Stories Like This Don't Help

[togor]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/01/us/california-gun-seizure-squads/index.html

White anti-gun propaganda, in the sense that it is true. Nobody I hope is going to argue that these felons should retain unmolested ownership of their arms.

In the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel there was a story of how a Glock bought in Wisconsin changed hands until it shot a high ranking Chicago cop. The first few FTF transactions were legal, then it gets murky.

If we want to reduce the flow of guns from legal to illegal owners, if that's really a goal, then the thing to do focus on transactions. If you end ownership of a gun and don't have a proper disposition record on file, and that gun shows up later in the system, you could lose your own ownership rights. Simple. Keeping guns out of the hands of criminals is every gun owner's responsibility.

[leftyo]

problem is, even if you legally sell a firearm to someone, heck maybe someone you know and you are 100% sure they are clean and you keep a note of who you sold it to....down the line maybe they sell it to someone, and then they to someone else, and then maybe its stolen. as for felons with guns, round em up, and lock em up!

[Dick Hosmer]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/01/us/ca...ads/index.html

White anti-gun propaganda, in the sense that it is true. Nobody I hope is going to argue that these felons should retain unmolested ownership of their arms.

In the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel there was a story of how a Glock bought in Wisconsin changed hands until it shot a high ranking Chicago cop. The first few FTF transactions were legal, then it gets murky.

If we want to reduce the flow of guns from legal to illegal owners, if that's really a goal, then the thing to do focus on transactions. If you end ownership of a gun and don't have a proper disposition record on file, and that gun shows up later in the system, you could lose your own ownership rights. Simple. Keeping guns out of the hands of criminals is every gun owner's responsibility.

Would "proper disposition record" include report of a theft? Your hands should be clean at that point.

[blackhawknj]

If the weapon had been obtained from a crooked cop -how much publicity would that get ?
A Professor of Constitutional Law told me that US law does not provide for forfeiture of rights.

[CJCulpeper]

So citizens convicted of felonies, violent and non-violent, who have completed their sentences are to be perpetually denied the ability to defend their lives and property? So much for the Declaration of Independence. I guess it is dead too.

[steelap]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/01/us/ca...ads/index.html

White anti-gun propaganda, in the sense that it is true. Nobody I hope is going to argue that these felons should retain unmolested ownership of their arms.

So citizens convicted of felonies, violent and non-violent, who have completed their sentences are to be perpetually denied the ability to defend their lives and property? So much for the Declaration of Independence. I guess it is dead too.

Point the first (since there are two parts to this thread already):

So there is the argument - permanent forfeiture of rights versus restoration after completion of sentence.

Weren't conservatives (including myself) against restoration of voting rights to felons in Virginia before the last election, and couldn't those voters have swung at least one statewide election?

How is the right to vote different, less fundamental, than the right to bear arms?

Point the second:

I can't tell if togor is in favor of the APP program or not, but he seems to be leaning that way.

However, the Armed Prohibited Persons list, so lovingly praised in the article and video, relies on two pillars - a complete list, which nationally could be started with the NICS database, and UNIVERSAL registration of ALL firearms (to include so-called ghost guns).

The APP list could be greatly enhanced by simply putting every person, if he registers as a Democrat, on the list. After all, such a person obviously has a criminal mindset and a defective mental condition!

[togor]

My point is that it is a complicated issue. But there is also a question...when we say we don't want felons to have firearms, how much do we as gun owners really mean it? Depends on who you ask. But if these felons keep guns they shouldn't have, then the work of disarming them is a matter of law and order, yes?

- - - Updated - - -

Would "proper disposition record" include report of a theft? Your hands should be clean at that point.

I would think casualty loss (house fire, etc.) or theft must be reported. In the case of theft, if someone reports 50 guns burgled per year in 20 separate acts, then it's a flag. But otherwise, it's ordinary theft and understood as such.

- - - Updated - - -

problem is, even if you legally sell a firearm to someone, heck maybe someone you know and you are 100% sure they are clean and you keep a note of who you sold it to....down the line maybe they sell it to someone, and then they to someone else, and then maybe its stolen. as for felons with guns, round em up, and lock em up!

Yes, agree, this is the problem. A bit like STDs in that respect.

[clintonhater]

So citizens convicted of felonies, violent and non-violent, who have completed their sentences are to be perpetually denied the ability to defend their lives and property?

That's the problem with such a blanket category as felony--makes no distinction between violent and non-violent. You can receive a felony conviction for an offense as meek & mild as income-tax fraud and a misdemeanor for such a savage, pathological, crime as torturing an animal. Often what determines whether a prosecutor holds out for a felony conviction, vs. a misdemeanor, is how crowded the court docket is, and always, of course, how much the defendant has to spend on his defense.

"Felony" is so vague in terms of the nature of the offense it's applied to that what's badly needed is some entirely new legal terminology that distinguishes between violent and non-violent offenses, and makes violent misdemeanors equivalent to felonies.

[leftyo]

felony, violent or non means you have an absolutely poor ability to make decisions, and you probably should not have the right to vote or possess firearms. dont much matter to me if you ran a ponzi scheme and screwed hundreds or thousands of people out of their life savings, or you killed someone. same poor decision making!

[JB White]

Silently lurking behind all the "This is a good thing" is a pilot program for listing and confiscating. They (CA) call for others to adopt the plan state-by-state, yet they admit failures and have wrongly confiscated firearms. A very expensive proposition for the upstart, and to maintain. No mention as to accuracy. No way to tell how well it works. No way to tell how many crimes MAY have been prevented. No way they'll admit to civil rights violations. (See 'failures')

What we see here is a showcase scenario. It doesn't say whether the culprit (victim?) was on parole, or whether he paid his dues and has had a clear record since. It doesn't make clear the exact reasons for the raid. They apparently entered under the premise of suspicion and a likely violation. What they found may justify the charges, but how do they justify the initial raids which have been turned over by the courts? The victims in those cases must've been mentally and financially anguished. Time in jail. Posting bail. Hiring an attorney. Damaged reputation and loss of income. Not to mention a possible loss of employment itself. To what end? "Here's your guns back. Hope your property damage has been somewhat repaired? We'll return your bail someday but your lawyer gets to keep his fees. Oh BTW while you may not have been wrong, we'll be watching you. Have a nice day".

The precedence has been set on a large scale. Keep a sharp eye on what's coming down the trail.