DaveTN

Wow, I would think Patrolling at night with animals that will kill you and eat you would be a far greater danger than the poachers.

You’re supposed to put them in your pocket; not drag them behind the car on a rope.

Starting in the mid 90’s S&W was tapping the 686 for a scope mount. Are they still doing it on new 686’s? If you open your cylinder and look at the inside top of the frame there will be three tapped holes. All mine are pre-locks, and not tapped; never thought I’d be looking for one that’s not.

When this all started a lot of the people I worked with ask “What is the gun show loophole?” because they assumed you already had to do a background check to buy a gun. Some of them even owned guns and assumed because they did it when they bought their new gun; that everyone has to do it. When I explained how it worked; most of them said they thought a background check was a good idea. It isn’t going to impact me one way or the other (other than added cost if they don't make it free); I’m against it because it will do nothing. It will not stop one criminal or mass shooter from getting a gun if they want one.

Sure, here’s the FOX News poll; I figure they are probably the least likely to word the questions to put their own spin on it, or just outright lie. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-voters-favor-gun-measures-doubt-congress-will-act If you look at some of the other polls, Gallop, CNN, etc.; they are even higher. Some of the polls even asked if guns should be registered with the local Police and claim 70% said YES. It’s going to take a lot for the states to stop the Feds from requiring BC on private sales. If they also want to create a registry; they will have problems getting that passed. (I think. But I could be very wrong.)

I’m a little confused on what’s going on here. I keep seeing in media reports that the Judge will decide if there is enough to send this to a grand jury. I thought the DA had chosen to skip the Grand Jury and this was a preliminary hearing??

Then let them tie a gun registry to the BC bill; it won’t pass. Guns are traced every day that didn’t go through paperwork. If they need a trace bad enough they start with the first dealer and follow the path. When they get to you; you are going to give them my information pretty quick.

No, if they require a transfer and you don’t do it; you both should be worried. This is not the first time I have seen this tied to a gun registry. I just am curious how or why someone is making that leap?? I don’t see how it would require a registry, or have anything to do with guns you have at the time the law went into effect. I’m not arguing; I’m asking. Maybe I’m missing something here.

Why do they need a database? They make it a crime to transfer a firearm without a BC; same as it is now for across state lines. They would enforce it the same as with any other law.

Whats a list of guns you have got to do with private sales?

After years of private sales a lot of stolen guns would be turning up. Many of us have done private sales on guns where the history has not been checked. Any of us could have stolen guns. That could be a big problem, in some states possession of a stolen firearm is a felony; it doesn’t require they prove you stole it.

Background checks are coming; and I doubt there will be much negotiation by anyone. However, I wouldn’t be for allowing trading background checks for a Federal Carry permit. As soon as you take the carry permit process out of the hands of the state and turn it over to the Feds; the Feds will determine where, when, and what you can carry, and what “reasonable restrictions” are on the 2nd amendment. That might be a good thing if you are in NY or CA, but it would suck for us here. Background checks and state gun carry laws don’t have anything to do with each other; I would like to see it stay that way.

My first question is, did they make it or have someone else do it for them? If so; who?

Wow. As I read that story I thought. What are the chances of being in the Vegas shooting and that shooting? Gotta be astronomical. 21 minutes…had to seem like hours. I did not know the Deputy was killed by “friendly fire”. (What a weird term) A lot is learned from these shootings and they will be used for training all over the country. But the most obvious fact many will dismiss is that armed people were required to stop the shooter; but laws keep that from happening.

There is no bill. He will probably wait to see if there is a bill, and what it says. That’s what I will do.

https://wilsoncountyclerk.com/motor-vehicles/

Thank you for your service. Again… We need to know what is in this bill. The fear you have of someone complaining to the Police that you are a danger and having your firearms seized without due process is very real right now; PTSD diagnosis or not. Failure to do something will leave things the way they are now. I say this as a former Police Officer that has been involved in these kinds of cases; not in this state, but I doubt there are any protections here either. Do I think this legislation will allow for someone’s immediate due process? I doubt it because it’s being written by lawyers. Lawyers expect cops to make slit second decisions; yet they want weeks or months to make decisions. Heck with that; if they have evidence you are a danger to yourself or others they need to detain you for a reasonable amount of time (hours) and present their case to a Judge.

I don't think anyone is going to want to go to court over a bump stock. Especially when if you lose; you go to prison.

Shoot them down. problem solved.

The thing I find amazing about this story, besides the fact that the child lived, is that in 10 minutes the guy walked to a Police station, got to talk to a cop, confessed, and they got first responders to the child. A higher power was involved.

There is apparently going to be a court hearing on the guns. If the kids plan was to break in and steal them; I would guess the guns will be returned after the trial or resolution of the case. If the kid had routine access to the guns and ability to open the safe; that's a problem for the relative. If this case is going to go to trial the Prosecutor is going to want those evil black rifles so he can parade around the courtroom holding them in the air and making wild claims about the firepower these kids would have had when the entered the school. So I don't see him getting them back until there is a resolution in this case; they are physical evidence. Yes, you are misunderstanding me. I am not suggesting someone be held accountable for a criminal stealing their guns whether they are locked in a safe or not, or that someones gun could be seized because they were the target of a theft. My kids are grown; so no I don't know what they are doing. I'm not suggesting the parents be held responsible criminally. Based on what the suspects are apparently telling the Police; they need to be in reform school or a mental facility. This is beyond any remedy by the parents. Sorry if that sounds cold hearted; but I have zero tolerance for people who threaten or commit violent acts. The fact that someone heard this and came forward, stopping the plan, shouldn't mean these kids get a pass. Quite the opposite; they should be made an example of.

To win a lawsuit it’s probably going to have to be over authority to do what they have done. If banning bump stocks is unconstitutional; so is banning machine guns. If they want to ban anything it needs to be done by Congress; not the BATF. Bump stocks violate the intent of the law; not the letter of the law. If they wanted bump stocks to be illegal they should have amended the law. They may get by with doing it with a court ruling. I may be wrong, but I wouldn’t think a court would be bound by an ATF ruling on whether something is legal or not. If this goes to Congress to change the law: we may be in trouble on all aftermarket triggers.

If the kid gave detailed information and descriptions that he had access to uncle Bennies guns; yes, they are going to seize them as evidence for a conspiracy to commit murder case and they have the right to do that. You were a cop; you know that is true. Someone admitting to conspiracy to commit murder is no different than someone threatening suicide or homicide. The guns they have access to will be seized. Anything less is unacceptable. There is no violation of 2nd amendment rights. The 2nd amendment does not now and never did protect the rights of those that can’t keep their firearms from criminals. After the trial Uncle Bennie can petition the court to get his guns back. If my kid had access to my guns and then was arrested for conspiracy to deliver the guns in a murder case; my guns would be seized. But I don’t think I would be screaming about my 2nd amendment rights when I found out my kid was homicidal; I would have bigger issues to deal with.