Are guns sold in the internet? How are checks done?Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
Printable View
Are guns sold in the internet? How are checks done?Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
Why do you need more? What is possibly going to happen that you need to stock up. I see only a few fringes calls for banning or taking away law abiding citizens guns. Is Trump going to mobilize the national guard to go door to door and take your guns? Are you suddenly going to have to hunker down in your home and fend off huge mobs of crazed anti gun activists? I actually know people who said if Obama was elected for a second term he would declare martial law and confiscate everyone’s gun. Where do these ideas come from? I don’t get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
I shoot sporting clays. It’s very challenging and I enjoy it. Currently my friends and I compete in around 3 or 4 tournaments a month. And we get together around twice a week for practice. These are shotgun events and there are also sub guage events. So you can compete with a 12, 20, 28, or 410 gauge shotgun. I have a 28 guage on the way. I already have the others.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
I also like to go to the range and shoot pistol and rifle. This is just bullseye shooting and I’m just competing against myself, and a few friends. It’s also challenging and I enjoy it also.
So why stock up? I shoot 1000’s of rounds a year. When people start hearing about bullet bans, gun bans, taxes, or other infringements, they start hoarding. Then this causes supply problems, it was hard to get powder a few years ago, and 22 shells, and other ammo.
Since i I reload, and it’s cheaper to buy quantities in the thousands, I do.
The gun has to be sent to a FFL holder. They require a 4473 and background check. Same as if you bought it in a local store. I’m pretty sure you can’t mail a gun to anyone but a manufacture or FFL. Anytime a gun is sold and shipped thru the mail it requires the same background check that the state it’s being shipped to requires.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Guns can be advertised on the internet and sold locally. Then you would meet face to face and sell.
makes perfect sense. The people I knew who were stocking up were preparing for government takeover. I assume the type of weapons you talk about are not the kind that someone would use to shoot from a windo into a crowded concert or gun down a classroom of children?Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
The Germans wanted to ban these shotguns for use in war. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_1897Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
So im sure that if there is a will, there is a way for someone to kill if they chose. They will find a tool to get the job done.
When I was seriously into competitive target shooting, I could go through 1000 rounds of ammunition a week. These days, I may go through that in a month.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
When engaged in National Match events, I used an M1 Garand sold to me by the US Army, quite arguably a “weapon of war” as it had been used in war. And I fired ammunition the US Army sold me by the crate. (They still do this, btw...) I also used an M1A and an AR15. And a M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle. These are or were all military-issue firearms.
Bit more to it then that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
From USPS site:
432.3 Rifles and Shotguns
Except under 431.2, unloaded rifles and shotguns are mailable. Mailers must comply with the rules and regulations under 27 CFR, Part 478, as well as state and local laws. The mailer may be required by the USPS to establish, by opening the parcel or by written certification, that the rifle or shotgun is unloaded and not ineligible for mailing. The following conditions also apply:
Subject to state, territory, or district regulations, rifles and shotguns may be mailed without restriction when intended for delivery within the same state of mailing. These items must:
Bear a “Return Service Requested” endorsement.
Be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
A rifle or shotgun owned by a non-FFL may be mailed outside the owner‘s state of residence by the owner to himself or herself, in care of another person in the other state where he or she intends to hunt or engage in any other lawful activity. These mailpieces must:
Be addressed to the owner.
Include the “in the care of” endorsement immediately preceding the name of the applicable temporary custodian.
Be opened by the rifle or shotgun owner only.
Be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Mailing of rifles and shotguns between licensed FFL dealers, manufacturers, or importers are not restricted. The Postal Service recommends that these items be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Rifles and shotguns may be mailed by a non-FFL owner domestically to a FFL dealer, manufacturer, or importer in any state. These items must be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Except as described in 432.3a, licensed curio and relic collectors may mail firearms meeting the definition of curios or relics under 27 CFR 478.11 domestically to licensed FFL curio and relic collectors in any state. These items must be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery.
Firearms meeting the definition of a rifle or shotgun under 431.4 which are certified by the curator of a municipal, state, or federal museum, which exhibits firearms to be curios or relics of museum interest, may be accepted for mailing without restriction when mailed between governmental museums.
Air guns (see 431.6) that do not fall within the definition of firearms under 431.1a are mailable. A shipment containing an air gun with a muzzle velocity of 400 or more feet per second (fps) must include an adult signature service under DMM 503.8. Mailers must additionally comply with all applicable state and local regulations.
