Well Mr. President-Which is it going to be"

Discussion in 'US' started by jumpinjarhead, Feb 25, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. This is what His Beneficence said about His not intending to take firearms away from the people and how he supports the Second Amendment.

    While this is what researchers in His Justice Department are coming up with ideas like this (note the futility of a so-called "assault weapons ban" and the ultimate action that would be needed if He was to achieve His true goal of "gun control"

    NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama admin of wanting to confiscate guns - Washington Times

    Of course His minions deny that this memo in fact means gun confiscation but it is nevertheless highly illuminating as to the efficacy of many of the proposals urged in such a high profile manner by Him and His lapdog Joe Biden and others speaking for His administration.

    If His own researchers think these ideas already put forward by His administration will not work what then will He do and this is the import of the overall tenor of this memo, regardless of the backpedaling being done by His administration to further obfuscate what many of us (now quite reasonably so, in contrast to the allegations of unfounded paranoia leveled at us) believe is His ultimate goal to disarm law abiding Americans in direct violation of the Constitution.

    I tired to attach the actual 9 page memo but it is too large a file. If you are interested it can be found here:

  2. How will they know who's got what type of firearm? Do you have registration over there?
  3. They don't know. Thats half of what I personally see as the problem. Before JJH has an coronary, I believe that decent, mentally competent and law abiding citizens should be allowed to buy firearms.

    No, not really apart from for full auto, silencers and things that fall into the category 'Any other weapon'.....thats sawn off shotguns to you and me.

    When buying from a dealer you must fill out a federal form and have a criminal background check done (takes about 15 minutes). No details of the firearm you are buying are passed to the Feds. You fill out the form declaring that you are not a criminal or a nutter, they take your word for it and hey ho off you go..........you see the flaw in the system?

    When buying, or selling, privately there is legally no requirement to notify anyone of anything.........again do you see the problem?

    As a decent law abiding citizen I have no objection to a modicum of controls and in my opinion nor should any other decent law abiding citizen. I have cleared up the mess at a school a couple of times, albeit traffic accidents in front of the gates, but its not a nice experience having to tell mum and dad that their little one will never be home again and its an even worse experience for mum and dad.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Therein lies the rub--modicum means something far different to our Masters. The Australian experience of beginning with a "modicum" and ending up with nearly total gun control/confiscation is a cautionary tale.
  5. Why would it matter, if I'm a fit and proper person to own a weapon does it matter what that weapon is? I'm not going to use it illegally.

    Of course if I'm not a fit and proper person I'll just have anything I want illegally.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Exactly.
  7. I'm a UK based shooter, I think that our gun controls are excessive, however I don't see some sort of registration system as being contrary to the 2nd amendment...

    I see the issue with creeping gun control and that it was we continue to fight against here (you wouldn't think the control could get any worse would you) I do believe it's sensible to know what is owned and the owner taking some responsibility if the weapon is used illegally.

    I do understand that we are probably at different ends of the gun spectrum culturally but I hope I don't sound like a gun control nut ;-)
  8. Once registration comes in, I've no doubt confiscation will be along at some stage.
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Yes, but the original 2nd amendment, in my understanding, was written as a proviso, more of a deterent really, to allow log cabin dwellers to keep a musket about the property so that should those nasty, tea drinking redcoats return they would have a means of collectively banding against them in an armed fashion.

    Then it all went a bit looney tunes when everyone who wanted one, regardless of their mental condition or criminal standing, bought more or less whatever they wanted. As I stated above the Fed Form, the number of which I never remember, has peolle declaring that they are not a nutter or criminal. The criminal background check is only done in the State in which the indivisual is buying a weapon, based on them holding the driving licence for that State - which you can get in half an hour. As I have previously stated on this forum my Mrs had an audit done of employee criminal backgrounds and it was discovered that they, as a bank, were employing over 20 convicted murderers along with a host of individuals with a multitude of State and Federal convictions. A sympton of the disjointed law enforcement system.

    I will say again, and I was told to **** off from a gun club here for this, no decent, honest, mentally stable person should have any objection to a form of licensing that helps prevent needless deaths and murder. Point of interest, since the school shooting that kicked Obama off on his crusade against guns there have been in excess of 1000 gun related killings in the USA. We had one locally recently where a guy and his mate step off the underground as they walk away from the carriage doors the one guy turns, pulls a pistol and fires a couple of shots into the doorway at a bloke who supported another footie team. They got him, he did'nt know they had cameras all over the place - made for interesting watching on the news. Then there was the bloke who was contesting custody of his kids, walks into court shoots the two plods on the security desk, walks to the courtroom and shoots his mrs and her mate, then tops himself. So now the kids have no parents.

    All because some ********* don't want to admit there may be a need for some controls, and the NRA rakes in millions in subscriptions so that the executive can pay themselves huge wages.

