that are already illegal from happening? Your article stated (quite well) that many criminals are already using illegal methods to acquire their guns. How does a new law change this if they are already breaking the old laws to get the guns? If you can't see that enforcement is a major issue here, then you really are blinded by partisan politics and liberal agendas.

Enforcement is a huge issue. The main tenets of my idea: transfering ownership, ATF database, and annual registration are all ideas to making it easier to enforce current laws.

Sometimes I honestly don't know what you're talking about. How are those bad ideas in and of themselves? Please enlighten me.

If enforcement is a problem, nothing you are doing here is going to change that. You think because you make more laws that they will enforce them better? What on earth makes you think this is so? Because you think it's going to happen doesn't mean it will. Enforcement being the problem now won't change just because you make more laws to enforce. If they wanted to stop illegal gun sales, they could do it with the laws on the books. It's obviously not the priority you would like it to be or they'd be doing it.

Kid, use your brain. Do you think a database of license plates, VIN's, and registered owners makes it easier or harder for law enforcement? Just in general.

I am positing more specific resources for law enforcement. Your retort is a blanket answer of "no new laws until we enforce the current." That doesn't address what I am saying and is flat stupid. You give no example of current laws that need to be enforced and offer no alternative solution. You are just acting like an ignorant immoveable rock. You are blocking any worthwhile conversation while at the same time offering nothing.

I didn't say "no new laws" we've had this debate over and over again. I have no issues with making background checks mandatory for ALL gun sales. It is you who isn't adding solutions. Databases of legal gun owners will not help one iota in the ability to enforce the laws being broken with ILLEGAL gun sales. Seriously, think about what you propose. You want a database of all registered gun owners, and yet this will somehow stop illegal gun sales that are already not being enforced? You might think you are making some semblance of sense, but you most definitely are not.

Illegal gun sales? Do you know what straw purchasing is?

Yes I know exactly what it is. It's already illegal to use this method in obtaining a firearm.

There are a lot of things that are illegal. It sounds like you're suggesting we stop giving law enforcement more tools and just call it good. Norquist didn't go far enough with no new taxes, we need no new legislation!

Just keep repeating that I am saying no new legislation whatsoever, and maybe, just maybe, you can convince someone that it's true.

I personally am not against background checks and an updated ATF database. Hell, here in OK we don't even have to register our guns, which really blew my mind when I purchased my first pistol here. I think that should be changed, as a database of owners would be great for law enforcement. As long as they don't say I can't have my guns though, but I seriously doubt that would happen here anytime soon.

Furthermore, all of you who hate guns, have you ever shot one? It is rather fun, and if properly trained and in the right environment safe as all hell too. If not that is all good to. I'm not one to say you have to own one, I just personally like things that go boom.

_________________
2013 AAR: Chris Harper

Question for all of those wanting stricter gun control laws:

I currently have in possession my father's .357 revolver. It's registered to him, but he lended it to me since I recently had a break-in. Should this be legal or illegal? Isn't it pretty much the same as him lending me his vehicle?

Was this a break-in or a home invasion? (Either way, I'm sorry to hear it!)

As to your question: What do the laws of Alabama say? For all I know, you don't need a license in Alabama?

_________________
If you're walking on thin ice, you might as well dance.................................................Mom

It was a break-in. Came home from work at 4am to find the front door wide open (it had been kicked in, door framing split in half). The only thing they stole was my SKS, not the ammo or magazine (keep them separate, but very close by).

Yeah, another gun on the street, though I don't even know if it works, as I've never fired it.

The .357 is for a home invasion, much easier to hide. My father recently gave my sister his 9mm, since he just purchased a .40.

At least no one was hurt. So, do you need a permit in Alabama?

_________________
If you're walking on thin ice, you might as well dance.................................................Mom

Only need a permit for concealed carry. Though, handguns have to be registered. That was actually what I meant by posting, since it isn't registered to me, should it be illegal for me to have it? As for Alabama law on that, I don't know the answer.

Just looking for public opinion, not what the law says.

Honestly, I think its a slippery slope and comes down to the word "borrowed". You lay out a perfect example of why a gun may need to be borrowed. There was a break in AND your gun was stolen. For immediate protection you begin to borrow your father's gun. I see nothing wrong with that.

However, this is an instance where guns differ from cars. Cars carry insurance policy with them so it doesn't matter (per se) who is operating the vehicle, so it can be loaned out at the will of the owner. Guns don't offer that kind of protection. What's to stop gun traffickers to buy up guns and say they "loaned" them out when they are used in crimes?

If there was a gun owner database and if registration/ownership was maintained, my immediate thought would be that your dad should have to contact the ATF or some gun hotline and add your name to the registration within a certain time frame. Create a paper trail and document accountability.

edited for typo

I personally don't have a problem with something like that. I think all weapons (guns) should be registered, not just handguns, but rifles also.

If you're a law abiding citizen, there isn't an issue. My father just got his concealed carry license in three days, for $10. Not too shabby.

I don't agree with limiting ammo or how much a magazine holds.

It's an interesting question. I wouldn't say that it should straight up be illegal, but I don't think that it would be unreasonable for there to be a system where lendings would be reported and on record.

edit: yeah, pretty much what evenf said.

_________________
Tanzania¹²

I'm pretty much in agreement with Evan on this. I'm not anti-gun, per se, but I'm anti "any fucking nut job with the money can buy a firearm."

'Smokin's example of just walking down the street buying weapons with absolutely no record, is wrong. No record of buying or selling. Hell, who knows where those weapons have been?

_________________
If you're walking on thin ice, you might as well dance.................................................Mom

This is a whole different tangent Im about to start and would need its own thread..

but what I would say is it should be totally legal. BUT your father should also be equally liable for anything done with the gone registered to him while on loan to you.

If you dont properly store it, its stolen and the gun is used in a crime.. he is liable.

Essentially this is stance in general. If the country doesnt want to limit the number of firearms out there, fine. I understand. But make people liable for whatever happens with their guns.

I wish I had more time , I would like to join the converstation properly but since summer my work and the bar I opened have occupied all my time. Miss this forum.

_________________
“If somebody thinks they're a hedgehog, presumably you just give them a mirror and a few pictures of hedgehogs and tell them to sort it out for themselves.”