There are also some estate rules.
Some links:
- BATFE Q&A for Unlicensed Persons - https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/unlicensed-persons
- BATFE FAQs for Unlicensed Persons - https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearm...rearms-carrier
- 18 USC § 922 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922
- 27 CFR § 478.31 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.31
- USPS Publication 52 - Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail (Firearms) - https://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/pub52c4_008.htm
- UPS "How to Ship Firearms or Ammunition" - https://www.ups.com/us/en/help-cente.../firearms.page
- FedEx "Prohibited or Restricted Articles - Firearms" - http://www.fedex.com/us/freight/rule..._articles.html
The “mail it to yourself” USPS regulation doesn’t “you can buy firearms on the Internet and ave them mailed to you”.
Correct, but I wanted to also make it clear about shipping already owned, or family owned/inherited firearms. Sorry for the confusion, been on 13 hour days this week and getting ready for another 6 of those.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I had to do this when clearing out my grandfather’s estate, I had to bring a printout of that regulation and walk the postal people through it. When the counter clerk looked up in the large post office and unthinkingly yelled down to his supervisor at the far end “he’s got guns, I need help”, the clerk and I both paused, then moved very very slowly :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
You didn’t answer my questionQuote:
Originally Posted by dmc
i do own a modern sporting rifle if that was your question. It functions the same as my BAR 7mm mag that I bought to go elk hunting.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Ive shot it at the range also, but it’s not as accurate as some of my other rifles.
And im not concerned about anyone coming to get me or whatever you were wondering about.
I’m much more concerned by teens driving while looking at their phones. We should require that their phones are disabled if they are traveling over 5 mph. That would save many more lives than a ban on scary looking rifles.
I think we should ban the sale of cell phones to people under the age of 21. Apparently 11 children a day die from texting-and-driving. http://www.textinganddrivingsafety.c...-driving-statsQuote:
Originally Posted by dmc
Heck, we probably shouldn’t be letting teens/children drive at all, so no licenses until 21 too!
And they obviously aren’t mature enough to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Regardless of what you are shooting, if it is game or targets I have no problem. Stockpiling in your case does not seem paranoid or odd. I just wondered of the type of guns you use are similar to the ones that can take out a crowd from a high window or multiple students quickly. I have never held or shot a gun and I have no idea what any of them areQuote:
Originally Posted by dmc
I think that is why we have so many problems. I have no clue about guns. Like I said the second amendment I believe should stay in place, perhaps with some clarification when deeded.
The crazy either Ban All Guns or the NRA saying Obama or Hillary means the end of the second amendment are the extreme positions. I don’t think either of these extremes is where we will end up.
Agree about the phones. There should be a lockout above a few MPH. But then what about a passenger?
also, driving and eye tests once you reach 80, more severe penalties for drunk driving, nothing extreme, just safety.
in some states kids younger than that drive farm equipment. Raising the age to 21 might pose problems for teens who hold jobs though.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I have firearms I inherited from elderly relatives that would be quite suitable for engaging multiple targets rapidly, and capable of extended periods of continuous fire. They were made in the 1800s.
I also have a Colt Gatling gun from 1877 that would be quite efficient at such things. They cost $50k-$100k these days, and each round fired costs about $1, so at full speed it’d run you about $1k/minute to fire. The effective range is perhaps 1500 yards. I am unaware of any being used in criminal acts recently.
Raising the age for rifles to 21 poses similar issues for rural residents. My daughter had her first rifle at 10 or so. At my very rural high school, we were able to check out our rifles from the school storage lockers when we went out to do our ranch chores.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
The beauty of our Constitution is that it grants no rights, it limits government's ability to violate your inherent rights. Once you start clarifying I'm afraid all inherent rights then become privileges, available only to our overseers.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Would this be a good moment to mention my fine collection of cannon? (Which oddly, are almost completely unregulated...)
so how did we get to the current hysteria? NRA hysteria that any talk about background checks or raising age to buy guns= they want to abolish the second amendmentQuote:
Originally Posted by bae
far left= banning certain weapons and so on
what is the sensible middle ground, or is it all or nothing? How can current laws be enforced if there are laws that are not being enforced?