    Don't get me wrong, I am happy I can own guns again, but my european mentality dictates that with rights come responsibilities and not a disregard or blind selfishness at the cost of others lives.
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Since the Connecticut shootings approximately 10,000 American children have been killed legally. No guns involved, no outcry.
  11. My pet hate here is the way that they think cars drive themselves: mobile phone; cup of coffee; make-up; fag. I don't remember the exact statistic but they used to pound away at it on the local radio in Florida and it is something like 4 deaths a minute due to phone calls or texting whilst driving.......just in Florida.
    • Like Like x 1

  12. Actually the contemporaneous record of communications among the founders regarding the amendment demonstrate the primary reason was to deter usurpation of the republic by any individual or group.

    This a good summary of the historical background and it has been even further underscored by the several recent landmark Supreme Court cases finding the 2d Amendmernt to be an individual right of every American without regard to the militia clause.


    Attached Files:

  13. Have they enshrined the Right to arm bears yet?
  14. And you would be misinformed and wrong, spreading more of the same.

    The Right to bear arms is more than about the militia. The intent is to allow self-protection, capability of self-provision, and ensuring that the means to deter any enemy to the Constitution and our country, whether foreign or domestic, are in the hands of the Citizens.

    Background checks are performed from the forms that are filled out, in most cases immediately. No one's word is simply taken. Many people who should not be are turned down at the purchase counter due to mistakes in the response from law enforcement, and these erroneous refusals are reported with all the turn-downs as "prevented sales" making the efforts of control look better than what they are.

    As far as private sales not having checks, most people sell to people they know, and are careful with how they dispose of a weapon, as they know it can come back to them because even though, technically, records are not to be kept, they are.

    There are plenty of controls and regulations and laws in place. People who are going to break the law do not follow them.
    Responsibility that comes with Rights is not a uniquely European concept, and failing in upholding those responsibilities is not an entirely US concept. Some of those responsibilities include ensuring that nothing should be allowed to erode the Rights and Freedoms which are acknowledged, NOT granted, by the Constitution.

    It is pure irresponsibility, laziness and selfishness to insist that law abiding Citizens cannot be trusted with self-regulation, which already involves way too much oversight and intrusion by the police force on the behalf of the executive.

    The only ones that more laws and regulations put a burden on are those that will follow them, the criminals are not bothered, burdened or deterred.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. I don't often suffer from misinformation, then generally only as a result of bad information to myself.

    Buying a firearm from a dealer:

    You are required to complete a form ATF 4473 in the presence of the FFL when buying or receiving a firearm on transfer. A copy of the form can be seen here:


    You complete the form. The FFL checks tha you are a resident of the State by checking your driving licence. Checks the given address against the driving licence also. You may, but are not required to, give your social security number as additional proof of ID.

    Question 11, (a) thru (l) are your self given declaration that you are not a criminal, psycho or nutter - I will come back to these.

    Once the ATF Form 4473 is comlete the dealer places a call to the relevant STATE not FEDERAL department responsible for pre-transfer criminal background checks. Most, probably all nowadays, States link into NICS as a central criminal database a bit like the UK PNC, more nformation here:

    FBI — Gun Checks/NICS

    This is a more or less instant service taking, on a good day, 15 minutes or so. It takes a bit longer for me because I am a resident alien and my ID is directly checked with the Feds to ensure that I am legally in the USA.

    Back to the FFL and his customer: once the relevant State law enforcement department has conducted the check over NICS they tell the FFL everything is fine and issue them with an APPROVAL NUMBER. The FFL notes the APPROVAL NUMBER on the ATF Form 4473, usually along with the name of the person issuing the number to them. At that point the FFL will release the firearm to the individual.

    Back to the declaration that you have no criminal record or mental issues: The only person who can tell them you are a nutter is a doctor and there has been no doctor involved in the process. The criminal background check is also in many cases a test of the honesty of the individual filling out the ATF 4473. There are over 3500 local Police Departments in the USA many consisting of the Chief and his brother in law, both of wom have problems signing an X for their signature, never mind completing a Federal return for criminal convictions....see my above about the crmnal ecords audit at my wifes bank. As a further comment; I worked with US Law Enforcement for a while, operationally, I also know several, lots, many local, state and federal officers.....so I have seen the system from inside.

    Private purchases of firearms:

    I gave no specific examples of 'Billy' selling 'Bob' a firearm. Yes friends and gun club members do sell eac other firearms because the know each other. Yet, my mate in DHS who speaks Spanish seems to think that there are an awfl lot of private sales that go south of the border to the cartels. Then there is that ATF Special Agent I spent a few days on a course with who is a task force supervisor and tactical team leader who seems to spend most of his working time chasing down illegal firearm purchases, again mainly procured by people sending them down to Mexico.

    My own experienc of the lawful and trustworthy gun owner involved me visiting a gun show when I was here in the USA on holiday. The guy offered me a civvy HK 53 (i forget he civvy model number) when I pointed ou I was only on holiday he said he did'nt give a shit if I wanted it I could have it, for $1800.

    Then we move on o he various forums and gun sale websites where the words "private sale, face to face only" seem to appear regularly. A way of giving the finger to the Feds and their rules.

    As for irresponsible and lazy. Yeah, I fail to understand how generating more administrative work can be classified as lazy. Irresponsible, personally I do nt consider the majority of gun ownrs I have met to be fit to own water pistols never mind owning real bullet spitting firearms......a sad fact that is shown on many news channels every night of the year.
    • Like Like x 1