Because the well of civil discourse has been poisoned, and it is no longer possible to have a sane discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
But normal people like us can do it, even though we have different levels of education, different life experiences and come from all over the place. No one here has said “fake news” or called someone “cadet bone spurs”, “liar” or anything. Most of this lack of civil discourse is driven by the media seizing on every little thing, thentweeter in Chief, social media making mountains out of molehills and the biggest of all Money. NRA gave $50,000,000 to elect it’s preferred candidates. How did we let this happen. Do our politicians really represent us?Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Sadly, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
While it may be more comfortable to blame politicians as a class, or one in particular for our present situation, I think we need to face the reality of who sent them there.
Isabelle Robinson, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School wrote an Op-ed for the New York Times 3/27/2018.
She has seen comments to the effect that if students had befriended and loved Cruz, maybe he would not have been so shamed, enraged and violent. She rejects the idea.
Five years before the shooting incident, Nikolas Cruz threw an apple at her in the school cafeteria, hitting her in the back. This is one example of his history of rage and violence in the school which she personally witnessed.
In Robinson's opinion, It is the responsibility of the school administration and guidance department to seek out those students (who have demonstrated aggressive, unpredictable or violent tendencies) and get them the help that they need, even if it is extremely specialized attention that cannot be provided at the same institution.
Considering that in a survey last october 96% of people say they favor background checks for all purchases, 75% a 30 day waiting period and 70% that all privately-owned guns be registered I question whether politicians actually do represent us.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
But most of us don't vote based on single issues as measured by polls taken six months ago. For the most part, we vote out of habit or identification with a particular party or candidate. Sometimes, as with Trump, some of vote us out of spite. Some vote to "shake things up" out of pure boredom.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
You can blame Fox News or the Russians or "the Rich" or hypocritical Christians or racists or patriarchs or lefty snowflakes or poor parenting or rampant political correctness fascism or omnipotent Big Data sorcery, but in the end each of us is free to vote his choice (or neglect voting at all) as he sees fit.
If we are brought to a choice of two types of liar, if our clowns become pundits and our pundits clowns, if we decide the people who disagree with us are idiots and liars, than the real fault lies with our own ignorance and neglect, not some designated scapegoat.
If a sungle puppy dying in an overhead bin of an airplane can stir congress to rapid action but dozens of dead children can’t, despite overwhelong support for a commonsense reform it seems pretty clear that the problem isnt that vioters don't care. It seems much more likely that the gun lobby has more power to thwart congress from carrying out the people’s wishes than the ‘i like dead puppies on planes’ lobby.
The phrase “common sense reform” is full of nonsense.
wait, has Congress actually passed legislation against another bad thing happening, like dead dogs?Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Oh they are so resourceful at saving us from the bad stuff of the world.
Fools. they are a bunch of idiots and fools. I tire of their stupidity.
I’d have to question that poll some, I’m not saying that a majority might favor background checks, but not 96%. Of coarse the latest polls also put trumps approval rating above Obama’s for the sameness time in office. I’m sure you believe that also.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Here is that link. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ez_track_apr02
No moreso than the NRA’s extremist interpretation of the second amendment.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I'm not sure what the NRA's interpretation might be, what do you consider extremist?Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
I’ve been thinking of giving my grandkids a life membership to the NRA. I don’t view them as extreme. And they give a jacket for signing up and I’m keeping that for myself.
You can always send some money to Bloomberg and while he’s at it he can get back to fighting soft drinks.
Im sure both groups are gaining membership and contributions.
Ignoring the first 13 words.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I always want to ask people who want "common sense gun law reform" how they'd feel about common sense abortion reform or common sense free speech reform or common sense labor law reform.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I suppose if we were talking about specific labor law or abortion or speech reforms, in a way similar to how i was dscussing a specific potential gun law reform we could decide whether the proposed reforms could be characterized as common sense or not. My gut instinct, though, is that if any off your proposed reforms for the above polled at 96% approval they’d probably be pretty common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultralight
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I think those first 13 words are well settled.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
According to Wikipedia:Quote:
In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that held the amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.[14][15]
In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court clarified its earlier decisions that limited the amendment's impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment against state and local governments.[16]
In Caetano v. Massachusetts(2016), the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier rulings that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that its protection is not limited to "only those weapons useful in warfare".[17]
So, given such a solid basis for the NRA's advocacy to retain settled rights, I'm still curious why anyone would use the word "extremist".